 |
| Even the artwork is uninspiring [Source: Cirque Tribune]. |
Written,
choreographed and directed (terms that are increasingly more dubious
than the last) by Brazilian choreographer Deborah Colker, Ovo
tells a broad story of a colony of insects who are preparing to have
a feast and dance-off. Amidst this wacky world of insects is the
heart-felt story of love, illustrated though a trio of reoccurring clowns comprised of a bumbling patriarch, a
ladybug, and (by far the worst) an insufferable stupid blue male called 'Flipo' who brings the egg to the colony (which subsequently just deflates with a schizophrenic light-fest and a tinny rendition of Beethoven's 5th . . . spoilers!) and treats us to a cracker of a performance by running around the tent
screaming "OOOOOKAYYY! PUP-A-WAPA-PA!! WOOOOW OOOOOOOOVOOOOOO!" for what feels like 90 minutes. While the show still boasts a degree of Cirque's
incredible level of athleticism in its feats and acrobatics, Ovo
flops because it just goes nowhere. There is no unifying concept or
structure to the show, and to simply state that the whole show falls
under the umbrella of 'insects' is very broad (lazy) of the creative
team. The show traipses around flouting incredible acrobatics but
divorces itself from Cirque's typical aesthetic, with the majority of
the show failing to uphold any attempt at a mise-en-scène, utilising
stupid costumes and banal music, and failing to engage the audience
emotionally due to an absence of conflict and drama that does not
imprint any lasting thoughts or emotion to reflect on.
 |
| The three main characters/clowns, and some of the costumes which take insect features too literally [Source: USC Annenberg]. |
The
aerial acts were of excellent quality, but from there the production
fell down a dark chasm when it came to other elements. The
choreography is hilariously
bad. The cast are forced to scamper and plod across the stage
waving their asses around, flopping their limbs in various directions
and prancing all over the place. I genuinely can not comprehend what
I saw, considering that the director is also a choreographer. It's
just inconsiderable that such a prolific figure like Colker could
create such shit that results in a hybrid of a pre-school nativity
production and the Macarena. The integration of choreography into the
acts was pretty much non-existent, and when it was there it was a
disaster and I felt was embarrassed for the artists.
Gringo Cardia's
set was somewhat inspired when it comes to the design of the spider
webs, and there are these two gigantic flowers which bloom on stage during acts but then disappear and do nothing. Eric Champoux's lighting wasn't anything notable and added
nothing special to the overall look of the show. It looked nice in
some scenes but whenever the act needed a more sophisticated set up
it just seemed to not do anything special. The costumes are clunky
and the inspiration of the insects was taken way too literally.
Unlike Cirque's usual esoteric and abstract approaches to costumes,
such as the exquisite appropriation of Oriental designs in KÀ
(2004) or the Gypsy
inspired costumes of Varekai (2001),
Ovo's interpretation of insects is far too literal. Liz
Vandal's variegated designs are too outlandish, merging together the
emphasised grotesque features of insects with a bombastic pallet of
colours. If you're irrationally impressed with costumes that smash a
bunch of colours together and call it art, then hop aboard the
bullshit-mobile!
Berna
Cepas music (?) is hands down the most disappointing and worst aspect
of the show. The idiosyncrasies of Cirque's music, which include a
level of complexity comprised of memorable tunes, exquisite and
ethereal lyrics, and the amalgamation of different musical genres
from around the world, are all absent from Ovo's
score. Cirque invited me to review the soundtrack for Ovo in 2010,
and criticisms were met by this response from the composer:
 |
| Sebastian Savard plays the violin in Ovo. The band are dressed as cockroaches. Not sure what the message here is - the music never dies? [Source: All Things String]. |
“My goal, in essence, is to improvise musical mechanisms. My juxtaposition is the only one of its kind, due in part to the inclusion of highly-intellectual movement-commissions, with a hint of so-called 'pitch-solos'. I never sense styles, despite the fact that any pattern or performance can be, and has been interpreted as a rather dodecaphonically-melodic set of 'resonance-rhythms'. Except in rare cases (for example, when you are morphing a particularly neo-Romantic set of interactions), contemporary composers of 'triad-music' should avoid the use of themes. Unlike traditional orchestrations, I aim to develop conflicts, including a highly tonal vision that recontextualises all notions of similar fanfares.” - Berna Ceppas (via 'alibaba', The Cirque Tribune 2011)
From
the ashes of that self-indulgent wank comes a soundscape that
consists of annoying, skittering rhythms and snoozy tunes that
resemble generic Brazilian chill elevator drones, played on dreadful
synths that sounded as though they were summoned directly out of the
80s. In essence the songs sounded like a mixture of 'Girl
from Impanima' and the soundtrack of 'Virtual
Street Fighter', and ultimately it resembles a prehistoric homage
to Barry Manilow's 'Copacobana'.
In terms of composition, the score is very pedestrian, with the
compositions settling on an unfulfilling melody or hook which repeats
over and over, never evolving or developing any kind of climax. I
sympathise for the musicians (who are, as usual, of world-class
quality), trying to make the best of their shitty material while
being dressed up in disgusting outfits that I suppose represent
cockroaches. Singer Marie-Claude Marchand has a gorgeous crooning voice
but she is under-utilised, and when used there's nothing of
substance. The lyrics are insipid and could have been written by five
year-olds. The main libretto of the show is the enigmatic
“blarbarlagrgabaga”, “zoo zoo zoo zoo zum” and “I love you”
which seem to be uttered on every vocal interjection, but alternating
between 849037 different languages. Although it could be argued that
the dreadful music accompanies the boring staging of the acts
appropriately, the music served purely as background music and does
not engage or stimulate as a stand alone product.
Despite
what most audiences think, merely performing a sequence of tricks
does not warrant a good Cirque du Soleil act. Although almost all the
acts within the show are technically proficient, in terms of its
value as a theatrical work Ovo is nothing. It lacks any
thought out presentation in terms of how the act is integrated into
the mise-en-scène and it's just a selection of circus acts. The core
flaw of Ovo is that there is
no point to the show. There is no subtext, underlying message
or moral to take away after the performance – the show merely
entertains its audience for the duration and has no effect beyond.
Consequentially, Ovo can be summed up as people in bug
costumes doing tricks. The casual consumer may claim that the extra
theatrical elements are unnecessary when it comes to Cirque du Soleil
since they're primarily interested in acrobatics, but that's an
oxymoron because the reason that Cirque is distinguished from other
circuses is because of their initial avant-garde approach to fuse the
circus with theatre. Cirque, under their initial direction of Franco
Dragone, completely repositioned the presentation of circus through
the fusing of vividly illustrated stories into a series of feats.
This character-driven, story based theatrical approach warranted
Cirque's gradual escalation of ticket price into the hundreds of
dollars, despite other circuses offering a similar level of athletic
finesse – this was the unique appeal that enticed audiences. To
forgive Ovo for omitting the key aspects that distinguish
Cirque du Soleil from the rest of the world is not acceptable
since Cirque du Soleil productions are not renown for shoving a bunch
of acts on stage and labelling it a theatrical experience. But that's
all Ovo is - a sequence of acts that thoroughly entertain the
audience through skill but lack any artistic and theatrical value.
 |
| Wacky colours and 'family fun' excuse Ovo from failing in every other aspect theatrically [Source: About.com]. |
You can't just
stick an egg on stage and call it Cirque du Soleil, but that's
exactly what's happened. Ovo is painfully uninspired, a
generic and substandard manufactured show which draws its success out
of the image of being 'family fun' – and, somehow, that makes it
okay for it to be an artistic failure on every other element to the
production. I blame the creative team under the woeful (or
non-existent) direction of Colker, who clearly either did not
understand or did not care what a true Cirque du Soleil show is
comprised of.
I don't have a problem with people enjoying Ovo, and if it gets people more interested in Cirque, then I guess it's done some good. What I can't stand is people claiming that this production is a good example of a Cirque du Soleil show, or a good piece of theatre. Ovo will
not create discussion or inspire change. It is not innovative, it is not special, and
it is not deserving of being associated with Cirque du Soleil. The
greatest mentor I've known told me that the best theatre is an
experience that creates and poses the questions – Ovo does
nothing of the sort, and is just a gigantic theatrical failure.
