The Cutlet of Ham.

It is tough enough to stage one play perfectly, without any glitches. Evam's The Cut of Hamlet, tried to stage two, and if there were any glitches, the audience were none the wiser, for they didn't know if that too was part of the script or not. That, as a friend put it, was a very good safety net.

So yes, the two plays were called 'The Cut' and 'Hamlet' respectively. Well, the second one was Hamlet, so for a justification of title, the first must have been The Cut. The Cut was about a play, within a play, within a play, within a play (wait, one, two, three, four... yeah, that's about right.). And then there was the play itself. You know, The Cut! The characters were all actors, as in the actors were playing... actors. Get it? It's about the appreciation of the delicious irony of the method of picturisation of the existential crisis of actors who get caught in a web of their own doing and which they are now trying deperately to undo. Also known as Autograph, a method of script-writing first pioneered by a till-then-unknown-but-after-that-well-known director called Cheran. The cast was very good at playing themselves, and as we all know, it's very difficult to act like you are NOT acting. Seriously, it's tough. Add to that, the problem of being afflicted with an identity crisis about which 'you' you are, and you've got a very tough role to portray, and as far as my knowledge of acting goes, it was all done very well indeed. But while this was all very innovative and all, this play within a play within a play, at one point of time, your brain had to start racing to keep up with the storyline, if there was any. It was a bit like watching Memento in slow motion, except that the shots weren't going in reverse chronological order. Or maybe they were. I don't really know...

Hamlet was, pretty obviously, a spoof of Hamlet. With only three people portraying various roles, you could see that there had been loads of work done by those three. Mix some original lines from Hamlet and some own compositions, add background music from Star Wars, do fight sequences a la The Matrix, and you've got the perfect script for a spoof, really. But it's one thing getting the script right, yet another thing to make it as funny as possible through the acting, and that wasn't a let down. One of the Hamlet monologues delivered in a single breath in a monotone by one of the actors showed an effort any audience would praise and a memory any 12th Standard kid would kill for. Getting the audience involved is like a given in most plays by now, but a much more theatrically-sound friend next to me kept predicting how they would get the audience into it. So clearly, lack of imagination there, but Hey, we all like to stick to tried and tested things that have worked before. Yeah, the play got a few laughs with some good lines, a lot of laughs actually, but there were lines which you knew were coming too. But then, they didn't try to Copy and Paste the original Hamlet script but went on and tried to be original instead, so I guess that's imagination enough for one play.

And now we'll do it faster...
Hamlet, a spoof of the original. Only three people, who showed great effort. Usual mix of classic lines, famous music and famous movies. Very good Monologue, murder by 12th standard kid. Got the audience involved with an old trick, but then, we know what they say about Old Dogs and New tricks. Mission of making people laugh, accomplished, but also made them groan at times. At least there was no Copy, Paste of original script. Hats off for that.

And now we'll do it even faster...
Hamlet, a standard spoof, with usual ingredients. Wonderful effort by the three actors. Murder of Old Dogs. Laughing and groaning is a part of life. Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V avoided. Well done.

And now, we'll do it backwards...
Done well. Avoided Ctrl+V, Ctrl+C. Life of part a is groaning and laughing. Dogs Old of Murder. Actors three the by effort wonderful. ingredients usual with, spoof standard a, Hamlet.

Anyone find this remotely irritating????