「隨想」的定義就是字面這麽簡單：看完戲，想到什麼便說什麼，東拉西扯，分享一些看劇的點滴，亦作為多給劇團正面回應和鼓勵的渠道。
茶館 –
觀後随想
還未看戲，已聯想到The
Grand Budapest Hotel*，最大公約數是觀星，TGBH裡有不少明星一閃即逝，至於《茶館》，在HKRT
「新文化運動」 裡King
Sir卻開導了男主持人的迷思，演員不是因為出場時間少便會輕鬆容易，反之，要在極短時間裡演繹出角色性格，那才是大挑戰！人物多是這劇一大特點，King
Sir 兩度强調，謝幕時及場刊中都提到導演作為兼任''交通警''這特别角色。
老舍這作品寫於1956，大約是曹禺的各經典面世之後廿年，後來到八零年代揚威海外。故事挎過數十年，這和《城寨風情》相似，但後者說的是兩家，三代的故事，《茶館》重心始終落在三個人物身上，從壯年，老年至垂暮
(從戊戌百日維新剛失敗開始至抗戰勝利後內戰連連)。雖然三個都可統稱為''正面''人物，但也分輕重，賓主。全劇的靈魂是
『老裕泰』的掌櫃王利發，懂得人濟關係的生意人，在動盪和黑暗的時世中，努力地希望保住茶館。兩個旗人常客，正氣凜然的常四爺，因敢言而坐牢；胸懷大志而力不從心的秦仲義，鬱鬱終生。劇终時三人敘舊，大時代的悲劇，對垂暮的他們，已是到了無可挽回的地部。和《魔鬼契約》(網誌32)比較，更喜歡萬梓良今次演出，默菲斯特較形象化，王利發則有血有肉，和觀眾更接近。葉進的常四爺無論順境逆境都積極面對，豪爽待人，伍衛國的秦仲義初時意氣風發，後來意志消沈，兩人都交出好戲。
很欣賞這戲一個特別處理，孤稱之為''錄像導賞''，通常場刊中的導賞資料，以至精如瑰寶『愛麗絲劇場實驗室』每次演出都有的特刊，都鮮有時間在開場之前細讀，今次每幕開始前有百份百user-friendly的馮祿德錄像導賞，對觀劇時的吸收程度大有幫助。
老舍這''小人物反映大時代''的橫段面劇，人物性格處理重點是形象鮮明，而不在於深度描繪，所以演繹時也不求層次分明或抽絲剝繭的character
development，而在於一針見血。但也不全然平面化，例如王淑芬一角，世故，能幹，是丈夫王利發的好幫手，鄭至芝演來雖然沒有《宫本武藏》(網誌
59)
的阿通那麽多幾會發揮，但也有立體感。梁翠珊的周秀花更少發展的幅度，但歷來看過她演數不勝數林林種種的不同演出，就如《宫本武藏》裡較小的角色，也必全力以赴。另一方面誇張甚至漫畫化的角色，也同樣有看頭，劉錫賢絕對不是只懂在開麥拉前演戲，一走上舞台便和觀眾''絕源''那一類，這早在看《金池塘》已知，今次他演的劉麻子兩代，全劇中最搶鏡。還有龐太監，出場時間很短，但梁天一踏出虎度門，輕描淡寫，已震攝全場，那份功力，非同小可！熟悉的演員實在太多，難以盡錄。
HKRT黑盒國際視野系列，看了來自日本「青年團」這一齣，很享受這輕輕巧巧的一句鐘，不高深，冇懸疑，只需稍稍 suspend logic，不要固執問“點解＂，接受這 “我們結婚了，非常突然＂的情况，欣賞四個角色的心態，互動。
「編導的話」介紹歸納這劇為荒誕劇，並說靈感來自卡夫卡，看完後個人感受，它比較《遲牛》和《蛻變》之類，“荒誕指數 ” 較低，澄江一覺醒來發現自己在姊夫的弟弟昇平家，而兩人已有共識是經已結了婚，詳情始終沒有清楚交待，但在哥哥和姊姊這一對正準備離婚的夫婦先後盤問之下，也有些細節出了來。首先，這不是一般醉後糊塗的情景，兩人也沒上過床，總之是“結婚了”，似乎是一種心態的默契，突如其來，自然是沒有法律依據，但既然“結婚了” ，當然會盡快去註冊，澄江也當天便回家收拾細軟，搬來昇平家兩人開始其夫婦生活。荒誕嗎？Maybe。但除了開始如何突然結婚了未有清楚交待之外，以後一切有條有理，哥哥還醒目地指出那麼今晚便成了 “新人”的初夜，和姊姊應快告辭，別阻礙好事，還笑說昇平該早换睡衣！
澄江和昇平自然是認識的，當年兄姊結婚時互相對對方的印象頗有趣，昇平覺得這個女孩子很漂亮，澄江則沒太深印象，只知這個是“姊夫的弟弟”。但之後兩人似乎不太相熟，一開場是兩人客廰對坐，有點尷尬，客客氣氣地討論“我們結婚了！非常突然” 這種狀況。但討論發展下去，是很實際，合羅輯，例如註冊，婚禮，蜜月，婚後生活和工作細節等。換個角度，如果一開場是交待兩人在兄姊結婚後也交往起來，終於發展到了談婚論嫁的階段，那麼這劇的發展是自然不過。
有趣的是兩人一覺醒來發現已結了婚，吊詭之處是兩人對此百份之百的接受，對自己結婚了沒有丁點兒的疑問，一心一意把這件事做好。兩人雖客客氣氣，但感情的交流觀眾是感覺到的，例如姊姊到訪時昇平剛外出，他回來剛踏進玄關，澄江立刻把地上騰空的座墊拉到身旁，昇平過來和她榻榻米式並肩而坐面對姊姊，夫妻兩人的solidarity不言而喻，使我立時想起《東京密語》的一對老夫婦，同時亦有信心這“非常突然” 的婚姻 is going to work。完場時兄姊告辭，澄江去廚房收拾，昇平則去换睡衣。
兄姊配角的一對是比較常見的情况，想離婚只是因為一切都淡了，但有個女兒可能是維繫的契機。劇分五場以黑燈過場，場景二人，三人或四人圍繞婚姻這課題不同的交流，互動。雖聽不懂，但中英文字幕很好，演員出色的表情，聲韻，型體都很大幫助。此劇值得推薦。
上一輩子的情人 – 觀後随想
以父女情為題材的劇近年看過的有《赤裸》(網誌 54) 和《Happy
to gather》(網誌 47)，但都不是純以此為題，前者是以大時代先行，後者更隱藏懸疑。荷理活電影觸及這主題的有兩套較喜歡的，同是Evan
Rachel Wood演年輕卻思想成熟的女兒，和父親對調身份，"King
of California" 的Michael
Douglas神經兮兮， “The wrestler” 的Mickey Rourke 是光輝過後末路窮途悲劇人物。
《上一輩子的情人》場刊中一休已經開宗明義：“這齣劇沒有高潮迭起的故事發展，也沒有大起大落的戲劇情節。只有兩父女為對話。很平實的父女對話”。一氣呵成看完兩句多鐘，九“PART” (劇本中用辭) 戲，如要只用四個字來形容感受，可說“滿心喜悦”。這博客中提到“二人戲”不少，其中有叫人透不過氣的張力，又或有火爆的衝突，吊詭的懸疑，但從未見過以這麼 “平淡” 的閒話家常，能如此緊緊地吸住觀眾。但自第一眼看到宣傳照上阮煒楹和廖啟智淺笑對啖咖啡的場境，這劇的格調已絕對在期待之中。
《上一輩子的情人》素描父女同渡的一個下午，走過不同的地方，結構跟岩井俊二《花與愛麗斯》其中一段戲頗相似(*)，但內容不大相同，蒼井優演的愛麗斯跟和母親離異了的父親每隔一段時候相聚一次，電影重心在女主角，描繪她對父親初時隔漠，經過相處半天後終而依依不捨，十分感人，但有劇情襯托
(父母離異)，多少有點melodramatic。《上一輩子的情人》則境界更高。
一休觀察入微，雖然全劇只有父女對談，但內容極豐富：父女兩人互訴無傷大雅(“無野架”)的出軌秘密一節已言人所不能言；用對於stereo 和Dungeon and Dragon 的不同認知來寫代溝亦妙不可言；看得Yiu心Yiu肺的是父親對刨冰的遺憾，尤其是女兒淡淡地一句 “同埋我都大個啦”；另一面 “唔出聲唔係代表唔知” 然後如數家珍說出父親對魚的喜惡一場，則正是上面說的教人看得“滿心喜悦”；“老公”(即沙灘上寫去的“老去”)一場相信年青的觀眾也有一定的體會，但“男人的浪漫”描寫對外父微妙的感情的內函更是精品；學術上的內函也豐，物質三態觀眾自然知道，但不是人人都知(或記得) entropy是什麼。
從《聖訴》的温馴到《A lonely planet B》的粗獷，阮煒楹不同類型的角色看過不少，今次輕描淡寫演的女兒叫人愛得不得了，亦勾起沒有女兒
(儘管有很好的兒子) 的父親的憾事！她的音樂造詣在《一夜歌，一夜情 (2012版)》(網誌 47) 裡欣賞到，今次劇終的主題曲，餘音嫋嫋。「智叔」電影界中不用介詔，舞台上也有幸看過他「友情演出」的《遍地芳菲》(網誌 40)，今次看「全程演出」，又豈只“有幸”而已？很高興謝幕見到鄭傳軍的王爾德風采依然，四月十六good luck。
床前十分 – 觀後随想
The first thing in the flier that grabbed my attention was the name 盧俊豪. While he in recent years has appeared occasionally in various productions, his own company which started with some fanfare five years ago, 阿盧制作, seems to have lost steam after two very good productions《鬥角勾心》(網誌19) and《俠盜張師奶》(網誌31). For one moment I thought this production is the revival of 阿盧制作 but this was my own wishful thinking. Still, I enjoy, as always, his riveting performance in this production.
The English title “Pillow talk” is better than the somewhat convoluted Chinese title. But there is an even broader landscape – the city, which is underscored by the sleek stage design you see the moment you walk into the theatre. We live in a vibrant city that is home to a rich variety of communities, many of them minorities. Some of us focus narrowly on our own environ while others have a broad interest in the urban giant we call home. There is nothing wrong with either. However, for the latter, there is just too much to absorb. Many of us know just as little about the so called “Southern Asian” communities as about the homosexual communities. “Pillow talk” provides a glimpse into the latter.
Following a structure that has found favor with many theatre people, PT is played out in sketches of short scenes that are essentially unrelated. But then, again a favored treatment, some scenes are loosely linked. For example, in scene 5, reference is made to a property deal in scene 2, and the pre-wedding bash is followed up in scene 9 when the actual wedding takes place in the U.S. The link, however, is just through one character - the guy getting married. All the other characters are replaces. “The guy getting married” instead of “bridegroom” is intentional as this is a same sex wedding, talking about which, I missed the opportunity of attending one in Toronto last year although I got a chance to hang out with the guy’s parents when they visited here.
This play looks at the local homosexual landscape from a rich variety of angles, Internet-encountered flings to serious relationship with an age discrepancy of two decades. Both of these involve men. There is also a story about two women lovers re-encountering after drifting apart. Also throw into the pot luck dinner, so to speak, is a heterosexual couple that, after a decade of happy marriage, drifted apart because one became too honest (scene 6, outrageously hilarious, presented by 盧俊豪 and 郭麗敏). The scene I like best is scene 5, the aforementioned pre-wedding bash set in a lavish afternoon tea gathering of 5 姊妹, 4 of which are men and one is a real 姊妹 (well portrayed by 黃安妮)。I like this scene best because it allows me to experience a relaxing and fun-filled afternoon tea with a community that I would not otherwise have experienced. And, as if these are not enough, there is also a ghost story. The final scene, showing three different locations simultaneous on stage, is a broad brush depiction of three happy couples – man-woman, man-man and woman-woman.
The cast comprise an ensemble of solid, experienced performers and I won’t go into each one in detail of their strong performances. Other than 盧俊豪，I am particularly impressed with 郭麗敏 who in 3 different scene portrayed 3 entirely different characters, all with excellence.
On the production, I have mentioned the sleek, modern urban production design. As well, this is a no-microphone production, which I applaud. There is one unusual thing I must mention. For well over a decade, I have been very comfortable with the free seating arrangement at the Sheung Wan HKRT Black Box. As well, I am very familiar with the Sheung Wan Cultural Centre Theatre, not only in the audience but also including performing on stage close to a dozen times. This, however, was the first time I attended a performance there with free seating arrangements.
I like to close with a reference to a phenomenon in the English language, with a quote from Ernest Hemingway’s “For whom the bell tolls” (first published in 1941). This is from the last paragraph of Chapter one, talking about resistance fighters in the Spanish Civil War : “You’re getting gloomy, too…. All the best ones, when you though it over, were gay. It was much better to be gay…”. Even in my pathetically modest vocabulary, I can find quite a few words to describe a certain emotion: happy, glad, blissful, ecstatic, joyous, merry, cheerful. But there isn’t a single one that can be a perfect substitute for “gay”.
