I didn’t particularly enjoy “Rhinoceros,” but I didn’t hate it either. I think ultimately in any form of entertainment that involves acting or some type of script, if the audience isn’t moved in some way by the end, it didn’t accomplish what it set out to do.

Unfortunately for “Rhinoceros,” the only moving I did took place after the actors took their final bow.

The first step in creating a thought-provoking performance is creating a world that exists outside our own, encapsulating itself in a reality that we as individuals have yet to fully experience. With a task that size, there is little to no room for error in regards to the technical aspects of a stage show, of which “Rhinoceros” had a few.

The sides of the stage weren’t properly quartered off so all happenings that would normally take place behind the curtains were entirely visible even to those sitting centered in the audience. Props from previous scenes were left out on tables that no one even attempted to hide or conceal and sound equipment was plopped only a few feet from the set’s scaffolding.

The set design itself was minimalistic in its approach, which may have been intentional in hopes of showcasing the acting or material being performed, but neither could right the ship. The set, composed of scaffolding, was a poorly thought out attempt at set design and didn’t help the play. There was no honest attempt made to construct another inviting and involving world, and it showed quite readily. If the production doesn’t care about the set design, who will?

Some of the aspects of the show were a result of pure laziness. Background characters hung Rhinoceros heads at the climax of the play, still sporting the fire fighter pants they had worn in the opening act. Set transitions between scenes consisted of the stage lights being brought down and the actors scuttling off stage. Wandering spotlights also blinded some in the audience and audible complaints were made. Without taking into account the acting or the play itself, I’m not really sure anyone behind the scenes cared too much about what they threw on stage.

In general, the performances were mediocre; nobody stood out above the rest, which can be blamed on the lack of environment to work with, though just as much can be blamed on the actors and actresses themselves. No two performers really clicked or showed any real chemistry, leaving the audience with a handful of puzzle pieces that don’t all assemble one picture.

The story makes sense, one man standing tall against the lot and resisting conformity, but how many times have we seen this tragic character? What about the production is supposed to entice us to care?

I guess I’m just disappointed with a Grand Valley State University theatrical production for the first time this year. “Romeo and Juliet”, “Rent” and “Into the Woods” were all fantastic in many ways, so it’s a bit depressing to end the year with “Rhinoceros.”

As the saying goes “you can’t win ‘em all.” Which is true, particularly if no one shows up.

[email protected]