This story is from October 31, 2018
Theatre Review: Flock Flock Tick Tock tried hard, but didn’t click
Plot: Adapted from master playwright and Padma Bhushan awardee Vijay Tendulkar’s Panchi Aise Aate Hain, Flock Flock Tick Tock is a story of a middle class family that’s finding it difficult to get their daughter married. Despite best attempts by the parents – Anna and Maa — Saraswati (Saru), the daughter, is ‘rejected’ by every suitor. One day, a stranger named Arun, who claims to be an acquaintance of the family, comes to visit them and manages to charm the parents. Both Anna and Maa slowly open up about the problem to Arun and he assures them that he will talk to Saru. Arun then takes Saru into confidence, asks her to be oblivious of others’ opinion and talks her into believing that she is an attractive woman. When the next suitor comes to see Saru, he falls for her. But now, Saru reveals that she is in love with someone else.
Review: Director Varun Gyanchandani tweaked the narrative style of the original a little to present this adaptation. For instance, by making the characters do a backward circular run in the first scene, he apprised the audience that the narrative of the play will play out in flashback. and, it worked in the play’s favour.
The thoughtful execution of the two scenes when Arun converses with Saru in the garden added novelty to the narrative style. By using the backstage staff as shrubs and flowering plants, Varun employed the garden as a character in the scenes. The same goes with his decision to employ two backstage actors, dressed as a tree and bird, to symbolise the feelings of Arun and Saru.
Art direction-wise, the primary set of the living room, where most of the drama unfolded, was designed keeping in mind the ethos of a Maharashtrian household, and reflected the socio-political era in which the story is set. The portraits of Bal Gandadhar Tilak, Bhagat Singh and the quintessential photo frames of Hindu gods and goddesses not only established the household’s religious and political views, but also threw light on the characters’ backgrounds. The furniture however, was a tad too urban for the setting and didn’t gel well.
In the acting department, Jayanth Nandagiri as the protagonist Arun and the sutradhar, did an okay job. Much like in the original, he stuck to his business of guiding the flow of the narrative. at times though, he went a little overboard in trying to establish the sympathetic nature of the character and goofed up a bit in character blocking.
Jayanth was well aided by Rajiv Kumar, Upasana A and Sanjay Singh who played the frustrated Anna, a typical loving maa and the despicable brother, Banda, respectively. While Rajiv was in his character throughout, tickling the
Surabhi Sharma was successful in maintaining the meek demeanour of her character Saru throughout. Her dialogue delivery however, lacked crucial emotions and she failed to bring out the agony of a dejected young girl in a patriarchal world. The weakest link in the cast was Nikhil Hireckr. Playing Vishwas, a suitor, Nikhil made a mess out of character with recurring fumbles in dialogue delivery and character blocking. He didn’t maintain the basic ‘45 degree angle rule’ on stage and lacked the charm which his character demanded.
Krishna Shukla behind the light console did a sloppy job. His timing was all over the place and he couldn’t provide the essential shades in crucial junctures despite having all the necessary equipment at this disposal. Nikhil, who also gave the background score, was far better at music.
Verdict: This Home Production’s adaption maintained a healthy mix of both slapstick and romantic comedy of the original, but failed in certain departments. It however, did have its moments and Varun’s novel narrative inputs complemented the farcical elements inherent in the plot. This adaptation would have been a
riveting watch had Varun and co fixed the holes in the acting and lighting departments.
The thoughtful execution of the two scenes when Arun converses with Saru in the garden added novelty to the narrative style. By using the backstage staff as shrubs and flowering plants, Varun employed the garden as a character in the scenes. The same goes with his decision to employ two backstage actors, dressed as a tree and bird, to symbolise the feelings of Arun and Saru.
Art direction-wise, the primary set of the living room, where most of the drama unfolded, was designed keeping in mind the ethos of a Maharashtrian household, and reflected the socio-political era in which the story is set. The portraits of Bal Gandadhar Tilak, Bhagat Singh and the quintessential photo frames of Hindu gods and goddesses not only established the household’s religious and political views, but also threw light on the characters’ backgrounds. The furniture however, was a tad too urban for the setting and didn’t gel well.
Jayanth was well aided by Rajiv Kumar, Upasana A and Sanjay Singh who played the frustrated Anna, a typical loving maa and the despicable brother, Banda, respectively. While Rajiv was in his character throughout, tickling the
funny bones
of the audience with his acute comic timing, Upasana seemed monotonous, unable to come out of the characters she has essayed in the past. Sanjay’s character had all the elements to garner laughter and he didn’t disappoint.Surabhi Sharma was successful in maintaining the meek demeanour of her character Saru throughout. Her dialogue delivery however, lacked crucial emotions and she failed to bring out the agony of a dejected young girl in a patriarchal world. The weakest link in the cast was Nikhil Hireckr. Playing Vishwas, a suitor, Nikhil made a mess out of character with recurring fumbles in dialogue delivery and character blocking. He didn’t maintain the basic ‘45 degree angle rule’ on stage and lacked the charm which his character demanded.
Krishna Shukla behind the light console did a sloppy job. His timing was all over the place and he couldn’t provide the essential shades in crucial junctures despite having all the necessary equipment at this disposal. Nikhil, who also gave the background score, was far better at music.
Verdict: This Home Production’s adaption maintained a healthy mix of both slapstick and romantic comedy of the original, but failed in certain departments. It however, did have its moments and Varun’s novel narrative inputs complemented the farcical elements inherent in the plot. This adaptation would have been a
end of article
Visual Stories
- Meenakshi Chaudhary blissful saare looks
- Samyuktha’s travel diaries
- 10 animals with eye catching red hues
- 10 quotes by Shirdi Sai Baba that are profound life messages
- Inside Charu Asopa’s closet featuring elegant ethnics
- Janhvi Kapoor stuns in purple tissue saree winning hearts
- Kriti Sanon stuns in black cropped top and dual toned slit skirt
- Shehnaaz Gill delights fans with her mesmerizing ethnic style
- Shweta Tiwari radiates glamour in a black bodycon dress with diamond detailing
Bigg Boss
- BB18: Tajinder-Avinash make jokes on Digvijay's character
- Excl - BB18: Former contestant Hina Khan to appear on WKV
- BB18: 'Stop Sidelining Digvijay' trends on social media
- Excl - Nouran on husband Vivian’s OCD struggles
- BB18: Netizens react to strong contenders being sidelined
- BB18: Rajat recalls his violent action against a man who teased his sister
- BB18: Karan Veer warns Rajat to speak respectfully with women
- BB18: Vivian Dsena calls Karan Veer 'low on confidence'
- BB18: Digvijay gets a massive support from Abhishek Malhan
- BB18 faces backlash as netizens slam the entry of 3 wildcards
UP NEXT
Start a Conversation
Post comment