39 Steps to Laughter

39 Steps is a side-splitting, 4-person comedy show that can itself laughing all the way to the bank.  Seeing this play with my cousin, we came in expecting a small laugh.  This play turns out to be an exquisite example of innovative use of set space, props, and overall dramatic effect.
The “bare bones” approach of the set allowed for great flexibility and ease of movement of the props that the actors made much use of throughout the play.  No fixed walls.  Doors on wheels. These gave simulation of the actors moving from room to room.  Because of the lack of set to work with, the actors had to work twice as hard and use much more body movement to give a proper sense of movement of the space. At some times their acting seemed more like overkill, but I remind myself of the overall cheeseball comedy this play strives to convey. A conversation between "rooms" becomes much more effective as the use of different sound effects between the two added to the different moods between rooms.  Another example of this could be found with the actors on the train and their movement of their bodies according to the motion of the train.  Their clever use of movement and sound brought the stage to life.
Keeping the play as a four-person act seems to be impossible with the amount of actual characters in the play.  One thing that did stand out to me the most was the hilarious use of costume and character switching between actors.  I had a blast seeing characters switching hats on stage in front of the audience and straight-out changing their persona to seem like a totally different character.  Costumes with different outfits on each half of the body brings to life a classic vaudevillian performance.  Overall, it was this sort of acting that really gave the play a playful atmosphere.  
Though I appreciated the style of “39 Steps“, I felt that it seemed a bit too amateur for it to be featured in such a high key venue in Piccadilly Circus.  The plot of the story was cute and the performance between the actors was memorable, but it all comes across as a play put together by a group of university students.  I appreciated the self-aware nature of the performance on stage and the almost experimental use of stage.  However, I fail to see this play as a smash hit catering to more traditional theater-goers. 


Marc Palanca
UCSB