Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THEATRE ROYAL.

“ Eubexa.” The principal item of the bill at the Theatre Royal on Saturday evening was “Eureka," a piece described in the bills as “ an original and powerful drama.’’ As to the claim of the piece to originality there can ha little doubt, however questionable its power may be, viewed as a contribution to the dramatic literature of the present period. Like many other pieces of a similar calibre, the plot and action of “ Eureka ’’ is delightfully incongruous and involved. *Tn parts, it is true, there is perceptible the true ring of genius, but these gleams of light are obscured and almost obliterated by a quantity of dialogue which never rises above mediocrity. The situations, except in the scene between Eranz Weber and his wife, where he learns her infidelity, are by no means effective or dramatic, and throughout the play there appears to be a straining after effect which is never realised. Miss Maggie Moore played the part of Nellie Weber with that dash and vivacity which marks all her impersonations. As depicted by the author, the mission in life of this young lady appears to be to sing mottosongs on the slightest provocation and have somewhat surfeiting love scenes with her husband. In both of these departments we are bound to say Miss Moore showed herself a thorough adept. She sang the songs excellently, eliciting an enthusiastic encore, and she went through the love scenes as though she liked it, which infused a great deal of naturalness into her performance. The ono exception to the dual role laid down by tha author for the character was a scene with Annie Weber in the last act, in which Miss Moore displayed a power of rendering pathetic passages which ono would hardly have given given her credit for possessing. Miss Navaro was the guilty wife, a most peculiar part, inasmuch as the author leaves a great deal to be imagined by the audience as to the motives which induced her to place herself in the position she does. As might be expected, Miss Navaro gave a very powerful rendering of what there is of the character, her acting in the last portion of the play being very good. Little Lily Moore, a young lady of tender age, played the child in the drama in a very touching and selfpossessed manner, "Why it should be necessary for Miss Leigh to disguise herself as, presumedly, a nurse of Hibernian extraction to speak three or four lines which do not very materially affect the progress of the piece, is one of the conundrums propounded by the author with which tho’picoe abounds. Mr Williamson’s part is a sort of juvenile John Stofel, and he is, therefore, mast thoroughly at homo in it. Except one scene, to which reference has been made, the author has done little or nothing for the part except to give us in the drama a kind of washed out imitation of John Stofel in the latter portion of his career. In the last scene of the pro logue, where he accuses his wife of infidelity, and produces a letter as evidence, Mr Williamson was exceedingly good. As regards the other portion of the play, he is altogether denied any opportunity of displaying his undoubted talent, for the simple reason that the author, probably exhausted by his efforts in the prologue, makes him walk through two acts without scarcely a situation or a line which requires acting. Mr Vernon’s villain was exceedingly colorless and lame throughout. It may be that, playing continually the parts of lovers who have to whisper soft nothings and bo very gushing it not conducive to success in Lho fuller flavored parts of villainy. At any rate, as

played by Mr Vernon, the wonder is how a woman, such as Nellie Weber is pourtrayod. by Miss Navaro, could hare left her home anA child at the bidding of so meek and mild *>- specimen of the stage villain. Mr Vincent was good as Charley Prink, and Mr O’Brien, gave ns a specimen of his cleverness aa a character actor in the part of Colonel Jack Hover. The latter, perhaps, was scarcely brisk enough in parts, but the character was well played as a whole. In the comedietta of “The Pool of the Family,’’ which ODEeluded the performance, Mies Maggie Moors was the principal feature. She sang and played practical jokes on all the rest of th*characters, with a vivacity and thorough love of fun which was quite infectious, and the audience laughed heartily throughout thewhole piece. Her singing of “ Hidin’ in a Railroad Keer ” must be heard to be appreciated thoroughly. The same bill will be repeated this evening.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GLOBE18820206.2.14

Bibliographic details

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2445, 6 February 1882, Page 3

Word Count
782

THEATRE ROYAL. Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2445, 6 February 1882, Page 3

THEATRE ROYAL. Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2445, 6 February 1882, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert