JADAR

★★★★☆

MOJO, harshly hilarious excellence on stage, has been revived at the Kings Arms Salford. This two-act black comedy, written by Jez Butterworth, is a powerful look at masculinity and identity in gangland London. Beautiful, powerful and witty, this production is not one to miss. Directed by Oliver Hurst and presented by Red Brick Theatre, Up ‘Ere Productions and Rising Moon, MOJO has provided some of the best theatrical performances Manchester has seen.

The themes of this production are subtle, flowing throughout the piece like a river. MOJO is about power, charisma and music. Matching Butterworth’s intention for realism, this piece provided exactly what I have been looking for, a powerful piece dedicated to the phenomenal talent available locally.

From the beginning of the piece, there was a high expectation of quality. The King’s Arms is a beating heart in Manchester’s theatre scene, and having done productions there myself, it is difficult to move around the space as a performer.

Audiences were greeted with a completely in-the-round piece that looked jaw-dropping. The theatre was transformed into a 1950s above-the-bar lounge . Up ‘ere productions always does beautiful work transforming their theatre spaces into site specific stories, and this was a shining jewel in this expectation. The stage design was nearly flawless, allowing for era-accurate design and stunning sight lines. The design of this production was almost flawless with a gorgeously dressed ensemble and immaculate staging. Jez Butterworth plays demand an authenticity that is unparalleled in modern playwriting, and this specific interpretation matched his level of excellency well.

I often find that in-the-round pieces leave specific viewpoints unaccounted for or jarring intimacy that leaves audiences on edge. With MOJO, this was not a problem. The director, Oliver Hurst, did an exceptional job making audiences feel like the final ensemble member on stage and almost like a fly on the wall. The cast delivered an absolutely marvelous performance from start to finish. Hurst’s decision to pose the cast throughout transitions in increasingly outrageous scenarios with blaring rock music playing overhead was both hilarious and fitting.

One performer who immediately caught my eye was ‘Baby’, played by Paddy Stanford, who had an exceptional use of movement. His character, who drunkenly walked around the stage while swinging around a large metal sword, got within inches of my seat. However, there was such a phenomenal grasp of movement where even his ‘uncontrollable’ and drunken movements were accurate, sharp and solid. I never thought he would stumble into me. His ability to play these high intensity moments set viewers up for an excellent evening. His loudness paired with genuine and authentic moments was a performance I felt lucky to see. His charisma was well-suited to the character; we cannot help but appreciate his personality (even when holding someone hostage). I felt he handled the trauma of his character with care while playing into his insanity powerfully.

The entire cast was exceptional, truly some of the best acting performances Manchester has seen in awhile. John O’Neill, who I have previously had the pleasure of watching in ‘Cock,’ delivered a phenomenal show. He was a captivating performer who had a heavy influence over the other actors on stage as well as a direct influence over the audience, who seemed to be hanging on every word he said. His ability to draw attention in while remaining silent shows a true mastery of his craft.

A personal favorite of mine was ‘Skinny Luke,’ the youngest employee who was repeatedly bullied by others. Played by Matthew Khan, he delivered a wide range of emotions throughout the production. It is not an easy job to portray fear in dozens of different ways from panic attacks to subtle rising of emotion for any amount of time, let alone across a two act piece. I was incredibly impressed by this young performer and would not be surprised to see him become a well-known name very quickly.

It is rare I wholeheartedly feel like every performer is deserving of a callout but this fits the occasion. Jack Elliot and Charlie Watkinson played a charming dynamic duo, constantly bouncing off the other’s energy. Elliot portrayed a light-hearted and hilarious employee who delivered a consistent performance, always alert to his surroundings. He balanced anger, fear and excitement very well. Watkinson was a hilarious character delivering comedic relief in every scene while maintaining a highly realistic performance. Finally, Gaz Thomson was a brilliant shining star in this piece, shown so little but always matching the incredible energy on stage.

There was only one moment, I felt there was a drop in the consistent delivery provided by this cast of six. One element I find important in every personal production I am a part of is presence. Being present to your space and to the other performers can make or break any show. During a particularly tense conversation, a piece of the set, just a piece of metal, fell to the floor and scattered across the stage. I was so invested in the production, I felt like that was a staged drop that would make the actors fall into a fit of pre-determined laughter. Both actors paid it no attention, despite the loud noise it created. It was a brief moment that shattered the barrier of theatre and reality. It brought me back to being an audience member instead of a seventh cast member watching this scene. However, this moment is so small it did not impact the show at large, just slightly disrupted the flow.

On the other hand, what blew me away was the resilience of the core cast during the final scene. Their professionalism in the face of technical mishaps was out of this world. Every actor’s worst fear is a crucial sound cue going wrong, unfortunately this happened during the pivotal gunshot that killed a beloved character. The audience broke their frozen stances but the actors covered up the interaction so well; it did not feel like anything had gone wrong. They did not miss a single beat and delivered a devastating ending to this production.

What I did find particularly interesting in both the script and production was the distinct lack of discussion around race. East London in the 1950s has been described as a multicultural and vibrant community with heavy attachment to music and with the piece revolving around music; it felt odd to exclude discussions around race in jazz and rock-and-roll. East London is seen as the birthplace of grime, a Black-British sub-genre of modern music. There was a musical metamorphosis in London dependent on Black people and mass immigration into London that was not developed or alluded to. Even the costuming alluded to Black influences—the tailoring of the suits (drawn inspiration from the zoot suit), the use of a large tilted hat as a power statement and the discussion of their pinstripe trousers (which originated from jazz culture). I felt these elements went undiscussed, but was curious what role they played.

The costuming set the scene for the time period but I felt there was a distinct conversation and voice missing from the mix. In my reviews, I tend to put a call to action suggested for surrounding artists, theatre makers and designers to uphold integrity in the cultures that have benefited the art world.

Overall, this production is absolutely worth the watch; it felt professional in every sense, the immersive design, the casting and the brilliant direction. I yearned for a nod or a discussion surrounding the culture that has provided a foundation for so much of today’s modern music and art scene. I do believe, however, this is an issue with the surrounding industry and atmosphere as opposed to an individual fight in this production. I wholeheartedly look forward to seeing what they do next.