Twelve Angry Women Review- Regalo Theatre Co

Twelve Angry Women (adapted by Sherman L. Sergel from Reginald Rose’s classic 12 Angry Men) is a full-length courtroom drama centered on 12 female jurors deliberating the fate of a 18-year-old on trial for the fatal stabbing of his father.

Direction:

The director of this production was Michael Carrasco. Carrasco made sure to assemble a production team that worked well together. He had a clear vision, and made sure to let his team know what he wanted. All parts of the show flowed together because of his clear direction. Carrasco made sure to play to all the serious moments and brought the emotion that was needed to make the show. Throughout the rehearsal process he kept both the female and male casts separate from each other to let them develop and be different from each other. The hard thing with this show is that the cast is supposed to be staying at a table discussing the case. Carrasco added movement and levels to make it so that most people could be seen. He had the characters pull the audience through so many emotions that the show had a very effective and powerful end.

Performances: 

This show would not have been able to be as fun as it was without the cast being able to play off of each other. The ensemble as a whole deserves a shout out. Their facials and their acting choices helped to tell the story. 

Foreman was played by Paige Erickson. Erickson played her character as formal, organized, responsible, and somewhat insecure. Through her character's position, Erickson kept to having her character being strong and firm, without yelling. She was good at keeping an authoritative presence throughout the whole performance.

Juror #2 was played by Adelheid Allison. Allison played her character as shy, hesitant, nervous, and easily influenced. With her acting choices she had her character fidget, look down, and not smile. As the time went on when her character changed and became more outspoken, her mannerisms changed as well.

Juror #3 was played by Serene Parker. Parker played her character as hot-tempered, stubborn, confrontational, and intensely opinionated. From the moment she stepped onto the stage she had a strong character. She made it so her character was not simply arguing about evidence. Her emotional investment in the verdict made changing her mind feel like admitting that her own beliefs and experiences are wrong. Parker had a strong accent that helped set her character a part from the others. There were times that I felt frightened by her. Parker was easily my favorite of the night to watch.

Juror #4 was played by Jade Gottfredson. Gottfredson played her character as calm, intelligent, sophisticated, and logical. She kept things logical and serious, even in the most intense moments. Gottfredson had her character stay strong in her convictions.

Juror #5 was played by Kaylee Kress. Kress played her character as young, sensitive, cautious, and initially quiet. She kept her actions small and quiet until it was time for her to put the more boisterous characters in their place. 

Juror #6 was played by Sariah Lyles. Lyles played her character as practical, steady, respectful, and quiet. Even though her character didn't play a big role she reacted to everything that was going on with her facials throughout the whole show.

Juror #7 was played by Kara Poulsen. Poulsen played her character as sarcastic, impatient, talkative, and easily distracted. She had her character fidget and pace to show that she didn't really want to be there and wanted to go see the play she had tickets for.

Juror #8 was played by Sarah Neipp. Neipp played her character as thoughtful, patient, compassionate, and persistent. Neipp helped guide the story. She added emotion and sincerity to her lines that helped the audience feel with her and relate to what her character was trying to convey.

Juror #9 was played by Polly Dunn. Dunn played her character as wise, reflective, empathetic, and observant. Her character was one that you could not not feel for. Her passion when trying to convince others that the old man could be trying to get attention was captivating. 

Juror #10 was played by Elizabeth Ludwig. Ludwig played her character as judgmental, hostile, narrow-minded, and outspoken. She gave her character a big personality, that made her easy to notice right away. Every time Ludwig spoke she was able to draw the audience in. When it came time for her to try and convince others, through a prejudice mind set, Ludwig had so much passion and emotion that it made it fun for when Juror 4 shut her down.

Juror #11 was played by Heather Brower. Brower played her character as earnest, polite, thoughtful, and deeply respectful of the law. Her accent was strong, so it made it easy to see right away that she was playing someone from Europe. Brower showed conviction and earnest through her facial expressions.

Juror #12 was played by Hannah Thomas. Thomas played her character as sociable, indecisive, and easily distracted. There were times when her character smoked she would blow the smoke into other character's faces, to add to the conflict and the frustration that the other characters faced.

Design:

The set was designed and built by Michael Carrasco, with Christopher d'Argy assisting. When you walk in you feel that you are there in the courtroom. There were so many delightful details that made it feel so real. The water cooler on the left wall actually worked. The picture of President Eisenhower on the wall helped show what year the show takes place in. The windows on the back were made from LED tv's and actually changed to show whether it was dark or light outside. My favorite details were the radiator on the back wall and the word "Jury Room" being backward on the door.

 

Costumes were done by Colleen Carrasco, with Amy Handy as a costume assistant. The costume scheme was more of a darker color scheme, which helped bring the mood and vibe of the show. Each woman had a different type of time period shoe and were very colorful. Each woman's dress fit the vibe of each character.

Why you want to go see both casts:

Through the rehearsal process the casts were kept separate. The reasons why this was done was because Carrasco didn't want the acting choices of their counterpart affect the choices the actors made on stage. The men played it more straightforward where they get angry, while the women played it where there emotions led their lines and their choices. As a result, this performance had a very different feel that the male counterpart of the show. 

Final Impressions:

This was the first time I've seen a show at the Regalo. Even though the drive was long, it was worth the drive. The perform on stage was powerful and brought a good discussion about how jury bias can affect the outcome of a trial. This show isn't one to miss. I STRONGLY suggest that you go get tickets to this show.

Tickets