Big Fish, more like medium fish, or maybe even small fish by Ebie Quinn

            I recommend Big Fish as performed by the SpeakEasy Stage Company to anyone who is a fan of mediocre musical theatre. And by that I mean, don’t go if you are expecting to be wowed or impressed immensely. Big Fish was originally a book written by Daniel Wllace, and then a Tim Burton movie. It also had an unsuccessful run on Broadway, which to me made perfect sense. The SpeakEasy theatre company performed this show at Roberts Studio Theatre in the Calderwood Pavilion. It is a smaller version of the Broadway show, with a reduced cast and smaller band.

            Big Fish is inherently a story about a father, and a son, and their tumultuous relationship. The two characters act as foils for each other throughout the show. The dad lives in a world of fantasy and tells many lavish exaggerated stories to everyone and more specifically to his son. The son is a self-proclaimed “realist”, who is very fact-focused and not very accepting go his dads stories. The musical switches back and forth from a young version of the son to an older version of the son. The story truly begins at the son’s wedding, where he has just learned of his fathers illness. He also just recently found out that his soon to be wife is pregnant. This turning point in the son’s life provides him an opportunity to better get to know and understand his dad, and he fears that the things he finds out won’t be positive. His dad was on the road most of his life and he always came back with many fantastic tales, involving witches, a mermaid and a very clever giant named Karl, all of whom the audience gets to see. The son’s goal is to chronicle the events that his father told and try to distinguish between fact and fiction. Most of the show consists of the stories.

            Many relationships are explored throughout the musical. The son and the father are constantly fighting and having revelations, and while for some people it seemed to be heart-wrenching, for me it felt cheesy and forced. While this actors didn’t lack talent, and the set didn’t lack creativity, the show overall lacked spark. Often after coming out of an amazing show, the audience members will feel a sort of “theatre high.” I’m sure this is something you have experienced. It is a feeling of happiness and it comes from a place of pure thought-provoking entertainment. I never experienced anything even close to that at this show. I was never blown away, if anything I felt indifferent. It seemed that this show was trying so hard to be original and different, but to me it seemed like a horrible cliche with random fantasy stories thrown in. But hey, that could just be me. The show was constantly striving for poignancy at every turn, but when you have lines like “I’ve been drowning since you left me”, right before a flood comes to the town, I’m going to have trouble taking you seriously. This constant attempt at creating “moments” was just not successful for me as an audience member.

            Overall, I think I might have struggled with the simplistic story itself more than anything. I want to take the time to give the actors credit, and also anyone who was involved with the sets. Many of the actors were phenomenally talented, and I think they did the best they could with the show they were given. The set was also cool and entertaining. I can only imagine the amount of work it would take to produce such complex set and costumes. I found the stage to be very visually interesting, and for me, these things were the highlight of the show.

            I don’t want to completely turn you off to the show. It wasn’t bad by any measure, it just wasn’t great. Not everyone shared my same opinion, and some people around me seemed to enjoy it just fine. You can judge for yourself, was this story amusing and poignant, or the epitome of mediocrity.