Is your glass half full or half empty? Is your door open or closed? It’s all about your state of mind, as is 8fold’s production of Cherise Cross’ play The Door.
John (Philip Nightingale) is an insomniac. In a last desperate attempt to cure his problem, he goes to a support group led by Lisa (Adèle Keating), with clients Karen (Stephanie Lodge) and Tim (James Naylor). John isn’t comfortable opening up, unable to identify a problem in his pretty simple and fulfilling life which might be causing his insomnia. Eventually he leaves the sessions which prompts Lisa to check up on him out of hours, worried he might kill himself like a previous client did. It’s at this point that the audience definitely begin to realise that something’s not quite right with the picture being viewed.
The climactic – and best – scene, is the one in which John and a bartender (Robert Bradley) have an increasingly drunk conversation about the pointlessness of life, and reveals he knows much more about John than a stranger should. Cross’ script hints that John and this man in the suit are one and the same somehow, but the matter’s never resolved. Cross dances around the truth in this Pinter-esque way, yet with more horror than tension. Nightingale’s performance is both intensely pained and intensely normal, there’s nothing suspicious about him so it’s a very empathetic character portrayal, and complimented well by Bradley who has brilliant stage presence. Keating also gives a measured performance, and Naylor gets some laughs as over-excitable and self-obsessed Tim.
Director Faye Merralls’ staging is simple, linear scenes are interspersed with literal dream sequences, where we step into John’s nightmare: a menacing knock at the closed door. These scenes arguably lose the visceral impact that they have initially as little changes, and the door itself isn’t particularly ominous, however the repetitious knocking at key moments within naturalistic scenes is significantly effective in communicating John’s persistent fear.
Whether you’ll enjoy The Door will depend upon your personal state of mind and how you receive open endings as opposed to the warm, fuzzy feeling of satisfaction closed endings bring. Personally I think it’s a brave decision on Cross’ part, but any clues are all too vague for audiences to be satisfied even with their own conclusions. I can’t help but feel that Cross’ play wouldn’t be half so interesting were it not for the electrically charged performances that have your hair stand on end. All the same, it causes an audience to leave debating with questioning minds and that is a brilliant thing.
