Espiga, Rogina Mae O.2014-30766BS StatisticsX-6R042115Melodrama NegraSet in the intersecting lanes of reality, surrealism and hallucination, Melodrama Negra showcases the different stories of its distinct characters. The play, written by Allan B. Lopez, directed by Professor Elmer Rufo and produced by UPLB Communicators Association & UPLB Demolay Club, was held at DL Umali Auditorium at 8 p.m. It Promising though as it was, the play squanders the chance by trying too hard and expecting too much. It was too unclear in its complexity what with the message it failed to convey, scenes that seemed much too unwarranted, unclear and tedious, and stage designs that looked a little pointless. Melodrama Negra is dissapointing, to say the least, and it teaches you to set your expectations in a play as low as possible as to avoid regretting and hating too much. There were three separate major enactments in the play, the overlapping of which I learned only near the end of it. Some parts were amusing, funny and interesting and some were downright distasteful. Some good scenes were lost on me, too, since in general, I did not like nor understand the play. I know it has an astounding message somewhere but either it is too deep and too clouded by the complexity of the scenes or I am too dim, but either way, having a hint of what Melodrama Negra is trying to get across is a failure.I would have liked to analyze more deeply why the conyo guy had a repeat of his script, how the death of the three souls bound them to each other, or what the significance of money in the politicians family is. The intricacy of these parts in the script is bewildering that understanding it would require a repeat of the play or brainstorming of perceptions. However, the reasons I dont like it far outweigh the reason I could have, rendering the said scenes dissapointingly unclear. During the supposedly sensuous sex scene of the mistress and the politician, my head was turned so far to the side because of their off-putting and unwarranted costume (particularly of the guys), movements and sounds. So displeasing as it is to the eyes and ears, understanding the scene became a lost cause. Well, to be fair I did understand that one repeated phrase Gaya ni misis, but seeing as I have no idea of what the larger picture is, I dont know where this puzzle piece of a script fits. The scenes of the necrophiliac guy and the annoying bilingual girls are tedious. Theirs are such strong intriguing characters whose interaction was a discord on stage. Their characters clashed for dominance, their dialogue unnecessarily too foul, and their stage movements slightly awkward. May it be through what these actors scripts say, how they delivered it and how they moved about on stage, they are seemingly trying too hard. They left only enough to understand the play to a degree and make an impression on the audience; for the pleasure or to say the least, relief of the viewers, like that of the mistress and the husband, their scene was not something that would turn my ratings up a notch. Every aspect of the play has a promising potential, I admit. Aside from the title and even the ticket, the stage design, special effects (the extras in black costume), lights and sounds were all beautiful and all contributed accordingly to the play. However, the glaring picture frame of Vilma Santos at the top didnt really make sense. Front and center though it was, and its significance in the play supposedly obvious, the Vilma Santos picture frame, along with the initial rundown of the celebrity couples picture frames, seemed utterly pointless for me. I got the impression that the playwrights of the theatrical show were expecting the audiences minds to be able to comprehend the complexity of it. I, on the other hand, came to DL Umali expecting to be stunned by the promises of the play. And in a way, I was. By its elusive message, unwarranted, unclear and tedious scenes and pointless stage designs. In general, this is a play I would recommend to theatrics critiques or anyone who has a knack for analyzing plays beyond what were immediately presented. I am not either of the two, but maybe if I saw the play one more time, I would understand. Then again, whos to guarantee the fee would be worth it the second time around?