33

The source material for 33 should be enough for any half-decent playwright to make a first class production, and this is probably why the piece is so disappointing. It brims with good ideas and potential, yet deserves better actors and less frantic execution to draw out the potential that lies within.

The hook for 33 is an interview given by one of the thirty-three Chilean miners on American TV after they achieved global fame due to their being trapped underground for a record length of time. The play begins and ends with video from the interview, but what comes in between is a muddle. It is unclear whether it wants to be surreal, empathetic, or realistic. Good dialogue is wasted on some school play-level acting and it is clear that someone has read about the alienation effect and decided to use it regardless of how useful it might be. What is intended as edgy just seems hackneyed.

33 is not without its merits, but it shows no sign of knowing what it wants to do, feeling very much like a vehicle for a group of drama students to take a trip up to Edinburgh on the back of an interesting idea. As it releases its audience back to the surface after an hour of subterranean action, what has just happened is already half forgotten. There are no TV cameras or waiting book deals, just an hour less life to live.