In Flagrante is erotica for the thinking person.  Staged as Neo-Burlesque, this unique merge of highly sexualised movement, comedic sketches and fantasised ‘normality’ is an intense mix of power, vulnerability, innocence, and knowledge, that could hoodwink the patriarchy.

This work is created and produced by MaryJane O’Reilly and Phil O’Reilly and performing tonight are Maria Munkowits, Lara Fischel Chisholm, Sofia McIntyre, Lucy Lynch, and Julie Van Renen. The costumes are divine and the music score irresistible.

This show is a compelling watch for anyone wanting to witness the return of sexual empowerment to women. Fantastically clever work.

Copyright © in the review belongs to the reviewer

In Flagrante, literally ‘in blazing,’ is a Latin euphemism for being caught in the sexual act. Five cheeky dancers take a satirical look at iconic sexist pop imagery and female stereotypes. Wickedly playful and decidedly sexy, In Flagrante offers 15 polished tableaux that mix femme fatale with fetish in a romp that takes us from the 1940s to the present.

The show begins with the entire cast in black latex stockings and mouth guards in ‘Our Day Will Come.’ Dancers appear and disappear on stage, performing identical and repetitive staccato movements with necessarily expressionless faces. This dark opening statement regarding women as sex objects, expected to fit the mould and conform to expectations, has me looking forward to what the rest of the show will bring.

Dark and edgy at times, In Flagrante explores weighty issues such as domestic violence (‘Black and Blue’) and deep fetish (‘Nurses’) while also finding room for sharply playful humour. ‘To Horses’ features dancers fully harnessed and bridled with mouth bits and complete with ears and tails. ‘Whip,’ a spoken word piece utilizing text from a 1950s treatise on domestic bliss, is a brazenly sassy parody of the perfect wife versus the whore.

Humorous and raunchy, elegant and sophisticated, In Flagrante is sleek and provocative ‘erotica noir.’  All five dancers display exceptional technique with beautifully executed contemporary and jazz dancing. Strong use of choreographic elements supports and enhances the themes within each piece, while distinctive movements are carried throughout the show. Minimal, often stark, costuming allows the dancers and their subject matter to take centre stage.

In this nicely balanced mix of group numbers, duets, and solos, each dancer has a chance to shine. ‘Blindfold’ is a beautifully streamlined, gorgeously elegant look at the 1940s Golden Girl. A traffic cop, an air hostess, and a magician’s assistant are some of the audacious and unashamed characters on display. Highlights include clever slapstick physical comedy in which a strip of pubic hair is used to transform the dancer into Hitler and then into Charlie Chaplin, an hilariously sexy rendition of a recipe for making pikelets, and a perfectly executed slow motion martial arts fight.

Choreographer and Artistic Director Mary Jane O’Reilly creates a show perfect for an evening of bold and impudent fun, featuring music from ‘Ballroom Stories’ by Waldeck. 

Copyright © in the review belongs to the reviewer

Burlesque or dance? Gender politics or entertainment? Clever or awkward? I think perhaps MaryJane O’Reilly’s In Flagrante is all of these and probably some other things as well. It is a slick performance and the sub-texts are all there for the taking, leaving the audience with plenty to talk about.

The capacity audience at Dunedin’s Mayfair Theatre is very cheerful and seems to be excited and ready for a fun and provocative show. They seem get what they are looking for as the applause at the end is sustained, unusual for a Dunedin audience which usually is out of its seats pretty smartly, and the dancers seem pleased to have been called back for some more.

From a burlesque perspective, the girls are gorgeous and spicy, if a little hesitant in some parts. There isn’t a great deal of audience engagement, which I usually expect from a burlesque show – the bawdiness and sweatiness of an unruly audience revelling in the near nudity. A Dunedin crowd tends to be fairly conservative though, however diverse it is – I’m not actually sure I’ve ever been part of a truly bawdy crowd here (sweaty most definitely!).

The burlesque element is much less than the dance element for me though. The choreography allows the beautifully trained dancers to show their skill, and they really are lovely to watch. The dominatrix/submissive piece is easily the most beautiful and evocative and the one where the dancer seems to feel most in her own skin. It is dark and subdued but elegant as well. A sense of the power that can come from submission comes through very strongly – perhaps the only piece where I sensed the intent I have read so much about of this performance.

On the other hand, the Cancan is exuberant and fun. I love the denim shorts and saucy red knickers under mismatched skirts – one made out of an old New Zealand flag (or maybe Australian – I couldn’t count the stars…). The dancers look as though they are having fun and the audience responds with whistles and cat calls.

The reference to domestic violence seems to be treated too flippantly for an issue that is so prevalent in this country. The mood in the audience changed too –  this sequence didn’t quite fit in with the rest. I do understand that beating women is a sexual fantasy for some, and I get that the ‘man’ is made to look like a buffoon with his clown-like steps, but I simply don’t think it’s a topic to make so light of. Perhaps if the woman had found strength or had some sort of revenge (stabbing a voodoo doll with her hairpin is all very well but I’m not sure how practical it is) or had even been offered some support, something, it would have sat better with me.

I wonder sometimes if timing and symmetry of lines is less important to choreographers and directors than it used to be. I often find a crookedly placed row of arms or asynchronously moving legs to be distracting from the purity or the intent of the movement.

I’m pleased I saw In Flagrante, as I’d heard and read so much about it , and I do love to watch beautiful dancing, but I’m not convinced it lives up to the media hype for me. It’s tricky for anything to live up to marketing spiel so it is good to go and form my own view.

Copyright © in the review belongs to the reviewer

Just before the start of the Nelson performance of MaryJane O’Reilly’s In Flagrante, the capacity crowd chats noisily, excitedly. Cabaret-style tables set up in front of the permanent seating is most uncommon for our Theatre Royal. At half-time, that excited buzz is muted, and at the beginning of the second half, despite the power of the show, several seats are left empty. And I wonder why.

Perhaps it has something to do with the difference between the classic style of burlesque – elaborate costumes decorated with pretty feathers and sequins, carefully coiffed hairdos, and a certain coquettishness in performance –  and the very contemporary style now being performed in New Zealand cities?  Perhaps the section of our audience who departed at half time had expected the former, and was put outside their comfort zone by what was presented? I guess we will never know.

The dictionary I looked it up in describes it as: “…a humorous and provocative stage show featuring slapstick humor, comic skits, bawdy songs, striptease acts, and scantily clad female chorus…” And that is what O’Reilly delivers although you may debate about the degree of striptease, as they were mostly scantily clad throughout the show. But although it evokes the requisite emotions and themes, her neo-burlesque evokes the edgy, uncomfortable side of sex – sex as power and women as chattels, and involves shocking contemporary elements  – darker deviant sex; a dominatrix, whips, leather, animals, disgust, spite, power.

Some unprepared patrons leave. Most stay. We are all in the deep end. It is uncomfortable for women to sit through.

On the lighter side, burlesque humour is most prevalent, with two skits featuring Molly McDowall and Megan Hughes. Both parody the 1950’s take on the perfect housewife and home baker, accompanied by the sanitized trite text of the time, delivered teasingly, and evocatively and humorously misconstruing every meaning. Licking my fingers next time I bake will never be the same again!

Still the war of dominance scores every try. Blindfold’ with Maria Munkowits straining at the reins of her controller Megan Hughes impresses and is the stand out piece in this respect. And just before half time, the magician’s assistant scores a pivotal goal. Amanda Mcfarlane is delightful, prancing around on stage, in “The Great ex Redondo”. The assistant finally has the stage to herself, pulling rabbits out of hats – and Redondo’s severed head. I get it!

The mood lifts in the second half. The wit rises readily from the dancers. We laugh and cheer them through to the Cancan, dresses firmly clenched in their teeth, eyes glaring at us, the frayed denim shorts visible underneath.

O’Reilly does not aim for a Spielberg/Disney delivery which pleases everyone all of the time, and her burlesque blurs the borders which differentiate “artistic” from “exotic” dance. Consequently, a mind-shift is required, and if you find this kind of experience disturbing, this performance is probably not for you.

On the other hand, our appreciative audience enjoyed the fun of the titillation, the skill of the physicality of the moves, and the dancer’s skill in expression as they pieced together the story on stage. Facial and body expression is the main feature of the second half. The performers flourished character and opinion throughout. This contrasted sharply with the austere first half where they had deadpan expression or the faces covered with masks or strapped with bridles.  I was prepared for the blurred genre and therefore not disturbed, and am still enjoying it the next day.

Last, I must compliment O’Reilly on her choice of music. Super cool Austrian lounge group Waldeck’s album ‘Ballroom Stories’. I need a copy of that album now. It is the icing on this cake that makes it whole.

Copyright © in the review belongs to the reviewer

Copyright © in the review belongs to the reviewer