Bye Bye Birdie - Stirling Players

Reviewed by Kate O'Sullivan

---

Stirling Players’ Bye Bye Birdie is a production with moments of genuine promise, but one that struggles to bring together its many elements into a cohesive theatrical experience. It is a show full of clear enthusiasm from the young performers and the creative team, but enthusiasm alone cannot replace the detailed character work, musical preparation and directorial cohesion required to make this particular musical succeed.

Visually, the production establishes the 1950s setting with a functional set and some effective design choices. The use of colour, pattern, and projections as visual elements helps communicate the energy and optimism of the era. However, the design often feels more suggestive than fully realised, with opportunities missed to create a stronger sense of place. The costuming similarly captures elements of the period but lacks cohesion, with individual choices working better than the overall visual picture.

Additionally, the production would have benefited from providing audiences with more context. Bye Bye Birdie relies heavily on references to 1950s pop culture, celebrity obsession and the conventions of its own era. Without familiarity with the show or the period, many jokes and references are difficult to appreciate for a modern audience, especially those that rely on racial stereotypes or references to specific people. A stronger program note or contextual information could have helped audiences understand the world they were entering.

The largest challenges of the production lie in its storytelling and musical execution. The score of Bye Bye Birdie is built around momentum, character, comedy and carefully structured transitions, but many of these elements feel underdeveloped. Musical numbers frequently felt disconnected from the dramatic moments surrounding them, and the production struggled to build energy or sustain pace.

The musical direction was a significant factor in this. The orchestra and performers frequently felt as though they were working separately rather than as a unified company. Tempos, transitions and underscoring lack consistency, and the production often appears reluctant to embrace the vamps and musical transitions that allow live theatre to breathe. Rather than supporting the performers and storytelling, the music became another obstacle to navigate. The reduced orchestration also affects the overall style of the show, with much of the swing, rock-and-roll energy and rhythmic vitality of the score diminished. 

The strongest performances come from those who demonstrate a clear understanding of character and comic intention. Aston Sampson as Hugo Peabody was a standout, bringing specificity, confidence and excellent comic timing to the role. His physical choices were clear, his delivery assured, and he understood how to create humour within the confines of his, albeit small, role.

The McAfee family are also among the production’s highlights. Sue and Alex McLennan bring a strong sense of period style, comic rhythm and theatrical confidence to their roles. Their scenes have a level of polish and clarity that is often missing elsewhere in the production. Julie Holmshaw’s Mrs Peterson is similarly engaging, bringing warmth and commitment to a role that contains some less politically correct material.

Samuel Yeo’s Albert demonstrates strong vocal ability and sincerity. He brings charm to his vocal moments, particularly “Put On a Happy Face”, but the central relationship between Albert and Rose never develops the emotional connection required to carry the story.

Rose Alvarez is a particularly demanding role, requiring a performer who can combine comedy, vulnerability, physical storytelling and emotional complexity. While vocally secure, Lily Kennedy does not develop a convincing character beyond the forward delivery of lines and songs. The delivery, facing the audience the majority of the time, limits genuine interaction with other characters, particularly Albert, and the lack of physical characterisation means the romantic storyline suffers because that relationship between Albert and Rose never feels lived-in or believable. Performers should make choices that serve the character rather than just present the material to the audience. This show reflects a broader lack of detailed character coaching and directorial shaping.

Across the ensemble, there are similar moments where performers appear to have been given choreography and blocking without enough attention to underlying motivation. The production often confuses movement with energy, resulting in scenes that are busy but not always purposeful. More detailed work on character objectives, relationships and storytelling would have strengthened the entire company.

Despite these issues, there are performers demonstrating clear potential. Lilah Stivaletta as Ursula brought commitment and energy whenever she appeared, and Taj Chaplin showed moments of charisma and stage presence as Conrad. Unfortunately, the production does not consistently provide these performers with the structure needed to turn individual strengths into a successful ensemble piece.

Ultimately, Stirling Players’ Bye Bye Birdie is undone less by a lack of talent than by a lack of cohesion. The production contains capable performers, but they are working within a show where the direction, choreography, musical preparation and storytelling do not consistently support them. The result is a production that occasionally finds its charm but too rarely captures the wit, pace and theatrical energy that make Bye Bye Birdie endure.

Reviewer Note: Kate has previously worked with members of this production team. She also performed in Bye Bye Birdie in 2006. Tickets for this review were provided by the theatre company.