They Don’t Really Care About Us

They Don’t Really Care About Us was an attempt to tackle some hard-hitting themes, as we were pre-warned by the announcement before the show opened for its second night.

The opening was a choreographed number to Michael Jackson’s song of the same name, with all the whole cast on stage.

Then we see Dinesh (Sab Muthusamy) and Vanessa (Nina Price), hints of a romance promising Romeo & Juliet vibes thwarted by a racist society, family dispute and injustice, perhaps? It wasn’t quite that, once we open on Dinesh and his legal rep (Leonisha Barley), the latter trying to console the former over the imminent murder trial setting the framework for the ensuing performance.

Fast forward to Dinesh on his way to meet friends for Vanessa’s poetry reading as he is stopped by the police for a “routine” inspection (by Officers Gilbert and Sullivan, played by Tristan Harper and Phil Halfpenny); someone has reported a mugging by someone fitting Dinesh’s description.

Rescued by his friends George (Paul Phillip Ryan) and Sarah (Madeleine Lloyd Jones), the group are able to continue with their night, thus far unscathed, ignoring a little ego-bruising.

Vanessa’s reading is well-received by all but George’s jealous girlfriend as George fawns over her lyrical prowess. They take the party back to George and Sarah’s flat where drinks are consumed, heart to hearts are exchanged and emotions have time to bubble over until a show-stopping murder takes place.

Act 2 picks up the trial and the legal process. We get to understand the equally sexist and racist dynamic operating among the police force with middle-aged silverback DI Josh Miller (Kru Lundy) and his brand-new partner, DCI Hannah Brindle (Hannah Kidman) a bright young female who has just graduated from a fast-track programme. The inverse snobbery is rife.

Wanting an easy win, DI Josh goes through the motions of an investigation, compared with DCI Brindle’s sympathetic and fair approach in the days before sensitivity training. He pokes fun at Dinesh, having already made up his mind what sort of a person he is.

To make matters more complex, the forensic evidence points to Dinesh, who was left holding the bottle used as the murder weapon. His fingerprints are all over it.

We see the case moving on, interrupted by Vanessa’s ghost and Dinesh in prison confronting racist in-mates. At one point we see the extent of Dinesh’s temper – we are told he has a history of blackouts and violent outbursts – could he be the murder after all?

Subsequently, we are attendant at the trial, a hurried affair which sees the characters in their true colours.

There were some memorable acting moments, not least the Michael Jackson spin performed by George, whose energy lifted the scene. Surly Caitlyn’s (Abi Tyrer) comic timing was always on-point, Vanessa’s poetic interludes punctuated the second act with depth and poignancy. Sarah was a convincingly moody and jealous partner. DCI Hannah Brindle brought much gravitas to her role, a delightful contrast to the mansplaining and dismissiveness of DI Josh Miller.

Apart from the first couple of scenes, Act One was very linear, but the play became more stylised in Act Two, the realism of the scenes that moved the story forward were interspersed with flashbacks to the murder with various possibilities played out, the murderer disguised with a menacing mask. The stand out for me was the police interrogation using a split scene of both interviews on stage at once, police with back to the audience so we could see the witness’s reactions – a stellar move. The actors showed great timing and this was cleverly executed.

The lighting alternated between blue, white and red, heightening the drama at pivotal moments. Spotlights were employed throughout the trial scene. Music was played at various intervals and formed the backdrop of the ultimate scene of Act One – a brave choice to enliven the atmosphere, and yet it risked drowning out some essential dialogue.

The play bravely exposed themes that continue to be pertinent to this day. The racist and sexist illustrations felt over simplified at times – it was set in 1997 and felt more like 1977. Yet the play contained moments of humour and well-thought-out visuals. The cast worked well together for the most part.

I would have liked to see more of the trial and the case. Being an avid fan of procedural dramas, the detail is what keeps me engaged. This felt a bit tagged on, as though the writers wanted to quickly finish the story. Of course, the point of this play isn’t to pour over forensics, but that is where the zeitgeist is at for today’s TV addict audience. The play has promise as a concept and it was courageous in endeavouring to tackle complex themes that are ever-present. Theatre should be a space to challenge, and this certainly did that.

Covered by Kirsten Hawkins