My enjoyment of Richmond Shakespeare's King Lear started the moment I sat down. I was soon approached by Thomas Cunningham in his guise as The Fool and was chatted up nicely. I think I was a boring subject but he soon moved on to other much more entertaining victims and provided a personalized and charming introduction to the play for many patrons. As per usual, RichShakes makes even waiting for their shows to start something interesting.
The production itself was fabulous with a boldness and sense of gravitas that begins and ends with Alan Sader's performance as the title character. His voice, his composure, even his regally shaggy mane of gray hair made his royal stature unmistakeable and his eventual descent into madness palpable. I loved the way director James Alexander Bond staged the first scene with the king and his daughters, Lear's directive for flattery seeming almost off-hand and casual. Oh, but what a tragic series of events springs from this simple command. Jai Goodman is quietly heart-breaking as Cordelia and her performance provides a tender frame to this otherwise dastardly mean-spirited play (and I mean that as praise), her scenes at the beginning and the end providing a window into a more sedate and loving time in Lear's reign.
Adrian Rieder was impressive as Edmund but there was also a bit more swagger in his performance where I might have wanted more anger or even hurt (at being so unfairly diminished by his father). Still, there's no denying the agility with which he navigates the moments he bounces between Goneril and Regan -- simply delicious. A still greater challenge falls to Charley Raintree whose Edgar starts noble and clueless, falls into pantomiming madness with incredible zeal, and then emerges noble once more but with a worldliness and an anger that gives his character even more depth than Lear. Raintree's performance really captivated me.
Rounding out a truly outstanding trio of dark, passionate, and handsome types was Ryan Bechard as Cornwall. Could this really be the same actor who played the washed-up alcoholic from RTP’s “Devil Boys?” I never would have believed it, his smoldering power-lust was like a physical force at times, propelling the emotion of many scenes and apparently inspiring near-constant passion from Regan.
In the midst of so much excellent stuff going on, it is easy to pass over other great performances, which would include Cunningham as The Fool (that he can be so hammy and erudite at the same time is really a gift) and Foster Solomon as Kent. It's true that in a few years, Solomon himself could be a darn good Lear (he's already been a damn good Hamlet) but he does fine work as Lear's most loyal and therefore most crestfallen acolyte. Agustin Correro projected just the right level of disdain and sometimes comic bitchiness as Oswald; I wonder when we’ll see Mr. Correro in a lead role that will display the full range of his gifts.
I found myself liking the mean daughters somewhat less than I expected to, particularly since I’m a fan of both Kerry McGee and Sarah Jamillah Johnson. Certainly, they both were satisfactorily callous to their father, oftentimes getting downright nasty. But I found Regan’s pawing of her husband, sometimes in the middle of his lines, distracting. Perhaps this was Mr. Bond’s choice and maybe it’s more evident in the text then a realize but it was a bit odd on stage. I also found myself confused at times whether their rebuke of their father was out of political gamesmanship, familial hurt (for being overlooked for the favorite Cordelia, in parallel to the Edgar story), or just ingrained badness. It could have been all three but their motivations at specific points as the drama unfolded were sometimes obscure to me.
I found myself noticing the lights at Agecroft (lighting design was by Maja White) more than I had in the past, which is mostly a good thing. The actors were all illuminated well without distracting shadows (a relief after some recent frustration at the Firehouse) and the light-play that enlivened the storm was first-rate. There was at least one time when I was confused about a reference in the play to it being night, however, because it seemed awfully bright. That’s probably a tough balance in an outdoor venue.
The Cairns / Hoskins teamwork on the costumes resulted in some exceptional outfits. The king and the members of his court were finely decked out, of course, but I found myself noticing small things, too, like how Poor Tom’s rags were barely there and yet securely covered everything needed to keep the show family friendly. Also, the garb Jai Goodman wore as a peasant helping Gloucester along the path was nicely simple.
I’m sure there’s plenty else I could say but this is a production that is rich with gifts and I can’t really enumerate them effectively. So I’ll end where I began, with Mr. Sader and Mr. Bond. As a director, Bond has once again shown he has a firm grasp of the oeuvre and can make Shakespeare vital and entertaining. And, if for no other reason, this is a show that’s worth seeing for Sader.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Required Viewing
A review of “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” by Mr. Miller is up at the GayRVA site, a review that may incite some conversation.
I’m adding another little feature to my navigation over there on the right. One thing that my eyes were opened to when I was in Los Angeles was the number of people out there in cyberland who are covering theater. So I am adding a little sidebar with links to other websites that I have – or will start to – access for the latest “News and Reviews” on Broadway and theater around the country (or the world).
The first link is to an online publication called Arts Journal. One of the highlights of my L.A. experience was the opportunity to work with Doug McClennan who is a true visionary when it comes to the effect of the internet and new media on the arts. He did a talk at the TCG conference called “The Community Formerly Known as the Audience: Who They Are, What They Want, and What to do About It” (you can – and should! – pull up the livestream of the talk. Doug actually starts talking at about 6:11 so go to that point for the beginning and skip all of the milling around. And if you watch, yes, that’s me up there on the dais providing what tech support I could during the talk).
While the talk was going on, Doug was also taking questions from the audience in the form of texts and there was a Twitter feed with responses to the talk being broadcast live on the screen behind him. It was a truly brilliant conflagration of interaction and response that characterizes the inter-connected world of today.
This talk should be REQUIRED viewing for artistic and managing directors at theater companies across the country. If you want to understand how to align yourself with the audiences of the future, listen closely to what Doug says.
One of the most telling moments of the talk was when someone Tweeted that they didn’t like how people were laughing at anecdotes and stats related to how often people text or tweet or use Facebook or are involved in other new media. This comment was re-tweeted about a dozen times and Doug finally addressed it in his talk. Texting and Facebook and everything are not “cute.” As someone with two teenagers, I can tell you from first-hand experience that these are all integral aspects of life for a new generation of young people, AKA a generation of potential audience members. Tittering about this behavior is akin to scoffing at the appeal of that wacky new box called the television back in 1940s.
If you have suggestions for more websites for me to list as theater-specific news sources, please include them in a comment. Thanks!
I’m adding another little feature to my navigation over there on the right. One thing that my eyes were opened to when I was in Los Angeles was the number of people out there in cyberland who are covering theater. So I am adding a little sidebar with links to other websites that I have – or will start to – access for the latest “News and Reviews” on Broadway and theater around the country (or the world).
The first link is to an online publication called Arts Journal. One of the highlights of my L.A. experience was the opportunity to work with Doug McClennan who is a true visionary when it comes to the effect of the internet and new media on the arts. He did a talk at the TCG conference called “The Community Formerly Known as the Audience: Who They Are, What They Want, and What to do About It” (you can – and should! – pull up the livestream of the talk. Doug actually starts talking at about 6:11 so go to that point for the beginning and skip all of the milling around. And if you watch, yes, that’s me up there on the dais providing what tech support I could during the talk).
While the talk was going on, Doug was also taking questions from the audience in the form of texts and there was a Twitter feed with responses to the talk being broadcast live on the screen behind him. It was a truly brilliant conflagration of interaction and response that characterizes the inter-connected world of today.
This talk should be REQUIRED viewing for artistic and managing directors at theater companies across the country. If you want to understand how to align yourself with the audiences of the future, listen closely to what Doug says.
One of the most telling moments of the talk was when someone Tweeted that they didn’t like how people were laughing at anecdotes and stats related to how often people text or tweet or use Facebook or are involved in other new media. This comment was re-tweeted about a dozen times and Doug finally addressed it in his talk. Texting and Facebook and everything are not “cute.” As someone with two teenagers, I can tell you from first-hand experience that these are all integral aspects of life for a new generation of young people, AKA a generation of potential audience members. Tittering about this behavior is akin to scoffing at the appeal of that wacky new box called the television back in 1940s.
If you have suggestions for more websites for me to list as theater-specific news sources, please include them in a comment. Thanks!
Monday, June 27, 2011
Of Kings and Kids
Reviews of Barksdale’s “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” and Sycamore Rouge’s “The Odyssey” have appeared in the T-D already. I expect other outlets to have their takes in print or online soon, so stay tuned.
I knew this past weekend was going to be a busy one, but I had no idea just how crazy it was going to be for some of the theater folks in town. The Cultural Xpo at the Science Museum had people from multiple companies readying displays and performances and even flash mobs. The production to benefit the Massey Cancer Center, “The Pirates of the Chemotherapy,” a show that got edged over to the periphery of my radar screen, came back front-n-center as I started to hear good words from people who attended.
My focus for the weekend was on the SPARC 30th anniversary gala, in part because of my close personal connection to one of the performers, but also because of the incredible display of local talent I knew was going to be on-hand. The crew of rising teen actors that SPARC has groomed never fails to delight and the reprise of songs like “Money” that they had performed as part of “The World Goes Round” back in January looked great on the big Carpenter Center stage.
But though I knew a bit of what I was going to see beforehand, I was surprised (always pleasantly) by many of the performances, including Chase Kniffen doing a bit from “Oliver!” Jason Marks commanding the stage with his powerful “Memory,” and a charming collection of SPARC parents rolling out a rag-tag version of “Kids.”
There was even a moment early on that gave a glimpse into the versatile talent that SPARC employs. During a rendition of “Hard Knock Life” by SPARC’s “rising star” students, the performers started to waver from the tempo the onstage band was setting. With a skill that only years of handling similar situations can hone, music director and pianist Paul Deiss eased the band into matching tempo in time for the song to end perfectly. That kind of in-the-moment flexibility exemplifies not just Mr. Deiss’s talent but the quality of most all of SPARC’s teachers.
I didn’t know until Saturday that there were a whole slew of follow-up activities that SPARC was hosting on Sunday, so I missed all of that. But I hear that they were lots of fun and included a bunch of fine performances as well. Me, I went to see “King Lear” at Agecroft Hall and, while I might contest those that say it’s the best thing Richmond Shakespeare’s ever done, it certainly is a rousing production with a wide array of exceptional performances. In fact, there’s so much to say about it that I’m going to have to collect my thoughts over the next couple of days and get back to you with a more complete assessment later in the week. I will say that the Sunday performance was a near-sell-out so I would not procrastinate if you want to see it.
I knew this past weekend was going to be a busy one, but I had no idea just how crazy it was going to be for some of the theater folks in town. The Cultural Xpo at the Science Museum had people from multiple companies readying displays and performances and even flash mobs. The production to benefit the Massey Cancer Center, “The Pirates of the Chemotherapy,” a show that got edged over to the periphery of my radar screen, came back front-n-center as I started to hear good words from people who attended.
My focus for the weekend was on the SPARC 30th anniversary gala, in part because of my close personal connection to one of the performers, but also because of the incredible display of local talent I knew was going to be on-hand. The crew of rising teen actors that SPARC has groomed never fails to delight and the reprise of songs like “Money” that they had performed as part of “The World Goes Round” back in January looked great on the big Carpenter Center stage.
But though I knew a bit of what I was going to see beforehand, I was surprised (always pleasantly) by many of the performances, including Chase Kniffen doing a bit from “Oliver!” Jason Marks commanding the stage with his powerful “Memory,” and a charming collection of SPARC parents rolling out a rag-tag version of “Kids.”
There was even a moment early on that gave a glimpse into the versatile talent that SPARC employs. During a rendition of “Hard Knock Life” by SPARC’s “rising star” students, the performers started to waver from the tempo the onstage band was setting. With a skill that only years of handling similar situations can hone, music director and pianist Paul Deiss eased the band into matching tempo in time for the song to end perfectly. That kind of in-the-moment flexibility exemplifies not just Mr. Deiss’s talent but the quality of most all of SPARC’s teachers.
I didn’t know until Saturday that there were a whole slew of follow-up activities that SPARC was hosting on Sunday, so I missed all of that. But I hear that they were lots of fun and included a bunch of fine performances as well. Me, I went to see “King Lear” at Agecroft Hall and, while I might contest those that say it’s the best thing Richmond Shakespeare’s ever done, it certainly is a rousing production with a wide array of exceptional performances. In fact, there’s so much to say about it that I’m going to have to collect my thoughts over the next couple of days and get back to you with a more complete assessment later in the week. I will say that the Sunday performance was a near-sell-out so I would not procrastinate if you want to see it.
Friday, June 24, 2011
The Underwriting on the Wall
To address yesterday’s teaser: I found out earlier this week that the generous folks at the Carpenter Foundation have granted the Richmond Theatre Critics Circle the necessary funds to underwrite this year’s “Artsies” event. When I found out, I let loose with an enthusiastic (though quiet – I was in a room full of people) whoop of excitement. It’s a major burden off us organizers of the awards not to have to worry about money. But it’s also a good thing for the local theater community as a whole.
Hm. You look skeptical so let me explain. With all costs covered, every cent of the admission you pay to attend the event will go to the Theatre Artists Fund, which in turn benefits all local theater artists. Even if you don’t attend, more of the proceeds from the event will end up going to the Fund, which will in turn benefit the community as a whole.
Also, built into the budget that is now being underwritten is a smallish chunk of money for advertising. If we are able to advertise a little more broadly, we might reach more people who will come to the event, get a glimpse of how good the local shows are and will consequently be more motivated to see more shows in the future. We also set aside some money (again, a smallish amount) to cover expenses for any “big name” presenters who we might invite in from out of town. The hope would be that the big names would likewise build excitement for the event, incite more people to attend, they get a glimpse of how good…, etc. etc.
These last two bits might be a little pipe-dream-ish, I know, but still, they fit in with the general mission of the event: to build interest in and excitement for the local theater scene. To the extent that the event does that, everybody wins.
With that in mind, there are a couple shows opening this weekend -- “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” at the Barksdale and Sycamore Rouge’s “The Odyssey” down at Battersea Park -- not to mention "Wait Until Dark" at the Mill, the Charlie Brown duo wrapping up at the Firehouse, and of course "Lear." Sounds like a winning weekend all around!
Hm. You look skeptical so let me explain. With all costs covered, every cent of the admission you pay to attend the event will go to the Theatre Artists Fund, which in turn benefits all local theater artists. Even if you don’t attend, more of the proceeds from the event will end up going to the Fund, which will in turn benefit the community as a whole.
Also, built into the budget that is now being underwritten is a smallish chunk of money for advertising. If we are able to advertise a little more broadly, we might reach more people who will come to the event, get a glimpse of how good the local shows are and will consequently be more motivated to see more shows in the future. We also set aside some money (again, a smallish amount) to cover expenses for any “big name” presenters who we might invite in from out of town. The hope would be that the big names would likewise build excitement for the event, incite more people to attend, they get a glimpse of how good…, etc. etc.
These last two bits might be a little pipe-dream-ish, I know, but still, they fit in with the general mission of the event: to build interest in and excitement for the local theater scene. To the extent that the event does that, everybody wins.
With that in mind, there are a couple shows opening this weekend -- “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” at the Barksdale and Sycamore Rouge’s “The Odyssey” down at Battersea Park -- not to mention "Wait Until Dark" at the Mill, the Charlie Brown duo wrapping up at the Firehouse, and of course "Lear." Sounds like a winning weekend all around!
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Processing
The main computer system I use at work occasionally gets bogged down, the little chipmunks that make it run taking a lunch break or something, and when it does the system displays a message that says "Processing," and continues to flash that message over and over until Alvin and the gang get back to work.
I'm on a flight back from Los Angeles and I feel like that's what's happening in my head right now. I can't quite articulate anything about the experience of the last 10 days, the system is just processing...processing...processing...
While that's going on, I plan to read up on some of the stuff I've missed over the past week and a half and, if any of it still seems relevant I'll link to it here.
I wrote a fair amount of stuff while in L.A. But the piece I'm most proud of is this 'man on the street' video segment I did. I like it because I feel like you might get the same results if you approached people convening to see a big tour in Richmond and asked them about local shows. I also shot the video, edited it myself, and had it up on the site all within about 4 hours (with just a smidge of Engine28 tech help). So the world of video doesn't seem nearly as intimidating to me as it might have just a week or so ago.
The first bit of content I contributed to the site was this smallish rant in response to a panel the L.A. Times held to discuss "is L.A. a theater town?" featuring big names like Beth Henley and Tim Robbins. As you'll see if you read, I don't have much patience for that kind of navel-gazing.
The story that was the most fun to write - reflecting the enjoyment I had having the experience itself - was this story on seeing 4 shows in one night. It was a wacky night, only a fraction of which I could capture in the piece. Again, I like the aspect of universality in it; I expect many people could write a similar piece about any other kind of intense festival, whether it centered on music, film, theater, or dance.
The most interesting discussion / presentation I attended was the RADAR L.A. symposium that I reported on in this story, consisting of presentations by some of the most fervent, intelligent and articulate arts professionals I've heard speak. Associated with that story, I shot some other "man on the street" footage that became a little piece on people defining "devised theater." I can't find it on the site anymore, unfortunately. It was pretty funny, mostly because of the ingenious way the engine28 video gurus edited it.
I also did a story about L.A. actresses, prompted mostly by sitting next to an incredibly nice and chatty young woman at the L.A. Times panel who has done voice work in the "Land before Time" cartoons for years. It was eye-opening to hear stories from someone who has been on the inside of the movie and TV business for so long and yet didn't really have a clue about how the theater scene worked.
Finally, I did one straight review of a show called "Brewsie and Willie," a production that design-wise was pretty cool but content-wise didn't really deliver. The best part about doing this review was that I got to work one-on-one with Howard Shapiro, an incredibly learned and passionate critic who gave me some great insights into improving my critical writing. Also, I came up with the headline which I was proud of in that geeky self-satisfied way that writers can get when they think they've come up with something clever (that probably annoys the heck out of those around him, particularly spouses...)
So that's a taste of my fellowship experience, or as much as can be gleaned from the writing I did out there. More info and details may (or may not...) be forthcoming...
(UPDATE: Went through and corrected the more obvious grammer/spelling mistakes. Clearly, I've got some settling in to do before the blog flows as freely...and correctly...as before.)
I'm on a flight back from Los Angeles and I feel like that's what's happening in my head right now. I can't quite articulate anything about the experience of the last 10 days, the system is just processing...processing...processing...
While that's going on, I plan to read up on some of the stuff I've missed over the past week and a half and, if any of it still seems relevant I'll link to it here.
I wrote a fair amount of stuff while in L.A. But the piece I'm most proud of is this 'man on the street' video segment I did. I like it because I feel like you might get the same results if you approached people convening to see a big tour in Richmond and asked them about local shows. I also shot the video, edited it myself, and had it up on the site all within about 4 hours (with just a smidge of Engine28 tech help). So the world of video doesn't seem nearly as intimidating to me as it might have just a week or so ago.
The first bit of content I contributed to the site was this smallish rant in response to a panel the L.A. Times held to discuss "is L.A. a theater town?" featuring big names like Beth Henley and Tim Robbins. As you'll see if you read, I don't have much patience for that kind of navel-gazing.
The story that was the most fun to write - reflecting the enjoyment I had having the experience itself - was this story on seeing 4 shows in one night. It was a wacky night, only a fraction of which I could capture in the piece. Again, I like the aspect of universality in it; I expect many people could write a similar piece about any other kind of intense festival, whether it centered on music, film, theater, or dance.
The most interesting discussion / presentation I attended was the RADAR L.A. symposium that I reported on in this story, consisting of presentations by some of the most fervent, intelligent and articulate arts professionals I've heard speak. Associated with that story, I shot some other "man on the street" footage that became a little piece on people defining "devised theater." I can't find it on the site anymore, unfortunately. It was pretty funny, mostly because of the ingenious way the engine28 video gurus edited it.
I also did a story about L.A. actresses, prompted mostly by sitting next to an incredibly nice and chatty young woman at the L.A. Times panel who has done voice work in the "Land before Time" cartoons for years. It was eye-opening to hear stories from someone who has been on the inside of the movie and TV business for so long and yet didn't really have a clue about how the theater scene worked.
Finally, I did one straight review of a show called "Brewsie and Willie," a production that design-wise was pretty cool but content-wise didn't really deliver. The best part about doing this review was that I got to work one-on-one with Howard Shapiro, an incredibly learned and passionate critic who gave me some great insights into improving my critical writing. Also, I came up with the headline which I was proud of in that geeky self-satisfied way that writers can get when they think they've come up with something clever (that probably annoys the heck out of those around him, particularly spouses...)
So that's a taste of my fellowship experience, or as much as can be gleaned from the writing I did out there. More info and details may (or may not...) be forthcoming...
(UPDATE: Went through and corrected the more obvious grammer/spelling mistakes. Clearly, I've got some settling in to do before the blog flows as freely...and correctly...as before.)
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Good, with some Grief
I'm out of town but the Style machine keeps rolling along, with my review of "You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown" in this week edition.
It's been a bit of an insane time in LA, attending a panel tonight that included Tim Robbins and Beth Henley. The NEA program's site goes live in about 20 minutes. Check it out here.
Both the T-D and GayRVA love "Lear." Though I'm not exactly looking forward to the heat of home (it was about 73 in LA today), I am excited about seeing this production. Looks like a winner for Richmond Shakespeare!
It's been a bit of an insane time in LA, attending a panel tonight that included Tim Robbins and Beth Henley. The NEA program's site goes live in about 20 minutes. Check it out here.
Both the T-D and GayRVA love "Lear." Though I'm not exactly looking forward to the heat of home (it was about 73 in LA today), I am excited about seeing this production. Looks like a winner for Richmond Shakespeare!
Sunday, June 12, 2011
I'm Off
The NEA Fellowship program starts tomorrow. It's been a frantic week thanks to an astounding convergence of events and situations but here it is and I'll be on a plane heading west in a few hours. I'll be sorry to miss all of the goings on here over the next 10 days or so -- the big Tonys party at RTP, Richmond Shakespeare's first Agecroft show of the summer, a staged-reading at the Firehouse narrated by my pesky, constantly-involved son, etc. etc. I'll read what I can from a distance and hope people will fill me in on things when I get back.
I doubt I'll be posting much in the next couple of weeks but, if you are at all interested in goings-on at the TCG Conference and other things LA-theater related, you can follow the work of my fellow fellows and I here. Cheers!
I doubt I'll be posting much in the next couple of weeks but, if you are at all interested in goings-on at the TCG Conference and other things LA-theater related, you can follow the work of my fellow fellows and I here. Cheers!
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Dog Sees God
The extremes of "Dog Sees God" can be off-putting. The early scenes practically pummel the audience with surrogates for the beloved Peanuts characters getting drunk, smoking dope, and snorting coke. It's not long before the crudest sexual innuendoes are pantomimed and unexpected sexual impulses acted on. I had very adventurous high school years but even at their most free-wheeling they weren't as debaucherous (sp?) as this. Charlie Brown seems to have matriculated into Sodom and Gomorrah High School.
But I think Bert Royal does this for more than shock value. In a clever way, I think he's honoring the perspective of the original Peanuts cartoons. As in those more innocent depictions of childhood, a world swirls around "CB" that he only sporadically engages in and seems relatively clueless about. As with the kids in the cartoons, the teens of "DSG" are precocious, but when you're in high school precociousness isn't just restricted to deep thoughts about Buddhism but can also devolve into manipulating people's emotions in order to get laid.
And in the midst of the carnal and chemical pleasures of "DSG," the sweet and simple relationships between CB and Beethoven, and more poignantly, CB and his little sister, are strikingly honest and clear. Oh, they're messy, with none of the people involved quite understanding what's going on, but isn't that how life is? Full of confusion and missteps and messy misunderstandings?
There are many specific pleasures in the Firehouse's production, most of them having to do with the exceptional performances. Kyle Cornell makes a great CB, not the full-blown blockhead he might have been as a kid, but still a little adrift. Ben Hill fully embraces the aggressively sexual teen role; he reminded me of a couple guys I knew in high school who acted in nearly the exact same overboard way. The "mean girls" were an entertaining sidelight and, while I continue to love Liz Blake White in just about everything I've seen her in (including her underwear!), I'll also be adding Maggie McGrann to the list of actresses I'll be looking forward to seeing on stage again.
In the end, the chemistry between Cornell and Audra Honaker as CB's sister sold me on this production. In the last several scenes, Honaker strips away the affectations that have characterized some of her more extreme roles in the past and plays it straight, to great effect. These are siblings that don't always click but, in their own way, they still love each other, and Honaker and Cornell make you feel that.
The technical elements of this production are all solid, with Adam Dorland's scenic design a nice departure from anything cartoon-y you might expected. The technical wizardry that enhances the final scene is impressive and surprising.
"DSG" is certainly very funny, a fact that the shout-laugher who was sitting behind me last weekend would certainly attest to. But what may be most surprising about the show is that on one level, it's a tale of empowerment. There is tragedy involved but instead of maximizing the melodrama that the final events could present, the show focuses on CB's ongoing journey toward self-awareness. Some folks could quibble that Beethoven (an intense and effective performance by Lucian Restivo) is given short shrift by the plot and that homosexuality is not embraced as triumphantly as you might expect. The orientation of several characters is not firmly established at the show's close. But CB has taken a devastating but significant step towards a sort of redemption. Linus, er, I mean Van the Buddhist would be happy.
But I think Bert Royal does this for more than shock value. In a clever way, I think he's honoring the perspective of the original Peanuts cartoons. As in those more innocent depictions of childhood, a world swirls around "CB" that he only sporadically engages in and seems relatively clueless about. As with the kids in the cartoons, the teens of "DSG" are precocious, but when you're in high school precociousness isn't just restricted to deep thoughts about Buddhism but can also devolve into manipulating people's emotions in order to get laid.
And in the midst of the carnal and chemical pleasures of "DSG," the sweet and simple relationships between CB and Beethoven, and more poignantly, CB and his little sister, are strikingly honest and clear. Oh, they're messy, with none of the people involved quite understanding what's going on, but isn't that how life is? Full of confusion and missteps and messy misunderstandings?
There are many specific pleasures in the Firehouse's production, most of them having to do with the exceptional performances. Kyle Cornell makes a great CB, not the full-blown blockhead he might have been as a kid, but still a little adrift. Ben Hill fully embraces the aggressively sexual teen role; he reminded me of a couple guys I knew in high school who acted in nearly the exact same overboard way. The "mean girls" were an entertaining sidelight and, while I continue to love Liz Blake White in just about everything I've seen her in (including her underwear!), I'll also be adding Maggie McGrann to the list of actresses I'll be looking forward to seeing on stage again.
In the end, the chemistry between Cornell and Audra Honaker as CB's sister sold me on this production. In the last several scenes, Honaker strips away the affectations that have characterized some of her more extreme roles in the past and plays it straight, to great effect. These are siblings that don't always click but, in their own way, they still love each other, and Honaker and Cornell make you feel that.
The technical elements of this production are all solid, with Adam Dorland's scenic design a nice departure from anything cartoon-y you might expected. The technical wizardry that enhances the final scene is impressive and surprising.
"DSG" is certainly very funny, a fact that the shout-laugher who was sitting behind me last weekend would certainly attest to. But what may be most surprising about the show is that on one level, it's a tale of empowerment. There is tragedy involved but instead of maximizing the melodrama that the final events could present, the show focuses on CB's ongoing journey toward self-awareness. Some folks could quibble that Beethoven (an intense and effective performance by Lucian Restivo) is given short shrift by the plot and that homosexuality is not embraced as triumphantly as you might expect. The orientation of several characters is not firmly established at the show's close. But CB has taken a devastating but significant step towards a sort of redemption. Linus, er, I mean Van the Buddhist would be happy.
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
As If
I have a Twitter account but still hardly ever use it. Due to time constraints, however, I’m thinking of this post as if it were a series of tweets. So here’s several 140 character or less slices of theater:
Nice piece in Style this week about the Tony Awards viewing party. Good times, good deed, doesn’t get any better right?
Review of “Charlie Brown” in the T-D and reviews of both the Peanuts-inspired rep shows in GayRVA. Both pluses and minuses highlighted (highlit?).
I saw the same shows as Mssrs. Miller and Lewis. My take: Liked “DSG” a lot, details to come. “Charlie Brown:” good, not great but Shofner’s awesome!
Last chances to see [title of show] this weekend. Don't miss out!
The cool and crazy Saines in Petersburg have started blogging! Keep up with them here.
A “Rocky” musical. Really? I’d be more skeptical if the creative team wasn’t so impressive. But then again, so was “Spiderman’s.”
Nice piece in Style this week about the Tony Awards viewing party. Good times, good deed, doesn’t get any better right?
Review of “Charlie Brown” in the T-D and reviews of both the Peanuts-inspired rep shows in GayRVA. Both pluses and minuses highlighted (highlit?).
I saw the same shows as Mssrs. Miller and Lewis. My take: Liked “DSG” a lot, details to come. “Charlie Brown:” good, not great but Shofner’s awesome!
Last chances to see [title of show] this weekend. Don't miss out!
The cool and crazy Saines in Petersburg have started blogging! Keep up with them here.
A “Rocky” musical. Really? I’d be more skeptical if the creative team wasn’t so impressive. But then again, so was “Spiderman’s.”
Friday, June 03, 2011
1-2 Punch
I seldom have a clue what is going to get people talking. Apparently my “Casting Games” post on Wednesday struck a nerve of some kind because more than a dozen folks have chimed in with their thoughts. I love it when people are talking/writing because that means they care and/or think about theater and that’s the whole point of this thing here. (Update: you might want to check out Mr. Miller's recently-posted discussion about casting on the Barksdale blog.)
Style had two stories this week tangentially related to theater that you might have skipped over if you were only looking for theater reviews. One is this week’s cover story on the VCU library’s comic book collection – one of the largest in the country – that was written by the other Style theater reviewer, Rich Griset. The other is Ed Slipek’s architectural review of the still-relatively-new theater space that the Richmond Triangle Players has developed in Scott’s Addition. It’s an interesting piece, and not only because it’s twice as long as the typical Style theater review these days (no, I’m not bitter). This gives me the opportunity to point out that “[title of show]” has been extended until next weekend so hustle up and make reservations if you haven’t seen it yet.
(PS: Style also snuck in a quick story on the Conciliation Project’s latest production yesterday. Check out a preview of “Stolen Land” here.)
In other news, an eclectic group of theater folk has organized a Tonys Awards viewing party at the RTP theater as a benefit for the Theatre Artists Fund. This is a great idea and one that I would be totally there for if I wasn’t headed out of town. Still, you lucky folks who are here should waste no time making your reservations because I wouldn’t be surprised if this shindig sells out.
Finally, the Charlie Brown double-play has opened at the Firehouse. In an effort to take full advantage of the “rep” situation, I’m going to try and see both shows this weekend, perhaps to see if either production somehow informs the other. I’m also curious to see how a troupe of actors cast for a straight play has adapted to a musical. A few folks from the cast were on Virginia This Morning earlier this week. I can’t figure out how to link to the specific videos but both an interview and a performance from the appearance are available here. Judging from just this brief sneak preview, it seems they have adapted fine.
Style had two stories this week tangentially related to theater that you might have skipped over if you were only looking for theater reviews. One is this week’s cover story on the VCU library’s comic book collection – one of the largest in the country – that was written by the other Style theater reviewer, Rich Griset. The other is Ed Slipek’s architectural review of the still-relatively-new theater space that the Richmond Triangle Players has developed in Scott’s Addition. It’s an interesting piece, and not only because it’s twice as long as the typical Style theater review these days (no, I’m not bitter). This gives me the opportunity to point out that “[title of show]” has been extended until next weekend so hustle up and make reservations if you haven’t seen it yet.
(PS: Style also snuck in a quick story on the Conciliation Project’s latest production yesterday. Check out a preview of “Stolen Land” here.)
In other news, an eclectic group of theater folk has organized a Tonys Awards viewing party at the RTP theater as a benefit for the Theatre Artists Fund. This is a great idea and one that I would be totally there for if I wasn’t headed out of town. Still, you lucky folks who are here should waste no time making your reservations because I wouldn’t be surprised if this shindig sells out.
Finally, the Charlie Brown double-play has opened at the Firehouse. In an effort to take full advantage of the “rep” situation, I’m going to try and see both shows this weekend, perhaps to see if either production somehow informs the other. I’m also curious to see how a troupe of actors cast for a straight play has adapted to a musical. A few folks from the cast were on Virginia This Morning earlier this week. I can’t figure out how to link to the specific videos but both an interview and a performance from the appearance are available here. Judging from just this brief sneak preview, it seems they have adapted fine.
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
Casting Games
I haven’t linked to them explicitly before now but John Porter’s reviews of “[title of show]” and “Bloody Murder” were both posted relatively recently. For that matter, I didn’t link to the T-D review of “Murder” either – click here for Ms. Lewis’s take.
When the Barksdale “Signature Season” announcement came out a couple of weeks ago, one of the entries was listed as “rights pending.” Apparently, the rights for “God of Carnage” have come through and so now it’s their official “Acts of Faith” entry for next year, definitely an exciting development.
One of the fun things about season announcements has always been playing the casting guessing game. I know when word first started circulating that Barksdale was doing “Spring Awakening,” the speculation among “SA” devotees (e.g., my lovely wife) about who in town could / should play each part began in earnest. Now the same thing can happen with “God of Carnage.” The stars who originated the lead roles on Broadway definitely put distinctive stamps on them, making it hard for me to immediately plug local actors into each slot. It’s also interesting that the roles in this show have sometimes been swapped by the leads in each gender before so perhaps the specific person is not as important as someone who is just a damn good actor. Hmm.
The Barksdale shows aren’t the only ones that lend themselves to this game (“My Fair Lady” being precast took that one out of the running). Firehouse’s “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof” certainly was rife for speculation (though not anymore since casting has been finalized). I’m still fascinated by thoughts of who among the extremely talented local youngsters will be tapped for Triangle Players’ “Stupid Kids.” Certainly, someone of substantial skill will need to play Shylock in Henley Street’s “Merchant of Venice.” Sycamore Rouge’s “Topdog / Underdog” should spark some intense competition for the two leads. And even Theatre IV’s season generates conjecture: who, for instance, would be appropriate to step into the shoes – or webbed feet, as it were – of either Frog or Toad?
This kind of casting conjecture happens all the time for movies: anyone remember the strum and drang over the casting of the "Twilight" leads? Similar anticipation followed the announcement of an American adaptation of the "Dragon Tattoo" series. More recently, the producers of "The Hunger Games" got a lot of press for their decision to make Jennifer Lawrence their Catniss (an excellent choice, IMHO). The final decisions are always the director’s, of course. But even so, it’s fun to imagine who might be perfect for a specific role. Anyone out there want to offer up your thoughts for upcoming Richmond shows? You'll probably have a better chance guessing who'll be Richmond's Stinky Cheese Man than Hollywood's Lisbeth Salander.
When the Barksdale “Signature Season” announcement came out a couple of weeks ago, one of the entries was listed as “rights pending.” Apparently, the rights for “God of Carnage” have come through and so now it’s their official “Acts of Faith” entry for next year, definitely an exciting development.
One of the fun things about season announcements has always been playing the casting guessing game. I know when word first started circulating that Barksdale was doing “Spring Awakening,” the speculation among “SA” devotees (e.g., my lovely wife) about who in town could / should play each part began in earnest. Now the same thing can happen with “God of Carnage.” The stars who originated the lead roles on Broadway definitely put distinctive stamps on them, making it hard for me to immediately plug local actors into each slot. It’s also interesting that the roles in this show have sometimes been swapped by the leads in each gender before so perhaps the specific person is not as important as someone who is just a damn good actor. Hmm.
The Barksdale shows aren’t the only ones that lend themselves to this game (“My Fair Lady” being precast took that one out of the running). Firehouse’s “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof” certainly was rife for speculation (though not anymore since casting has been finalized). I’m still fascinated by thoughts of who among the extremely talented local youngsters will be tapped for Triangle Players’ “Stupid Kids.” Certainly, someone of substantial skill will need to play Shylock in Henley Street’s “Merchant of Venice.” Sycamore Rouge’s “Topdog / Underdog” should spark some intense competition for the two leads. And even Theatre IV’s season generates conjecture: who, for instance, would be appropriate to step into the shoes – or webbed feet, as it were – of either Frog or Toad?
This kind of casting conjecture happens all the time for movies: anyone remember the strum and drang over the casting of the "Twilight" leads? Similar anticipation followed the announcement of an American adaptation of the "Dragon Tattoo" series. More recently, the producers of "The Hunger Games" got a lot of press for their decision to make Jennifer Lawrence their Catniss (an excellent choice, IMHO). The final decisions are always the director’s, of course. But even so, it’s fun to imagine who might be perfect for a specific role. Anyone out there want to offer up your thoughts for upcoming Richmond shows? You'll probably have a better chance guessing who'll be Richmond's Stinky Cheese Man than Hollywood's Lisbeth Salander.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Fourth Wall
A month or so ago I stated in a review that “silence is one of the scariest things in live theater.” At the other end of the spectrum, one of the most fun aspects of live theater – and sometimes the trickiest – is the fourth wall. Just to heap a little more praise on “[title of show]”, I think the way the show doesn’t break the fourth wall outright, choosing instead to have the actors often give knowing looks or skittish glances that telegraph their awareness of the audience, is another one of its many charms.
From what I hear/read, CAT’s latest production, “Bloody Murder,” does break the fourth wall and, like “[tos],” has characters that know they are characters in a play. But while the musical’s characters were mostly happy to be there, the characters in “Bloody” are understandably none too thrilled about the plotline of their little drama and rebel against it. It’s a fabulous premise for a show and I really hope CAT can bring it off well. With a cast that includes talented vets like Emma Mason and Bob Murphy, the production certainly has good raw material to work with.
I hope everyone has a great holiday weekend. It won’t be long before Richmond’s stages are replete with scoundrels, Peanuts, epic battles and tragic kings, so brace yourself for the eminent onslaught of new productions.
From what I hear/read, CAT’s latest production, “Bloody Murder,” does break the fourth wall and, like “[tos],” has characters that know they are characters in a play. But while the musical’s characters were mostly happy to be there, the characters in “Bloody” are understandably none too thrilled about the plotline of their little drama and rebel against it. It’s a fabulous premise for a show and I really hope CAT can bring it off well. With a cast that includes talented vets like Emma Mason and Bob Murphy, the production certainly has good raw material to work with.
I hope everyone has a great holiday weekend. It won’t be long before Richmond’s stages are replete with scoundrels, Peanuts, epic battles and tragic kings, so brace yourself for the eminent onslaught of new productions.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Hilarious
What might not have been obvious about my review of Triangle Players’ “[title of show]” that I linked to yesterday is that it’s a bit more than just another rave about a cleverly directed, enthusiastically acted, and well-designed production. For one thing, it’s a review that I suggested be titled “Rave About Musical” to keep with the spirit of the show but my own little meta-effort apparently did not make the cut.
The review was also a bit of writing exercise for me. For much of the performance, when I wasn’t laughing out loud, I was smiling broadly or giggling softly. A show as consistently funny as that begs to be called “hilarious.” But ‘hilarious’ is one of those words that is notoriously overused in reviews. Sure, there are plenty of other options: ‘funny,’ ‘amusing,’ even ‘gut-busting,’ ‘side-splitting’ or ‘uproarious.’ But few words fit the bill as consistently as ‘hilarious.’ I thought a show as good as this one deserved a little extra effort on my part so I consciously avoided that one adjective. I was helped, so to speak, by a somewhat reduced word count on the review assignment but still, even with less space to fill, it was a challenge.
And that’s largely because this production is truly hilarious. It contains many clever little bits (the texting of potential stripper names), a few wonderfully ribald touches (I love the term ‘procrastibater’), some Richmond-specific shout-outs (yay, RTCC!), and even a crass prurient moment of semi-nakedness (Ms. Farmer’s scene may not have been this straight guy’s favorite moment but it was close!) The real genius of the piece, however, is how it maintains a logical narrative flow while also expertly walking the weird tightrope of meta-comedy. From small things like the impossible movement of chairs between apartments to the big concepts like the take-over of the show by secondary characters, “[tos]” does indeed push “meta to the max” and has a great time doing so.
So I succeeded in my little writing experiment but that was not nearly as impressive as this production. Each performer is spot-on – as my wife said to me, it’s now a show that’s hard to imagine with any other actor playing each part. But this is also one of those productions where I am more aware of the director’s skill than many others. Part of it is just a pacing thing – the show moves along at a great clip – but there is also a vision clearly guiding the production, an encouragement not to overplay certain parts while staging other scenes to maximize comic potential. So many kudos to Mr. Amellio for his accomplishment.
Finally, if you read this blog, then you ARE a theater geek and, while my review specifically said the show’s appeal transcends theater geekiness, it is a particular pleasure for the stage aficionado. Passing mentions of Dinah Manoff and shows like “Ruthless!” may be beyond the knowledge of even the most fervent geek, but the alternating excitement and drudgery of the perennial understudy or chorus filler will be familiar to many.
I really enjoy smart shows but, unlike intellectually overstuffed pieces like “Arcadia” (which I also loved, BTW), “[title of show]” has such a playful accessible intelligence that everyone can love it. It inspired me to try to write smarter; maybe it’ll inspire others to stretch new intellectual or theatrical muscles. Or, at the very least, to go see more shows.
The review was also a bit of writing exercise for me. For much of the performance, when I wasn’t laughing out loud, I was smiling broadly or giggling softly. A show as consistently funny as that begs to be called “hilarious.” But ‘hilarious’ is one of those words that is notoriously overused in reviews. Sure, there are plenty of other options: ‘funny,’ ‘amusing,’ even ‘gut-busting,’ ‘side-splitting’ or ‘uproarious.’ But few words fit the bill as consistently as ‘hilarious.’ I thought a show as good as this one deserved a little extra effort on my part so I consciously avoided that one adjective. I was helped, so to speak, by a somewhat reduced word count on the review assignment but still, even with less space to fill, it was a challenge.
And that’s largely because this production is truly hilarious. It contains many clever little bits (the texting of potential stripper names), a few wonderfully ribald touches (I love the term ‘procrastibater’), some Richmond-specific shout-outs (yay, RTCC!), and even a crass prurient moment of semi-nakedness (Ms. Farmer’s scene may not have been this straight guy’s favorite moment but it was close!) The real genius of the piece, however, is how it maintains a logical narrative flow while also expertly walking the weird tightrope of meta-comedy. From small things like the impossible movement of chairs between apartments to the big concepts like the take-over of the show by secondary characters, “[tos]” does indeed push “meta to the max” and has a great time doing so.
So I succeeded in my little writing experiment but that was not nearly as impressive as this production. Each performer is spot-on – as my wife said to me, it’s now a show that’s hard to imagine with any other actor playing each part. But this is also one of those productions where I am more aware of the director’s skill than many others. Part of it is just a pacing thing – the show moves along at a great clip – but there is also a vision clearly guiding the production, an encouragement not to overplay certain parts while staging other scenes to maximize comic potential. So many kudos to Mr. Amellio for his accomplishment.
Finally, if you read this blog, then you ARE a theater geek and, while my review specifically said the show’s appeal transcends theater geekiness, it is a particular pleasure for the stage aficionado. Passing mentions of Dinah Manoff and shows like “Ruthless!” may be beyond the knowledge of even the most fervent geek, but the alternating excitement and drudgery of the perennial understudy or chorus filler will be familiar to many.
I really enjoy smart shows but, unlike intellectually overstuffed pieces like “Arcadia” (which I also loved, BTW), “[title of show]” has such a playful accessible intelligence that everyone can love it. It inspired me to try to write smarter; maybe it’ll inspire others to stretch new intellectual or theatrical muscles. Or, at the very least, to go see more shows.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
VCU
I think the day after my review of “[title of show]” appeared in Style is a good time to give an overdue shout out to Theatre VCU. If there was any doubt as to the importance of this local university’s program to the local theater scene, a scan of the recent graduates should alleviate that. Looking just through the list of MFA recipients, I see at least two RTCC award winners and perhaps two other RTCC award nominees. And, thinking back on this past season, I wouldn’t be surprised if at least two more of the listed MFAs don’t snag a nomination before the year is over.
Not that the RTCC awards are the be-all-and-end-all but they are one convenient measure of the impact of these individuals specifically and the Theatre VCU program generally. It’s also worth mentioning that the folks who taught these graduates also participate regularly in the local professional scene, perhaps none more prolifically than Patti D’Beck (featured in this graduation ceremony picture).
I’ll admit to being too blasé about Theatre VCU in the past. I don’t make going to its productions a priority, though my colleague, John Porter, has encouraged me to do so several times in the past. This in the face of the fact that some of my favorite theatrical experiences over the past couple of years (“Chicago,” “Tommy,” etc.) have been at their productions. I don’t always scrutinize the school’s upcoming season when all of the other local companies are announcing theirs, even though this September they’ll produce the intriguing “Shakespeare R&J” directed by Keri Wormald, a fabulous director who’s been at the helm of some of the best pro productions in Richmond history (IMHO). And to complete the litany of inadequacy, I didn’t make it out to “The Bluest Eye,” the VCU co-pro with Barksdale, which I heard very good things about second-hand.
So I am going to do better in the future. For a start, I’ll add the fun and informative Theatre VCU BackStage Pass blog to the roll on the right. This should keep me (and any of you that care) apprised of some of the VCU goings on. And come next season, I’ll carve out the space required to see the VCU shows, something that won’t be chore by any means given shows like “Grease!” and “Arabian Nights” on their docket.
For those of you who pay attention, the Drama Desk awards were announced over the weekend and seem to give a good indication of how the Tonys might go, that is, lots of recognition for “The Book of Mormon.”
A few people have asked me about the NEA fellowship thing and I realized that I’ve probably confused some folks. I went to LA a few weeks ago as part of my 9-5 job, not for the fellowship. The NEA Institute begins two weeks from this Sunday and I’m alternately excited and terrified. Since I’m going to have to act like a real journalist while I’m there, I’ve been trying to pay more attention to how theater is covered. There’s no better place than the NYTimes to go for that and I was particularly impressed a couple of weeks ago at this little slideshow about “Catch Me If You Can.” It’s a great deconstruction of the choreography of a scene. I’ve always been a fan of journalism that’s instructive as well as informative and this piece definitely fits the bill. Now, if I could only make my blog posts just as good...
Not that the RTCC awards are the be-all-and-end-all but they are one convenient measure of the impact of these individuals specifically and the Theatre VCU program generally. It’s also worth mentioning that the folks who taught these graduates also participate regularly in the local professional scene, perhaps none more prolifically than Patti D’Beck (featured in this graduation ceremony picture).
I’ll admit to being too blasé about Theatre VCU in the past. I don’t make going to its productions a priority, though my colleague, John Porter, has encouraged me to do so several times in the past. This in the face of the fact that some of my favorite theatrical experiences over the past couple of years (“Chicago,” “Tommy,” etc.) have been at their productions. I don’t always scrutinize the school’s upcoming season when all of the other local companies are announcing theirs, even though this September they’ll produce the intriguing “Shakespeare R&J” directed by Keri Wormald, a fabulous director who’s been at the helm of some of the best pro productions in Richmond history (IMHO). And to complete the litany of inadequacy, I didn’t make it out to “The Bluest Eye,” the VCU co-pro with Barksdale, which I heard very good things about second-hand.
So I am going to do better in the future. For a start, I’ll add the fun and informative Theatre VCU BackStage Pass blog to the roll on the right. This should keep me (and any of you that care) apprised of some of the VCU goings on. And come next season, I’ll carve out the space required to see the VCU shows, something that won’t be chore by any means given shows like “Grease!” and “Arabian Nights” on their docket.
For those of you who pay attention, the Drama Desk awards were announced over the weekend and seem to give a good indication of how the Tonys might go, that is, lots of recognition for “The Book of Mormon.”
A few people have asked me about the NEA fellowship thing and I realized that I’ve probably confused some folks. I went to LA a few weeks ago as part of my 9-5 job, not for the fellowship. The NEA Institute begins two weeks from this Sunday and I’m alternately excited and terrified. Since I’m going to have to act like a real journalist while I’m there, I’ve been trying to pay more attention to how theater is covered. There’s no better place than the NYTimes to go for that and I was particularly impressed a couple of weeks ago at this little slideshow about “Catch Me If You Can.” It’s a great deconstruction of the choreography of a scene. I’ve always been a fan of journalism that’s instructive as well as informative and this piece definitely fits the bill. Now, if I could only make my blog posts just as good...
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
30, 31, 32
Reviews of “[title of show]” came out over the weekend, both Ms. Haubenstock at the T-D and Mr. Miller at GayRVA seeming to like it quite a bit. I finished up my review yesterday and it should be in next week’s Style. The best capsule review I can offer is also the simplest: don’t miss this show or you’ll be sorry you did.
This past weekend was a little weird in that seemingly all of a sudden, a big slew of shows were all closing. “Art,” “Honk!” and “Quilters” all wrapped up and, to complete the slew of one-word titles, “Shorts” opened and closed. (For those of you who might have missed it, Ms. Lewis in the Times-Dispatch wrote up “Shorts” and Mr. Miller weighed in on “Honk!” last week). I’m always more aware of openings and those occasional weekends when several shows arrive at the same time and there’s a buzz of new possibilities in the air. Now it’s like a big deflation as I look around and rue the shows I didn’t get a chance to see.
My recent out-of-town adventures allowed me to take in my 30th and 31st shows of the season. Several years ago I started keeping track of the local shows I’d seen during a season and this year I expanded my little spreadsheet tally to include any production whatsoever, including staged readings and out-of-town shows (I only counted the Radio City Xmas Spectacular once, even though I saw most or all of it at least 4 times). So “[title of show]” became the 32nd production I’ve seen this season, the 23rd local professional production.
Twenty-three was the total number of local pro productions I saw last season so I’m certainly going to beat that number this year. I’m looking ahead and thinking I could possibly make it to 30, particularly given that the Firehouse will have two shows in rep that I haven’t seen (thanks, Firehouse!). Even if I make it to 30, that’ll mean 39 productions overall for the year which will fall short of the 2008-2009 season when I saw 35 local pro productions and 5 non-pro ones.
Forty productions. That means that, on average, three weekends out of the four in the typical month I went to see a show. I’m not tooting my horn here or anything. It’s just a little staggering when I look at the numbers. Even more staggering to me is that I know people whose theater consumption dwarfs mine (looking at you, Ms. Haubenstock!) How do they find the time?
This past weekend was a little weird in that seemingly all of a sudden, a big slew of shows were all closing. “Art,” “Honk!” and “Quilters” all wrapped up and, to complete the slew of one-word titles, “Shorts” opened and closed. (For those of you who might have missed it, Ms. Lewis in the Times-Dispatch wrote up “Shorts” and Mr. Miller weighed in on “Honk!” last week). I’m always more aware of openings and those occasional weekends when several shows arrive at the same time and there’s a buzz of new possibilities in the air. Now it’s like a big deflation as I look around and rue the shows I didn’t get a chance to see.
My recent out-of-town adventures allowed me to take in my 30th and 31st shows of the season. Several years ago I started keeping track of the local shows I’d seen during a season and this year I expanded my little spreadsheet tally to include any production whatsoever, including staged readings and out-of-town shows (I only counted the Radio City Xmas Spectacular once, even though I saw most or all of it at least 4 times). So “[title of show]” became the 32nd production I’ve seen this season, the 23rd local professional production.
Twenty-three was the total number of local pro productions I saw last season so I’m certainly going to beat that number this year. I’m looking ahead and thinking I could possibly make it to 30, particularly given that the Firehouse will have two shows in rep that I haven’t seen (thanks, Firehouse!). Even if I make it to 30, that’ll mean 39 productions overall for the year which will fall short of the 2008-2009 season when I saw 35 local pro productions and 5 non-pro ones.
Forty productions. That means that, on average, three weekends out of the four in the typical month I went to see a show. I’m not tooting my horn here or anything. It’s just a little staggering when I look at the numbers. Even more staggering to me is that I know people whose theater consumption dwarfs mine (looking at you, Ms. Haubenstock!) How do they find the time?
Friday, May 13, 2011
Spent
Sorry, blog-land. This week has been a killer for me in many ways and anything I would have written about would have been of the personal rant variety. Many companies are coming out with their 2011-12 seasons with some very interesting productions planned. I’ll try to get it together enough to write about that soon but, in the meantime, feel free to leave your comments.
If you have been paying attention, “Spiderman” turned off the dark recently (having been dark for three weeks). I’ve only read one recap of the differences in the newly imagined production. I’m somewhat amazed to read how much they’ve changed, particularly re-engineering the entire second act. It’s definitely a wise move based on what I saw but it also makes me glad that I saw the show before it was revamped. Perhaps what producers are counting on is people who will come back to see it again every time it goes through a facelift.
I’m looking forward to seeing “[title of show]” this weekend. Any of y’all seen it? Ms. Haubenstock at the T-D liked it. What did you think?
If you have been paying attention, “Spiderman” turned off the dark recently (having been dark for three weeks). I’ve only read one recap of the differences in the newly imagined production. I’m somewhat amazed to read how much they’ve changed, particularly re-engineering the entire second act. It’s definitely a wise move based on what I saw but it also makes me glad that I saw the show before it was revamped. Perhaps what producers are counting on is people who will come back to see it again every time it goes through a facelift.
I’m looking forward to seeing “[title of show]” this weekend. Any of y’all seen it? Ms. Haubenstock at the T-D liked it. What did you think?
Monday, May 09, 2011
Stories
Our stories define us: tales from childhood retold at family reunions, nights of reverie recalled at high school reunions, the stories of courtship and marriage that parents tell their children. But at what point do these stories enslave us – trap us in roles from years past, encapsulating what is complicated and mutable into something pat and repeatable?
These is one of the meta-questions that lie behind “The Walworth Farce,” a production at the Studio Theatre in DC that my lovely wife and I took in a while back. But it won’t occur to you until at least midway through this disturbing slice of Irish darkness that is also fast-paced and intermittently funny. You’re likely to spend much of the first act just wondering what the heck is going on.
An old man sits in a beat-up armchair in the middle of a crumbling apartment, one younger man is in the next room ironing a dress, another nervously unpacks groceries in the kitchen. The old man, Dinny (Ted van Griethuysen), starts a tape recorder with peppy music from decades ago and the two younger men, who you soon find out are Dinny’s sons, fly into a bizarre series of interactions. Only a good way into the first act does it become clear that the boys, Sean (Alex Morf) and Blake (Aubrey Deeker), are acting out scenes from the last day Dinny spent in Ireland.
The play-within-a-play is a baroque farce involving two scams, two funerals, and a lot of quick costume changes (Blake plays all of the female parts). The boys’ agitation is palpable, and we discover why when Sean suffers the consequences of messing up some of the key props. He has had a conversation with a clerk, Hayley (Azania Dungee), at the grocery store and this contact with anyone outside the isolated apartment has totally unnerved him. When Hayley ultimately insinuates herself into this weird world, the results are disastrous.
Within its limited, strange little structure, “Walworth” is quite brilliant and presents prime opportunities for every actor involved to chew a healthy amount of scenery. As Sean, Morf has to surf between the three levels of reality in the play: Dinny’s fantastical story, the real-life relationship between a father and his sons, and the bigworld outside beyond their apartment door. Van Griethuysen’ Dinny is imperious and unhinged but also charming in places. Deeker makes Blake physically imposing but emotionally fragile, and the drama eventually turns on a decision his fevered mind must sort out. Dungee is unfortunately forced to sit and watch a lot of the action but she projects a breezy and appealing personality in her first scenes with Morf.
As the tension escalates, “Walworth” gets trapped in some frustrating scene constructions that you might expect in a bad horror movie. By late in the second act, you might find yourself asking, “Why doesn’t Hayley just use the knife prominently at hand in the kitchen?” Or “Why does Hayley’s cell phone ring for SO long?” For a show that teeters on the edge of plausibility as it is, these moments threaten to push it over the edge.
But even with its structural faults and overall weirdness, “Walworth” is fascinating in its exploration of the stories we tell ourselves and how they can ultimately determine our fate. A one-set show with only four actors, it’d be a prime candidate for production by the Firehouse or one of the fringier companies in town. The playwright is the recently celebrated Enda Walsh, a challenger to Martin McDonagh’s realm of idiosyncratic but amazing plays and a name I’ll be watching for in years to come.
These is one of the meta-questions that lie behind “The Walworth Farce,” a production at the Studio Theatre in DC that my lovely wife and I took in a while back. But it won’t occur to you until at least midway through this disturbing slice of Irish darkness that is also fast-paced and intermittently funny. You’re likely to spend much of the first act just wondering what the heck is going on.
An old man sits in a beat-up armchair in the middle of a crumbling apartment, one younger man is in the next room ironing a dress, another nervously unpacks groceries in the kitchen. The old man, Dinny (Ted van Griethuysen), starts a tape recorder with peppy music from decades ago and the two younger men, who you soon find out are Dinny’s sons, fly into a bizarre series of interactions. Only a good way into the first act does it become clear that the boys, Sean (Alex Morf) and Blake (Aubrey Deeker), are acting out scenes from the last day Dinny spent in Ireland.
The play-within-a-play is a baroque farce involving two scams, two funerals, and a lot of quick costume changes (Blake plays all of the female parts). The boys’ agitation is palpable, and we discover why when Sean suffers the consequences of messing up some of the key props. He has had a conversation with a clerk, Hayley (Azania Dungee), at the grocery store and this contact with anyone outside the isolated apartment has totally unnerved him. When Hayley ultimately insinuates herself into this weird world, the results are disastrous.
Within its limited, strange little structure, “Walworth” is quite brilliant and presents prime opportunities for every actor involved to chew a healthy amount of scenery. As Sean, Morf has to surf between the three levels of reality in the play: Dinny’s fantastical story, the real-life relationship between a father and his sons, and the bigworld outside beyond their apartment door. Van Griethuysen’ Dinny is imperious and unhinged but also charming in places. Deeker makes Blake physically imposing but emotionally fragile, and the drama eventually turns on a decision his fevered mind must sort out. Dungee is unfortunately forced to sit and watch a lot of the action but she projects a breezy and appealing personality in her first scenes with Morf.
As the tension escalates, “Walworth” gets trapped in some frustrating scene constructions that you might expect in a bad horror movie. By late in the second act, you might find yourself asking, “Why doesn’t Hayley just use the knife prominently at hand in the kitchen?” Or “Why does Hayley’s cell phone ring for SO long?” For a show that teeters on the edge of plausibility as it is, these moments threaten to push it over the edge.
But even with its structural faults and overall weirdness, “Walworth” is fascinating in its exploration of the stories we tell ourselves and how they can ultimately determine our fate. A one-set show with only four actors, it’d be a prime candidate for production by the Firehouse or one of the fringier companies in town. The playwright is the recently celebrated Enda Walsh, a challenger to Martin McDonagh’s realm of idiosyncratic but amazing plays and a name I’ll be watching for in years to come.
Friday, May 06, 2011
Puncturing pretense
On the third day I was in Los Angeles, I finally realized that the Fox Studios backlot was only 2 blocks from my hotel. For two days, I had turned left out of my hotel toward Santa Monica Blvd (a street I can't even say in my head without a melody line, thanks to Sheryl Crow) whenever I went walking or jogging. The last day there I turned right and boom, there was the Fox lot. Not that I could just run right in and wander around, but on my jog that day I did circle around the whole compound and took what opportunities I could to peak in. Mostly, it was lots of golf carts puttering around and lots of numbered buildings. However, when I finally got around to the front gate where people who work there were driving in, I saw someone who looked distinctly like Amber Riley (Mercedes from "Glee") drive right in front of me. That's the story I'm sticking with even if it wasn't her.
This happened the morning after I had several bona fide celebrity encounters at the performance of "God of Carnage" with the original Broadway cast. After the show, I was heading down to retrieve the bag I'd checked and nearly ran head first into John Stamos. I said "excuse me" and sidestepped just in time, but not before taking in his very chiseled good looks and the scary fact that he doesn't look a day over 35 in person even though he is exactly 2 days OLDER than me. Oy.
I inadvertently went by the stage door as I was leaving the theater (I was going to find the bus; I guess all the beautiful people went in the opposite direction). Unlike Broadway where stage doors are swamped after a show, there were only 5 other folks hanging out at the Ahmanson waiting for autographs. So I joined them and soon Jeff Daniels (taller than expected and nice but perfunctory to the fans) and Hope Davis (warm and personable and a little weary perhaps) came out. After another 15 minutes, Marcia Gay Harden came out and seemed like she couldn't light up a smoke fast enough. She had a distinct kind of "old broad" attitude that was refreshing and funny and, even though she was carrying two large handbags full of stuff, she wouldn't accept any help.
As for the show, I'm going to go ahead and do something like a full length review of it because I've got to warm up in preparation for my fellowship thingy in June. I've realized that I'm so stuck in a 400 word box that I'm not sure whether I can write anything longer. So what follows is something close to what I'd write if I was writing for the LA Weekly or some such thing. Feel free to skip it if you've got better things to do.
Though I've only seen two of her plays, it seems clear to me that Yasmina Reza is determined to deflate high-minded intellectualism, exposing, as it were, the Bugs Bunny cartoon that lies just beneath the surface of every opera. "Art" is precipitated by the consideration of sophisticated modern art but devolves into various hijinks and pratfalls. Similarly, "God of Carnage" begins with the most civilized of discussions between well-mannered adults but it quickly become clear how close each of the four characters is to the edge of barbarism. The infamous (and impressive, stage magic-wise) hurl at the show's midpoint is just one sign-post leading inexorably from blithe discussions of recipes to childish destruction of ornamental flowers.
You probably know the basic story: two couples have come together to discuss a fight between their children. The 11 year-old son of Alan and Annette (Jeff Daniels and Hope Davis) has taken a stick to the son of Michael and Veronica (James Gandolfini and Marcia Gay Harden), knocking out a couple of his teeth. There is no denying the entertainment value Reza skillfully draws from the tension that boils intensely beneath this simple set-up. But her brilliance truly becomes evident as allegiances fray and re-form during the course of the evening, demonstrating a remarkable depth of psychological insight into the dynamics between men and other men, women and other women, and married people of varying degrees of mental health.
Though filled with stars familiar from TV and movie screens, the cast of this production brings an intense theatricality to their roles, none more so than Daniels, who I found mesmerizing as the most nakedly assholish member of the quartet. Playing a lawyer trying to guide a pharmaceutical company through a potential lawsuit, Daniels uses the cell phone calls that regularly interrupt the evening to establish his profoundly cynical personality, which sets the stage for him to bond with kindred spirit, Michael. Gandolfini successfully escapes the bonds of his most famous role; when Michael finally untucks his shirt - a move that could be threatening coming from Tony Soprano - it's a signal of his resignation and frustration, not of impending violence.
Davis is slight and brittle on stage (seeing her afterwards in jeans and a loose sweater was like meeting a different person) and she traverses the highest highs and lowest lows here while never losing her bearings. Perhaps it's because her character ends up being the only one who doesn't seem to lose sight of the children that prompted the meeting in the first place. Harden has a somewhat thankless role, her Veronica clearly Reza's stand-in for deluded, righteous, and oversensitive do-gooders everywhere. Honestly, though she was excellent in the role, I'm surprised she was the one that one the Tony.
I laughed often and heartily throughout "Carnage" and not just at the slapsticky moments but also at Reza's unflinching disdain for pretense. However, I also tasted a little bile of bitterness seeping in by the play's conclusion, never a charming sensation. Michael's lament that "children devour your lives, and then they kill you" seems overwrought when he says it. But later you realize it's just a precursor to soften you up for the ugly epithets that will fly before the end. I think I would like Reza's plays better if I felt she left even the residue of sympathy somewhere in her characterizations. That the audience comes to consider Alan the only vestige of restraint is telling.
The production shines from a technical stand-point, with the subtle lighting design a particular stand-out. It was satisfying to me that even a big fancy Los Angeles theater can have trouble with sound design, as I heard a few people complain on the way out about not being able to hear certain lines.
In the end, I feel pretty profoundly lucky to have seen this production. I may not worship at the temple of this particular "God," but I had a fabulous time visiting it just the same
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
I get a-round
My review of "Circle Mirror Transformation" is in this week's Style. Better late than never, right? Mr. Griset's review of "Art" also appears this week, which is a cool coincidence since I just saw another of Yasmina Reza's works last night. More on that tomorrow.
It's always interesting for me to go back and read a review of mine a couple of weeks after I've written it. There's a way that a show settles into my consciousness: my initial impressions age and mature and don't always end up where they started. Sometimes this process results in a bolstering of my opinion of a show. After I saw "Avenue Q" the first time, my feelings about the show just got more and more positive (enhanced by repeated plays of the soundtrack) to the point that I was actually a little disappointed when I went and saw it a second time.
I wouldn't take back anything I said about "CMT" in my review. I enjoyed this show but it hasn't aged as well in my memory as other shows. Trying to think about it analytically, I suspect it's because this is a show of moments, usually small ones, subtle and simple character turns that are intriguing but also fleeting. At the performance I saw, the audience was older and relatively impatient about the pauses and stretches of silence. In the face of that, I felt a sense of defiance on behalf of the actors. I wanted to turn to the talkers in the crowd and say, 'pay attention -- there's good work going on here!' I also wanted to get pedantic and say, 'theater isn't always about rapid-fire dialogue!' So while I highlighted the pauses in my review, the rest reads to me now like a defense of the actors who utilize the open spaces in the script to fully inhabit the characters they play.
As I think back on it, I would put "CMT" in the category of plays that I appreciate more than I love. The lack of an intermission is a problem experientially. Some of the scenes are pretty indulgent (like the one where people portray the items in Schultz's room) and I'm not sure what they added to the play as a whole. As my colleague Mr. Porter suggests, there is also a fair amount of telling not showing going on thanks to the monologues where each character lays out another character's back story. For a show with less dialogue than many, the proportion of telling to showing seems high in retrospect.
There are other smaller issues that have popped up in my reflections about the show. I have ended up feeling frustrated with the Marti character. There is obviously a lot going on with this character but, more so than with any of the others, I think she gets short-changed by the play. I came away feeling like I wanted to empathize with her, particularly as portrayed by the always-winning Kelly Kennedy. But in the end, I don't think she really earns much empathy, seeming kind of rigid all the way to the end.
My appreciation of certain scenes has increased over the weeks, however. The "telling secrets" scene in particular is kind of stunning. I can pretty clearly remember each character's reaction as each secret was read. This is not a testament to my memory but to each actor's clarity in their almost entirely non-verbal response. Beyond being specifically impressed with Mr. Flannagan's performance, I thought he and Erin Thomas-Foley had a very compelling, very authentic chemistry, both as their relationship was heating up and as it frayed. In fact, every interaction between Theresa and another character had an energy a notch above the others, a reflection of Thomas-Foley's unique skills as an actress.
As I think back now, the scenes that most succinctly reflect how I ended up feeling about the show are the "lying in a circle, counting" scenes. I appreciate their purpose in the context of the play and there were some funny and/or interesting moments in them. But they also tended to go on too long and the pay-offs we're sometimes minimal. I can see how people with an abiding interest in theater and who happen to be fascinated by actors might be particularly enamored with "CMT." However, I can also see why some patrons, like the one who I overheard as I filed down the stairs at the Barksdale, might wonder, "...but what was it about?"
It's always interesting for me to go back and read a review of mine a couple of weeks after I've written it. There's a way that a show settles into my consciousness: my initial impressions age and mature and don't always end up where they started. Sometimes this process results in a bolstering of my opinion of a show. After I saw "Avenue Q" the first time, my feelings about the show just got more and more positive (enhanced by repeated plays of the soundtrack) to the point that I was actually a little disappointed when I went and saw it a second time.
I wouldn't take back anything I said about "CMT" in my review. I enjoyed this show but it hasn't aged as well in my memory as other shows. Trying to think about it analytically, I suspect it's because this is a show of moments, usually small ones, subtle and simple character turns that are intriguing but also fleeting. At the performance I saw, the audience was older and relatively impatient about the pauses and stretches of silence. In the face of that, I felt a sense of defiance on behalf of the actors. I wanted to turn to the talkers in the crowd and say, 'pay attention -- there's good work going on here!' I also wanted to get pedantic and say, 'theater isn't always about rapid-fire dialogue!' So while I highlighted the pauses in my review, the rest reads to me now like a defense of the actors who utilize the open spaces in the script to fully inhabit the characters they play.
As I think back on it, I would put "CMT" in the category of plays that I appreciate more than I love. The lack of an intermission is a problem experientially. Some of the scenes are pretty indulgent (like the one where people portray the items in Schultz's room) and I'm not sure what they added to the play as a whole. As my colleague Mr. Porter suggests, there is also a fair amount of telling not showing going on thanks to the monologues where each character lays out another character's back story. For a show with less dialogue than many, the proportion of telling to showing seems high in retrospect.
There are other smaller issues that have popped up in my reflections about the show. I have ended up feeling frustrated with the Marti character. There is obviously a lot going on with this character but, more so than with any of the others, I think she gets short-changed by the play. I came away feeling like I wanted to empathize with her, particularly as portrayed by the always-winning Kelly Kennedy. But in the end, I don't think she really earns much empathy, seeming kind of rigid all the way to the end.
My appreciation of certain scenes has increased over the weeks, however. The "telling secrets" scene in particular is kind of stunning. I can pretty clearly remember each character's reaction as each secret was read. This is not a testament to my memory but to each actor's clarity in their almost entirely non-verbal response. Beyond being specifically impressed with Mr. Flannagan's performance, I thought he and Erin Thomas-Foley had a very compelling, very authentic chemistry, both as their relationship was heating up and as it frayed. In fact, every interaction between Theresa and another character had an energy a notch above the others, a reflection of Thomas-Foley's unique skills as an actress.
As I think back now, the scenes that most succinctly reflect how I ended up feeling about the show are the "lying in a circle, counting" scenes. I appreciate their purpose in the context of the play and there were some funny and/or interesting moments in them. But they also tended to go on too long and the pay-offs we're sometimes minimal. I can see how people with an abiding interest in theater and who happen to be fascinated by actors might be particularly enamored with "CMT." However, I can also see why some patrons, like the one who I overheard as I filed down the stairs at the Barksdale, might wonder, "...but what was it about?"
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Out of town adventures
I haven’t really known what to post today, my mind still reeling a bit from the momentous news of last night. I’m also hanging out on the left coast this week so am fairly discombobulated thanks to that. After things settle a bit in my head, I’ll be able to regroup and post something more interesting. I have lots to talk about; Saturday I saw a weird and wonderful piece of work at The Studio Theatre in Washington called “The Walworth Farce” and on Tuesday, I’ll see “God of Carnage” with the original Broadway cast out here in L.A.
In the meantime, Ms. Lewis’s review of “Honk!” came out on Sunday and looks like another winner for Theatre IV. The Broadway in Richmond series for 2011-12 was announced and honestly, I'm not too impressed (I saw "South Pacific" on Broadway and, while wonderful, I don't think I need to see it again. Perhaps I'll take the opportunity to finally see Blue Man Group...) Also, the Tony nominations will be announced in about 7 hours as I write this. Since they’ll more than likely be out by the time you read this, who do you think is likely to collect a trophy? Were you shocked or disappointed by any of the noms?
UPDATE: The nominees are...
In the meantime, Ms. Lewis’s review of “Honk!” came out on Sunday and looks like another winner for Theatre IV. The Broadway in Richmond series for 2011-12 was announced and honestly, I'm not too impressed (I saw "South Pacific" on Broadway and, while wonderful, I don't think I need to see it again. Perhaps I'll take the opportunity to finally see Blue Man Group...) Also, the Tony nominations will be announced in about 7 hours as I write this. Since they’ll more than likely be out by the time you read this, who do you think is likely to collect a trophy? Were you shocked or disappointed by any of the noms?
UPDATE: The nominees are...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)