Finally, An Update

I feel like it's been a long time since I've posted an update. Not for any particular lack of theatregoing, though.

THE TEMPEST. The annual Brian Kulick-helmed Shakespeare productions at Classic Stage Company seem to get worse every year. I had some glimmer of hope that this year's production would be an improvement since Michael Cumpsty wasn't in the cast. Except instead of Michael Cumpsty starring, we get someone who turns out to be even worse - Mandy Patinkin. I'm not really sure who thought Mandy Patinkin as Prospero in "The Tempest" was a good idea, other than Patinkin himself. His performance here is just about as over-the-top hammy as you'd expect. Last night I went to see "To Be Or Not To Be" where David Rasche plays a Polish actor who is a brilliant Hamlet only in his own head, though to everyone else he's just a big joke. Let's just say that if Patinkin had any sense of humor, it would have been quite the coup to get his to play that role. If you ever wanted to see an actor, past his prime, who has become a caricature of himself, this is surely the production to witness it. In the final speech of the play, he stands there, eyes closed, reciting the lines as intensely as he can possibly muster (and ooh boy, is that a lot), and it just comes across as so self indulgent. This is not to say that he ruins the production. At least he's amusing to watch. The rest of the cast is just dull. With the possible exception of Stark Sands and Elizabeth Waterston (as Ferdinand and Miranda) who are quite charming to watch and have lovely chemistry, the rest of the cast is fairly dull. Usually these lousy Kulick productions can at least be counted on for some intriguing staging, but I guess most of his budget must have gone to pay dear ol' Mandy, because the design is all very cheap looking. This is overall, a huge disappointment.

TO BE OR NOT TO BE. In what I guess was Manhattan Theatre Club's attempt to recreate the success the Roundabout had with their imported production of "The 39 Steps," they have opened their Biltmore... I mean Friedman Theatre season with a stage adaptation of a dusty old movie. Except this one has quite a few more than four actors. There was some hubub during rehearsals, with two actors dropping out, then some cancelled previews and a delayed opening night - none of which are good signs for a production. I don't know if everything has quite settled down yet backstage, but what is currently being presented is not really what I would call "good." There are a couple of chuckles every now and then, but it's certainly not what I would call hilarious. I've never seen the original film, but I think the stage script must be sticking fairly close to the screenplay, because there are an awful lot of very short scenes. One would think they could have had the good sense to combine some of the scenes, so the audience didn't have to watch the scene change curtain move across the stage every 10 seconds or so. It made the evening feel really very choppy. Oh, and while most of the play is (in theory) a comedy, bizarrely in the final few scenes, it suddenly turns totally serious. The play is about an acting troupe in Poland, around the time of the Nazi occupation. So while most of the play is silly stuff about running around and avoiding being killed, there are these random sections of dialogue about actors being rounded up and shipped to concentration camps, and a kid delivering a speech from "The Merchant of Venice," and an extremely bizarre song sung in Polish that has the cast huddling together hoping for a better tomorrow. I guess this is supposed to be a comedy with some sort of social conscience, but when so much of the play is fluff, is comes across as really jarring and out of place. As far as the acting goes, the cast is fine, though I wasn't really thrilled with anyone. I'm the sort who will see Jan Maxwell or Kristine Nielsen do anything (and I have the mental wounds from Maxwell's last few awful plays to prove it), but I can't say either of them really give their best performances here. Maxwell came across as perhaps too intelligent in the role of the actress cheating on her actor husband, and Nielsen is really just plain wasted in the role of, what I guess is best described as a maid. Overall, the show isn't horrible, but I would definitely wait a bit before venturing to see it. I already have plans to see it again in November, so maybe things will be more in sync by then.

SALOME. I still get chills thinking about Karita Mattila's brilliant Salome at the Met back in 2004(?). So when it was announced it was finally returning, even though I already had tickets to see it tomorrow night, I decided to grab a standing room ticket to the first night on Tuesday as well. Okay, maybe it's not as mind blowingly fantastic this time around. But even if I was squirming a bit more this time, by the time Salome finally gets her claws on on Jochanaan's severed head, and through to the end, ooh boy there were chills up my spine. Even if her performance did veer slightly toward the over-the-top at times, and even if the Dance of the Seven Veils was more amusing that erotic, this remains a jaw dropping performance, and definitely should not be missed. So what if it's merely fantastic instead of fan-friggin-tastic? It's still a spine tingling thrill, and I think I may even throw in a third viewing this time around, assuming I can get my schedule in order.

I think I'll stop there. I have chocolate honey (cup)cakes in the oven that are going to be done soon, and others that need icing, and midnight is approaching.

RENT - the way it was meant to be filmed

As we've all witnessed time and time again, it's not easy to turn a stage musical into a successful film. A few years ago, Christopher Columbus made a pathetic attempt to turn "Rent" into a movie, and as anyone who saw it can attest to, was none too successful. In what seems to be a mea culpa on the part of Sony Pictures, we are getting - for four screenings only (Sept 24, 25, 27, 28) - "Rent: Filmed Live On Broadway," a film of the final performance of "Rent" on Broadway. I was invited to a screening of the new movie tonight at the Sony Screening Room, and let me say that Rentheads can all breathe a sigh of relief, because this new "Rent" wonderfully captures the spirit and energy of the stage musical. I could quibble about the times when I wished the camera would just keep still and not cut to a different angle every four seconds, or about how Will Chase struck me as a bit too old (and heavily made up) for Roger, or how well... they don't live up to my memories of the original cast. But those are really just minor faults. Considering how awful Broadway shows usually come across live on those Live From Lincoln Center and Great Performances small screen airings, this was a most pleasant surprise. The movie runs around 2 1/2 hours, including a ten minute intermission to rest your brain and relieve your bowels. If you are anything like me and were too lazy (and/or afraid) to see "Rent" one last time on Broadway, this "special event" movie is well worth seeing. I have to say I've been rather skeptical of this new fad of showing live theatre at the movies, and to be perfectly honest I doubt I would have bothered to see this otherwise, but having sat through it, I'll say I do think it is definitely worth bothering with. And think of it this way - if these screenings do well, that will likely tell Sony that the moviegoing public wants more Broadway at the movies. Any excuse to document a Broadway show for future generations makes me happy. Did I mentioned my fingers were crossed that this would eventually be released on dvd?

A Great Play Lurking In The "Shadows"

This afternoon, when trying to decide whether to see anything tonight, I was going back and forth in my head as to whether I should see "King of Shadows." On the plus side, it's by Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa, a young playwright whose work I've enjoyed keeping my eye on. Of the plays of his I've seen, I've liked "The Mystery Plays," "Good Boys and True," "Based on a Totally True Story," and "Bloody Mary," (especially those last two), and only really disliked "Dark Matters." On the minus, it's being presented at Theatre for a New City, which being the theatre snob I am, is not what I would call a desirable venue (it being not near the subway, and not having - in recent years anyway - produced anything high profile enough to reach my radar). Also, after suffering through the terrible "Dark Matters" at the Rattlestick, my theatre snob instinct also wondered why this playwright who had previously had work produced at places like Second Stage and MTC, was having to resort to having a world premiere play produced by a theatre company I'd venture to say most people have never heard of (namely the "Working Theatre").
Okay, so maybe that theatre snob instinct needs to be lashed forty times with a wet noodle, or whatever your punishment of choice is, because by curiosity over seeing the new Aguirre-Sacasa play won out in the end (plus nothing better came along), and goodness gracious, I loved it. Like "Mystery Plays," "Dark Matters" and "Bloody Mary," this play takes a look at the more supernatural side of life. That the playwright works as a writer for Marvel Comics, comes as no surprise. According to a program note, this play was commissioned by California Shakespeare Theatre, and was the result of a combination of community service working with homeless gay, lesbian, transexual, or questioning youth in San Francisco, and the requirement that he use a Shakespeare play as a starting point (in this case, "A Midsummer Night's Dream"). And somehow he takes those two odd concepts and melds them into something that kind of reminded me of the work of Neil Gaiman. The play is a about a (female) grad student who is interviewing homeless young gay man in San Francisco, who claims he was stolen from his parents by The King of Shadows, and escaped from the King's realm into San Francisco. And now the King wants him back (cue ominous music). It sounds kind of corny, but I think it's a credit to both Mr. Aguirre-Sacasa, and the splendid cast and creative team, that everything works just beautifully, and even the most far fetched of situations somehow become believable and touching. I imagine the design budget wasn't very high (this is off-off Broadway after all), but I was really impressed by the simple but creative set design (two curving walls, out of which magically pop desks and couches and benches), and some really beautiful and eery lighting.
Chalk this one up high in the pleasant surprise category. This is one of those plays that I'm very excited to spread the good word about in all of those "What did you see last night" conversations. Have I got a recommendation for you....

On a separate note, for completions sake only, I should mention the last three Fringe shows I saw - Paper Dolls (meh), Be Brave Anna (ugh), and Thoroughly Stupid Things (quite good). I'm pretty sure all that Fringe-going added up to 30 productions (over the course of 31 performances - having seen "The Fabulous Kane Sisters" twice). I spent last week recovering from the marathon, and now hopefully things will pick up again post-Labor Day as the Fall season kicks into gear. The Fall season started on a high note with "The King of Shadows," let's hope things don't deteriorate too quickly now.

Oh, and this was apparently my 75th post. Weeee........