What a treat! Excellent writing, set design, and solid acting combine to produce a thoroughly engaging evening of theater at the Raven.
I've said it before, but this production merits it being repeated: Chicago is home to some of the best theater I've encountered. Allow me to explain:
Set outside Kansas City in 1955, Bus Stop explores three lines of romance between six of the eight characters: a high school girl and a drunken, pedophile professor; an abandoned woman and a bus driver; and the principal story line, a rough, abusive young cowboy and a "loose" nightclub singer that he has kidnaped, stranded in a bus stop/diner due to a winter storm. In the wrong hands - in fact, in any but the best hands - this could be a disaster.
But in the hands of the excellent playwright, William Inge, the director, JoAnn Montemurro, the crew (in particular the set design by Ray Toler), and the actors, the result is a drama that finds the right notes with drama, romance and comedy. In particular, Michael Stegall as "Bo," Jen Short as "Cherie" and Kristen Williams as "Grace" deliver first-class, enrapturing performances: their transformation into their characters was seamless and complete.
Even in the face of some broad comedic moments (such as the professor's drunken stumbling and Bo's attempt to carry Cherie out over his shoulder), the moments of drama were genuinely touching. I was particularly moved by Cherie's nearly ten minutes of silent emoting as others occupied the speaking parts; Ms. Short truly inhabited "Cherie" and allowed us in for those very intimate moments.
A couple words of caution: the Raven has seats along the side, but the blocking for this play doesn't accommodate those seats. As it's open seating, arrive early and find a place in the main, center section. And, don't forego the opportunity to acquire season's tickets to this wonderful theater company: they tackle solid plays with predictable success - and delight.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Bus Stop - Highly Recommended
Labels:
chicago,
comedy,
drama,
Raven Theatre
Location:
Raven Theatre
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Against Type Project - Highly Recommended
There's only one chance left to see the Against Type Project - Wednesday night, October 5. Don't miss it!
Presented by the Focal Point Theatre Company at the Think Tank (off Ravenswood in Lakeview), this is a collection of six scenes from contemporary plays: Glengarry, Glen Ross; Our Town; The Four Yorkshiremen; The Importance of Being Earnest; The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe; and Steel Magnolias.
The program flyer from Melissa Albertario (Artistic Director) notes in part that the purpose of the evening was "to give our group of extraordinarily talented friends, peers and collaborators and opportunity to limber up and challenge themselves." The theme, beyond the largely comic selection of themes, is "to discard ... preconceptions about casting according to age, gender, race and experience."
This is 75 minutes of high energy, extreme talent and just plain fun. The settings could only be more minimalistic if they did away with the four chairs and table; even the costumes are all Basic Black. All of which allows this very talented collection of artists to show their considerable chops. While all the performances are well done, the closing scene from Steel Magnolias brought the house down - deservedly.
Go see this performance. Or, if you can't, be sure to follow the careers of all of those involved - this is a real treat for any lover of theatre! To wit, their first full-length production is this coming Spring - but I don't want to wait until then to see these folks in action!
Presented by the Focal Point Theatre Company at the Think Tank (off Ravenswood in Lakeview), this is a collection of six scenes from contemporary plays: Glengarry, Glen Ross; Our Town; The Four Yorkshiremen; The Importance of Being Earnest; The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe; and Steel Magnolias.
The program flyer from Melissa Albertario (Artistic Director) notes in part that the purpose of the evening was "to give our group of extraordinarily talented friends, peers and collaborators and opportunity to limber up and challenge themselves." The theme, beyond the largely comic selection of themes, is "to discard ... preconceptions about casting according to age, gender, race and experience."
This is 75 minutes of high energy, extreme talent and just plain fun. The settings could only be more minimalistic if they did away with the four chairs and table; even the costumes are all Basic Black. All of which allows this very talented collection of artists to show their considerable chops. While all the performances are well done, the closing scene from Steel Magnolias brought the house down - deservedly.
Go see this performance. Or, if you can't, be sure to follow the careers of all of those involved - this is a real treat for any lover of theatre! To wit, their first full-length production is this coming Spring - but I don't want to wait until then to see these folks in action!
Location:
The Think Tank
Sunday, September 11, 2011
In the Next Room (or the vibrator play) - Highly Recommended
Sarah Ruhl's 2009 Tony-nominated play receives a top-shelf treatment by the actors and staff of the Victory Gardens Theatre. Directed by VG veteran Sandy Shinner, the play weaves together a broad range of issues and story lines without ever appearing too heavy or contrived. The humor is spontaneous and evocative, and the writing overall is elegant - taut, poetic, and incisive.
The cast of seven is well up to the challenge, even in preview. While some of the characters are broadly drawn, and the delivery is often intentionally "stuffy Victorian," we have no doubt that these are real people, and each of them faces real personal challenges.
Those challenges include infant mortality, infidelity, emotional isolation, racism and the strictures society places on strong women and homosexuality. To tackle any one of these effectively in a single play would be a treat; In the Next Room gives us enough of a taste of each that we know we have shared a new intimacy with those who face those struggles.
And yet the play never really loses its "light," produced by Mr. Edison's harnessing of electricity in both optical and mechanical ways. Ms. Ruhl offers up delightful one-liners ("Would you rather a Negro Protestant or an Irish Catholic?"), the nearly-mandatory excoriation of critics, and an interesting interpretation of the relationship between love and poetry. Clearly, she is having a great deal of fun with this play - fun she effectively invites us to share with her.
As for the vibrators? Oh, they are present, and while the application of those tools is discreet, the "paroxysms" of the patients to whom they are applied are compelling and superbly timed. The material is never prurient, but it is intimate - which is really what this play is all about.
Can intimacy become mechanical? Can the mechanical spark genuine intimacy? Are we "meat and bones," or do our souls live a couple of inches outside our eyes? Come enjoy the delicate handling that In the Other Room provides to these issues, and prepare to be tickled - and touched - by this wonderful production.
The cast of seven is well up to the challenge, even in preview. While some of the characters are broadly drawn, and the delivery is often intentionally "stuffy Victorian," we have no doubt that these are real people, and each of them faces real personal challenges.
Those challenges include infant mortality, infidelity, emotional isolation, racism and the strictures society places on strong women and homosexuality. To tackle any one of these effectively in a single play would be a treat; In the Next Room gives us enough of a taste of each that we know we have shared a new intimacy with those who face those struggles.
And yet the play never really loses its "light," produced by Mr. Edison's harnessing of electricity in both optical and mechanical ways. Ms. Ruhl offers up delightful one-liners ("Would you rather a Negro Protestant or an Irish Catholic?"), the nearly-mandatory excoriation of critics, and an interesting interpretation of the relationship between love and poetry. Clearly, she is having a great deal of fun with this play - fun she effectively invites us to share with her.
As for the vibrators? Oh, they are present, and while the application of those tools is discreet, the "paroxysms" of the patients to whom they are applied are compelling and superbly timed. The material is never prurient, but it is intimate - which is really what this play is all about.
Can intimacy become mechanical? Can the mechanical spark genuine intimacy? Are we "meat and bones," or do our souls live a couple of inches outside our eyes? Come enjoy the delicate handling that In the Other Room provides to these issues, and prepare to be tickled - and touched - by this wonderful production.
Labels:
chicago,
comedy,
drama,
intimacy,
Sarah Ruhl,
vibrator,
Victory Gardens
Location:
Victory Gardens Theatre
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Strangers and Romance - Highly Recommended
These two one-act plays by Barbara Lhota are produced at the Trap Door Theatre, which is in itself an intriguing place to encounter. Set at the back of a narrow alley - after which one crosses a hallway joining two restaurants and enters through a door that looks like it belongs to a storage room - it is the first theater I've encountered where the "directions" page on its website offers extra assistance if you get lost. But it's well worth the trek!
The stage itself is spartan - don't be fooled by the promotional shots of the production, this is theater on a shoestring. And, with that in mind, I lowered my expectations a bit as to the quality of the productions, which proved reasonable for the first play, "Strangers" - but not for the second, "Romance." It is in fact on the strength of "Romance" that I give the evening a "Highly Recommended."
I would still recommend "Strangers," but it is the weaker of the two productions, and they are best presented in the order that I presume director Doug Long chose. In it, Maddie (Misti Patrella) and Madison (Tony Ketcham, in a strong performance) encounter each other through a clever device that Ms. Lhota uses to great advantage, establishing an accelerating pace to angst and discovery that builds nicely to a fine crescendo. The reveals are well-timed, and what (falsely) appears to be a forced performance in the opening scene serves the plot well. The given locale of Boston is purely incidental, and rightly fades from our attention before very long, as the accents of the actors are decidedly mid-Western.
It took a while for the audience to warm up to the humor (in a reasonably full house), which I take to be more of a commentary on the strength of the performances than of the material. The material that we are presented with is difficult, and the use of humor is correct, and eventually allows us to go deeper. The closing is, in my opinion, a little too tidy for the challenges facing the characters, but not so egregiously so that it becomes unbelievable.
With "Romance," we are presented with what seems to be greater maturity all around: in the writing, the acting, and the depth of knowledge with which the playwright faced the issues. Also incidentally set in Boston, it is Timothy Amos (in the role of Mick) who "gets" the accent and keeps his character well-grounded in the roots of his geography; the only failing of Stacie Barra (as Miriam) is that she does not match his talent there.
The weakest part of the play is in the transition from distance to intimacy, and I suspect that is mainly due to the constraints of time. The performances are impressive, again in particular by Mr. Amos. Ultimately, the resolution is less easy and more believable, with more loose ends - and more possibilities. Ms. Lhota is able to display her talents at humor here as well, conveyed effectively by the cast and appreciated by the audience.
The underlying question in each play - that of managing loss in an intimate relationship - is nicely explored in very different ways by each character. The contrived settings - just before closing at a T stop and in the basement chapel in a church - are easily forgiven and add sufficient color to help paint the pictures that the men and women grapple with.
So, take the time to travel down a narrow alley through a back door into some of the more hidden, but far from uncommon, corners of relationships. It will be an evening well worth the price of admission.
The stage itself is spartan - don't be fooled by the promotional shots of the production, this is theater on a shoestring. And, with that in mind, I lowered my expectations a bit as to the quality of the productions, which proved reasonable for the first play, "Strangers" - but not for the second, "Romance." It is in fact on the strength of "Romance" that I give the evening a "Highly Recommended."
I would still recommend "Strangers," but it is the weaker of the two productions, and they are best presented in the order that I presume director Doug Long chose. In it, Maddie (Misti Patrella) and Madison (Tony Ketcham, in a strong performance) encounter each other through a clever device that Ms. Lhota uses to great advantage, establishing an accelerating pace to angst and discovery that builds nicely to a fine crescendo. The reveals are well-timed, and what (falsely) appears to be a forced performance in the opening scene serves the plot well. The given locale of Boston is purely incidental, and rightly fades from our attention before very long, as the accents of the actors are decidedly mid-Western.
It took a while for the audience to warm up to the humor (in a reasonably full house), which I take to be more of a commentary on the strength of the performances than of the material. The material that we are presented with is difficult, and the use of humor is correct, and eventually allows us to go deeper. The closing is, in my opinion, a little too tidy for the challenges facing the characters, but not so egregiously so that it becomes unbelievable.
With "Romance," we are presented with what seems to be greater maturity all around: in the writing, the acting, and the depth of knowledge with which the playwright faced the issues. Also incidentally set in Boston, it is Timothy Amos (in the role of Mick) who "gets" the accent and keeps his character well-grounded in the roots of his geography; the only failing of Stacie Barra (as Miriam) is that she does not match his talent there.
The weakest part of the play is in the transition from distance to intimacy, and I suspect that is mainly due to the constraints of time. The performances are impressive, again in particular by Mr. Amos. Ultimately, the resolution is less easy and more believable, with more loose ends - and more possibilities. Ms. Lhota is able to display her talents at humor here as well, conveyed effectively by the cast and appreciated by the audience.
The underlying question in each play - that of managing loss in an intimate relationship - is nicely explored in very different ways by each character. The contrived settings - just before closing at a T stop and in the basement chapel in a church - are easily forgiven and add sufficient color to help paint the pictures that the men and women grapple with.
So, take the time to travel down a narrow alley through a back door into some of the more hidden, but far from uncommon, corners of relationships. It will be an evening well worth the price of admission.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Pornography - Recommended
This was not the play I expected, and I'm still not sure how I feel about that. One thing I can say for certain is that I wish I had seen it with friends so we could debrief afterwards. For that reason it lingers in "Recommended" land, but clearly tottering between "Highly Recommended" and "Somewhat Recommended."
Pornography by Simon Stephen is mounted with great skill by the Steep Theatre Company. Declared to be about the 2005 bombings in London, it seems to have little to do with either that terrifying day or pornography. Or does it? (As a disclaimer, my daughter was in London that day, and not far from the King's Cross bombing when it happened. So I have more than a little attachment to the topic).
Presented as six vignettes - four monologues and two dialogues - all that the characters share is the common time frame of the bombing, and the fact that all of them are touched by it in some way, if in some cases only indirectly. One of the terrorists is one of the characters, but if you did not know he was the terrorist, he would not be the most disturbing character you encounter.
The program notes give the logistics of, and asks a half-dozen pointed questions about, the bombing - none of which are directly addressed by the play. Which is all pretty much an unrealized teaser: we are promised a look into the dark underside of humanity, an exploration of what forces are at play to create events such as these, and instead, we are given six carefully drawn vignettes of 8(+1) characters who happen to be touched by three common events: the selection of London as the site for the 2012 Olympics, the Live 8 concert, and the terrorist bombings.
The staging and acting are excellent. The use of television screens to punctuate the vignettes is well-executed, and the images that flash through the major transitions are intriguing. One of the most successful technical aspects was the lighting of the six spare mini-stages: it is fluid and dynamic, and becomes a vital part of the grammar of each presentation.
Each of the characters is elegantly drawn and superbly realized. There is no doubt in my mind that - with the possible exception of the terrorist - these are very real people who happened to step into the play and expose themselves to us in a very intimate manner. The one exception is the terrorist, who seemed far too distant from the mission he was on, in a manner that I expect was an attempt to humanize him but for me simply made him less believable. Mind you, I wasn't expecting frothing fundamentalism, but the absence of any political dialogue seemed, well, wrong.
So where is the pornography? Is it a wry reflection on what the playwright thinks is necessary to draw people to a play? Who among the characters was obscene? With the possible exception of the first character, each seemed engaged in something that society would frown upon, even if it was merely the vulgar language of an 83-year-old woman.
There are many other questions to be mined from this play, but as I said before, they are best addressed with friends who attend the show. Left to an internal monologue, it's not clear if they are the desperate search for quality in a muddied script, or the enticements of a genuinely rich undertaking.
So see the play, and let me know what you think!
Pornography by Simon Stephen is mounted with great skill by the Steep Theatre Company. Declared to be about the 2005 bombings in London, it seems to have little to do with either that terrifying day or pornography. Or does it? (As a disclaimer, my daughter was in London that day, and not far from the King's Cross bombing when it happened. So I have more than a little attachment to the topic).
Presented as six vignettes - four monologues and two dialogues - all that the characters share is the common time frame of the bombing, and the fact that all of them are touched by it in some way, if in some cases only indirectly. One of the terrorists is one of the characters, but if you did not know he was the terrorist, he would not be the most disturbing character you encounter.
The program notes give the logistics of, and asks a half-dozen pointed questions about, the bombing - none of which are directly addressed by the play. Which is all pretty much an unrealized teaser: we are promised a look into the dark underside of humanity, an exploration of what forces are at play to create events such as these, and instead, we are given six carefully drawn vignettes of 8(+1) characters who happen to be touched by three common events: the selection of London as the site for the 2012 Olympics, the Live 8 concert, and the terrorist bombings.
The staging and acting are excellent. The use of television screens to punctuate the vignettes is well-executed, and the images that flash through the major transitions are intriguing. One of the most successful technical aspects was the lighting of the six spare mini-stages: it is fluid and dynamic, and becomes a vital part of the grammar of each presentation.
Each of the characters is elegantly drawn and superbly realized. There is no doubt in my mind that - with the possible exception of the terrorist - these are very real people who happened to step into the play and expose themselves to us in a very intimate manner. The one exception is the terrorist, who seemed far too distant from the mission he was on, in a manner that I expect was an attempt to humanize him but for me simply made him less believable. Mind you, I wasn't expecting frothing fundamentalism, but the absence of any political dialogue seemed, well, wrong.
So where is the pornography? Is it a wry reflection on what the playwright thinks is necessary to draw people to a play? Who among the characters was obscene? With the possible exception of the first character, each seemed engaged in something that society would frown upon, even if it was merely the vulgar language of an 83-year-old woman.
There are many other questions to be mined from this play, but as I said before, they are best addressed with friends who attend the show. Left to an internal monologue, it's not clear if they are the desperate search for quality in a muddied script, or the enticements of a genuinely rich undertaking.
So see the play, and let me know what you think!
Sunday, August 14, 2011
The Double - Highly Recommended
The opening volley in Babes with Blades' 2011-2012 season, The Double, should firmly establish in anyone's mind that this troupe is one of the more talented community ensembles that Chicago has to offer.
Even though seen in preview, the script was tight, the acting was first-class, and the "violence" was predictably top-shelf. There were, of course, the usual number of minor preview glitches, but these did nothing to detract from the show and, in fact, demonstrated the strength of the production in the way they were quickly left behind.
The script, the company's first foray into comedy, was crafted by Barbara Lhota, and reflects an endearment for the company, the period (1930s), and the genre. The comedy is broad but not slapstick, and clearly the actors are enjoying themselves as the plot unfolds and the mayhem begins.
Particularly strong in their parts were Lisa Herceg as Rosalind Rollins and Gillian Humiston as Minnie Sparks, but it should be said that there isn't a wooden nickel in the batch. And the direction by Leigh Barrett is crisp and clear - with so many story lines and actors to manage, she made the unfolding seem effortless.
Of course, what would a BwB production be without great stage violence, realized by Libby Beyreis? The Double builds nicely to a crescendo of swashbuckling derring-do that is simultaneously thrilling and comical. Given the imaginative multiplication of combatants and the swishing of blades across the entire stage, it was a treat to observe such skill and choreography from the front row.
What could be improved? Minor points, mostly: a few linguistic anachronisms creep in (being "freaked out" or "disrespected"), and there were a few times when the audience wasn't certain whether the time to applaud had come. Also, the first 15 minutes or so seemed a little muddier in exposition than they ideally might have been, but it wasn't long after that the roles and characters were sufficiently clear.
The long and the short of it, bub, is to find your way to this production at the Lincoln Square Theatre before it closes in late September!
Even though seen in preview, the script was tight, the acting was first-class, and the "violence" was predictably top-shelf. There were, of course, the usual number of minor preview glitches, but these did nothing to detract from the show and, in fact, demonstrated the strength of the production in the way they were quickly left behind.
The script, the company's first foray into comedy, was crafted by Barbara Lhota, and reflects an endearment for the company, the period (1930s), and the genre. The comedy is broad but not slapstick, and clearly the actors are enjoying themselves as the plot unfolds and the mayhem begins.
Particularly strong in their parts were Lisa Herceg as Rosalind Rollins and Gillian Humiston as Minnie Sparks, but it should be said that there isn't a wooden nickel in the batch. And the direction by Leigh Barrett is crisp and clear - with so many story lines and actors to manage, she made the unfolding seem effortless.
Of course, what would a BwB production be without great stage violence, realized by Libby Beyreis? The Double builds nicely to a crescendo of swashbuckling derring-do that is simultaneously thrilling and comical. Given the imaginative multiplication of combatants and the swishing of blades across the entire stage, it was a treat to observe such skill and choreography from the front row.
What could be improved? Minor points, mostly: a few linguistic anachronisms creep in (being "freaked out" or "disrespected"), and there were a few times when the audience wasn't certain whether the time to applaud had come. Also, the first 15 minutes or so seemed a little muddier in exposition than they ideally might have been, but it wasn't long after that the roles and characters were sufficiently clear.
The long and the short of it, bub, is to find your way to this production at the Lincoln Square Theatre before it closes in late September!
Sunday, July 17, 2011
A Beautiful Spell - Recommended
It had to happen. I managed to see two plays - penned by different playwrights, performed by different actors and produced in different venues - that bear such a strong resemblance to each other that comparisons are, for me, nearly impossible to avoid. Therefore, I'll postpone the comparison until the end of this entry.
A Beautiful Spell, from the pen of Greg Kalleres and presented at the Royal George Theatre, starts with the disquieting premise that one can awaken in the middle of the night with a terror sufficient to turn your world upside down. In this case, the terror is Franny's, who has the shattering experience of discovering she no longer loves her husband of nine years, Jim.
It's a rather intellectual premise that quickly gains solid footing under the talented performances of Maggie Corbett and Eric Burgher. The writing is both believable and fluid, making the several round trips necessary between angst and humor that are necessary for a story of this sort. The staging is in the round, so that the audience is close to this intimate struggle in every sense. And the set - the couple's bedroom - is for the most part very well executed, although the use of plastic for the windows was a distraction that could have been avoided without (it would seem) much additional expense.
The story itself seemed a little long, since the revelations that come don't deepen our understanding of the characters significantly, and so some of the middle section started to get repetitive. This was offset, though, by Mr. Kalleres' comedic talents and the vigor of the performances.
The question in stories like this is how they will be resolved, and I will not give away the ending. However, the penultimate moment is quite stirring, and the closing in good counterpoint to it.
So, why only "Recommended?" Here's where the comparison starts to rear its head, but I will nonetheless attempt to remain objective.
Basically, the story lacked an "edge." It raised the question of Tevye and Golde - if being married for all these years isn't love, what is? - in a way that was, for me, just a shade too intellectual. The presumed insecurities which kept the banter going made it seem too often more like curiosity than soul searching. The premise opened a door to darker passages, but no one ever really stepped through them.
The other play? "50 Words," which was presented at Profiles Theatre with almost identical staging, premise and setting (two parents of a young boy who discover their marital problems, set in the kitchen rather than the bedroom). That was a darker, edgier, bawdier, and far more difficult play. Were it in production, I would have no problem recommending which to choose. But, if you're looking for a less troubling, well-acted and written exchange between a young couple discovering that marriage ain't all it's cracked up to be, your time and money would be well spent at "A Beautiful Spell."
A Beautiful Spell, from the pen of Greg Kalleres and presented at the Royal George Theatre, starts with the disquieting premise that one can awaken in the middle of the night with a terror sufficient to turn your world upside down. In this case, the terror is Franny's, who has the shattering experience of discovering she no longer loves her husband of nine years, Jim.
It's a rather intellectual premise that quickly gains solid footing under the talented performances of Maggie Corbett and Eric Burgher. The writing is both believable and fluid, making the several round trips necessary between angst and humor that are necessary for a story of this sort. The staging is in the round, so that the audience is close to this intimate struggle in every sense. And the set - the couple's bedroom - is for the most part very well executed, although the use of plastic for the windows was a distraction that could have been avoided without (it would seem) much additional expense.
The story itself seemed a little long, since the revelations that come don't deepen our understanding of the characters significantly, and so some of the middle section started to get repetitive. This was offset, though, by Mr. Kalleres' comedic talents and the vigor of the performances.
The question in stories like this is how they will be resolved, and I will not give away the ending. However, the penultimate moment is quite stirring, and the closing in good counterpoint to it.
So, why only "Recommended?" Here's where the comparison starts to rear its head, but I will nonetheless attempt to remain objective.
Basically, the story lacked an "edge." It raised the question of Tevye and Golde - if being married for all these years isn't love, what is? - in a way that was, for me, just a shade too intellectual. The presumed insecurities which kept the banter going made it seem too often more like curiosity than soul searching. The premise opened a door to darker passages, but no one ever really stepped through them.
The other play? "50 Words," which was presented at Profiles Theatre with almost identical staging, premise and setting (two parents of a young boy who discover their marital problems, set in the kitchen rather than the bedroom). That was a darker, edgier, bawdier, and far more difficult play. Were it in production, I would have no problem recommending which to choose. But, if you're looking for a less troubling, well-acted and written exchange between a young couple discovering that marriage ain't all it's cracked up to be, your time and money would be well spent at "A Beautiful Spell."
Sunday, July 10, 2011
The Front Page - Highly Recommended
I am now officially a fan of the TimeLine Theatre. Their staging of Ben Hecht's and Charles MacArthur's "The Front Page" was gritty, intelligent, funny, challenging, and clever. The acting was top-shelf, the set (in the round) was stunning and engaging, and - in short - this production represents the best of what theater has to offer - not just local theater, but Theater.
As if that weren't enough, the wealth of educational materials - both in the lobby and online - draws one even further into the story and its historical roots. Again, kudos to TimeLine!
"A Front Page" is a challenging play to mount: I know a little bit about this, as I had the good fortune to be a "fly on the wall" on an excellent college production a half-dozen years ago. The pacing is frenetic; dialogue is constantly overlapping; and the topics - the ethics of news and politics, capital punishment, racism, misogyny - are serious. Many subsequent reworkings of the play (such as the Howard Hawks film "His Girl Friday") discard the darker side to emphasize the comedic strengths of the work, but this production is ample proof that such guttings do a great disservice to the playwrights.
For those unaware of the basics, it is the eve of Earl Williams' execution for murdering a "colored" policeman, and all the action takes place in the press room, where reporters from eight different Chicago newspapers first fend off boredom and then attempt to cope with the chaos that ensues when plans for the execution go awry. The other line of tension comes from the imminent departure of star reporter Hildy Johnson, who is about to be married and is leaving to take an advertising job in New York.
All the corruption for which Chicago is rightly or wrongly famous is exposed in this bit of historical fiction, which is broadly based on real newspapers, characters and events, but is clearly more fiction than fact.
The choice of presenting this in the round is inspired; having seen it in this form, I can't imagine a traditional approach working anywhere near as well. The acting is flawless, and the technical challenges of entries, exits, phones ringing and gallows falling are overcome in what seems to be an effortless manner. The pathos of Molly, Earl and even to some extent Mrs. Schlosser are well-defined.
I would say more about the play, but I fear it would amount to simple gushing. This is a production that has it all: run quickly to the TimeLine and see this before its last show on June 17!
As if that weren't enough, the wealth of educational materials - both in the lobby and online - draws one even further into the story and its historical roots. Again, kudos to TimeLine!
"A Front Page" is a challenging play to mount: I know a little bit about this, as I had the good fortune to be a "fly on the wall" on an excellent college production a half-dozen years ago. The pacing is frenetic; dialogue is constantly overlapping; and the topics - the ethics of news and politics, capital punishment, racism, misogyny - are serious. Many subsequent reworkings of the play (such as the Howard Hawks film "His Girl Friday") discard the darker side to emphasize the comedic strengths of the work, but this production is ample proof that such guttings do a great disservice to the playwrights.
For those unaware of the basics, it is the eve of Earl Williams' execution for murdering a "colored" policeman, and all the action takes place in the press room, where reporters from eight different Chicago newspapers first fend off boredom and then attempt to cope with the chaos that ensues when plans for the execution go awry. The other line of tension comes from the imminent departure of star reporter Hildy Johnson, who is about to be married and is leaving to take an advertising job in New York.
All the corruption for which Chicago is rightly or wrongly famous is exposed in this bit of historical fiction, which is broadly based on real newspapers, characters and events, but is clearly more fiction than fact.
The choice of presenting this in the round is inspired; having seen it in this form, I can't imagine a traditional approach working anywhere near as well. The acting is flawless, and the technical challenges of entries, exits, phones ringing and gallows falling are overcome in what seems to be an effortless manner. The pathos of Molly, Earl and even to some extent Mrs. Schlosser are well-defined.
I would say more about the play, but I fear it would amount to simple gushing. This is a production that has it all: run quickly to the TimeLine and see this before its last show on June 17!
Middletown - Somewhat Recommended
Full disclosure: following seeing Middletown, a recent play by Will Eno staged at the Steppenwolf, I sat in on a brief discussion session led by the Assistant Dramaturg. In trying to isolate the impact of that provocative discussion, I believe my opinion of the play was briefly raised and then, post-discussion, lowered.
Middletown is two-act play with a unique middle that is, in many ways and in all its parts, too clever for its own britches. A cerebral pastiche of wry, intellectual humor adorns the first act, treating the audience to many good laughs and plenty of assaults on the fourth wall. Even the typical "here are the exits" monologue is clever, funny, and oddly out of place.
Throughout the first act, a darkness is hinted at - in particular, the darkness of isolation and loneliness - amidst the rollicking humor. At its most extreme, a violent encounter between the Cop and the Mechanic seems poised to open up a truly dark, festering world beneath, but that promise (like many others) is never fully realized. Rather, it is more like (as one of my intrepid colleagues suggested) a Seinfeld episode where nothing ever happens, but without the attachment to the characters that that show engendered.
The second act steps off the light-hearted cliff and takes us down into a world that is still unpredictable, where the characters largely don't matter, but where the humor is less frequent and the isolation more profound. Even there, though, there is not enough darkness to engage us: just enough to leave us tasting loneliness, seeing it all around us, without enough hope to lift us up or enough terror to get us to rebel.
It is, ultimately, a profoundly lonely play without any discernible hope or purpose.
Technically, the set is sparse and clever, matching the text of the play. The direction is a conundrum to me: the first act seemed much "flatter" to me than the second, but I remain uncertain as to whether that was the staging, the acting, the material or just an off night. I doubt the last two, as the audience seemed to react well to the humor, but again - it's a mystery.
So why do I recommend this play at all?
The writing in the first act is genuinely superior, and executed (by and large) quite well. The pseudo-opening and pseudo-intermission are quite clever, and therefore at least half the play is intriguing, entertaining, and plays with conventions in a manner that is often surprising. And, as a result of the dramaturg's knowledge and enthusiasm, I see that there are more tropes and depth to the play that are worthy of discovery and discussion.
Armed with a half-priced ticket, I'd say it's well worth the investment of time and money. But be prepared for the drain on your emotions.
Middletown is two-act play with a unique middle that is, in many ways and in all its parts, too clever for its own britches. A cerebral pastiche of wry, intellectual humor adorns the first act, treating the audience to many good laughs and plenty of assaults on the fourth wall. Even the typical "here are the exits" monologue is clever, funny, and oddly out of place.
Throughout the first act, a darkness is hinted at - in particular, the darkness of isolation and loneliness - amidst the rollicking humor. At its most extreme, a violent encounter between the Cop and the Mechanic seems poised to open up a truly dark, festering world beneath, but that promise (like many others) is never fully realized. Rather, it is more like (as one of my intrepid colleagues suggested) a Seinfeld episode where nothing ever happens, but without the attachment to the characters that that show engendered.
The second act steps off the light-hearted cliff and takes us down into a world that is still unpredictable, where the characters largely don't matter, but where the humor is less frequent and the isolation more profound. Even there, though, there is not enough darkness to engage us: just enough to leave us tasting loneliness, seeing it all around us, without enough hope to lift us up or enough terror to get us to rebel.
It is, ultimately, a profoundly lonely play without any discernible hope or purpose.
Technically, the set is sparse and clever, matching the text of the play. The direction is a conundrum to me: the first act seemed much "flatter" to me than the second, but I remain uncertain as to whether that was the staging, the acting, the material or just an off night. I doubt the last two, as the audience seemed to react well to the humor, but again - it's a mystery.
So why do I recommend this play at all?
The writing in the first act is genuinely superior, and executed (by and large) quite well. The pseudo-opening and pseudo-intermission are quite clever, and therefore at least half the play is intriguing, entertaining, and plays with conventions in a manner that is often surprising. And, as a result of the dramaturg's knowledge and enthusiasm, I see that there are more tropes and depth to the play that are worthy of discovery and discussion.
Armed with a half-priced ticket, I'd say it's well worth the investment of time and money. But be prepared for the drain on your emotions.
Sunday, July 3, 2011
The Last Act of Lilka Kadison - Recommended
Sometimes familiar stories work because we know them and their telling so well, and we draw comfort from the predictable terrain. Sometimes familiar stories work because the teller adds a twist, and it is that difference that catches us up. And sometimes familiar stories work because they are told in a different way, and that telling brings a new delight to the story.
"The Last Act of Lilka Kadison," on extended run at the Lookingglass Theatre, benefits mostly from the latter of these. The story - of a Holocaust survivor's coming to terms with the past she has buried - is a familiar tale of angst and redemption. Which is not to demean the tale: it is inventively told, and despite (or because?!) of the familiar terrain, it easily brought tears to my eyes more than once during the nicely-paced 90 minutes. But that's not the reason to see this play.
What makes this production well-worth attending is the imaginative production: the use "toy theater" in both the micro and the macro to invite the audience to allow themselves to be drawn into the machinations of plot and set, and perhaps to imagine that they are part of an even larger "toy theater" - as actors and directors. Perhaps we can change our worlds by moving a few memories and assumptions around: allowing the hidden to be revealed, or the obvious obstacles to be finally discarded.
The set is frankly remarkable. At every turn, a new entrance or exit appears, and the intricate crafting of dialogue and action to bring it all together is inspiring. In Chance Bone's capable hands as Ben Ari Adler, the storytelling ghost, we forgive the mechanics and laugh - and cry - when cued.
There are a few missteps here, but many fewer than one would expect from a script crafted by five individuals. The use of modern vernacular in the "old days" of Poland was jarring and really unnecessary (e.g., what was gained by referring to the traveling troupe's next "gig"?). And the development of the young Lilka Kadison, played by Nora Fiffer - really didn't hold up: to go from frightened, observant maiden to feminist to her final youthful development may have been factual, but it wasn't "true" in the way the story was presented.
Nevertheless, these are not serious flaws: the story is solidly told, with well-timed and well-proportioned dashes of pathos and humor. It does not soar to new heights, but then again, that is not what we look for - usually - in the telling of a familiar story. So go ahead: revel in the magic that Lookingglass Theatre seems to be so adept at providing, and hear a familiar tale one more time. And maybe you'll find it's time to move around some of that lingering "baggage" that has crept into your life over so many years...
"The Last Act of Lilka Kadison," on extended run at the Lookingglass Theatre, benefits mostly from the latter of these. The story - of a Holocaust survivor's coming to terms with the past she has buried - is a familiar tale of angst and redemption. Which is not to demean the tale: it is inventively told, and despite (or because?!) of the familiar terrain, it easily brought tears to my eyes more than once during the nicely-paced 90 minutes. But that's not the reason to see this play.
What makes this production well-worth attending is the imaginative production: the use "toy theater" in both the micro and the macro to invite the audience to allow themselves to be drawn into the machinations of plot and set, and perhaps to imagine that they are part of an even larger "toy theater" - as actors and directors. Perhaps we can change our worlds by moving a few memories and assumptions around: allowing the hidden to be revealed, or the obvious obstacles to be finally discarded.
The set is frankly remarkable. At every turn, a new entrance or exit appears, and the intricate crafting of dialogue and action to bring it all together is inspiring. In Chance Bone's capable hands as Ben Ari Adler, the storytelling ghost, we forgive the mechanics and laugh - and cry - when cued.
There are a few missteps here, but many fewer than one would expect from a script crafted by five individuals. The use of modern vernacular in the "old days" of Poland was jarring and really unnecessary (e.g., what was gained by referring to the traveling troupe's next "gig"?). And the development of the young Lilka Kadison, played by Nora Fiffer - really didn't hold up: to go from frightened, observant maiden to feminist to her final youthful development may have been factual, but it wasn't "true" in the way the story was presented.
Nevertheless, these are not serious flaws: the story is solidly told, with well-timed and well-proportioned dashes of pathos and humor. It does not soar to new heights, but then again, that is not what we look for - usually - in the telling of a familiar story. So go ahead: revel in the magic that Lookingglass Theatre seems to be so adept at providing, and hear a familiar tale one more time. And maybe you'll find it's time to move around some of that lingering "baggage" that has crept into your life over so many years...
Monday, May 30, 2011
Working at the Broadway Playhouse: Highly Recommended
While I had a good idea about the broad lines of this play before attending, I was unprepared for its emotional depth. To call it a celebration of the "working man" (sic) is correct - but wholly inadequate. Through the words collected by Studs Terkel, then adapted and updated by Stephen Schwartz and Nina Faso, we are taken into the lives, aspirations and disappointments - but never defeats - of the working class.
Mr. Terkel's positive bias for the blue collar - and against executives - is transparent and unapologetically presented. Even the staging takes up the theme, making the stage crew and musicians active parts of the production. The set itself is ingeniously tied to the lighting, rendering the industrialized rendition of Hollywood Squares into a fluid, vibrant landscape. The actors and stories rip apart the cubical walls and allow us, in their finer moments, to be touched by the real people struggling within.
And, speaking of the actors, the six individuals who portray the 26 stories are a superbly talented ensemble, particularly Ms. Emjoy Gavino, whose voice, acting and dance all come together powerfully in "Millwork" (music by James Taylor).
Many of the stories were noteworthy, and in fact the only ones that struck slightly sour notes were those where Mr. Terkel painted the executives with too broad of a caricaturist's brush. The addition of the story of a project manager and a callroom staff in India helped modernize the flavor, but that was a welcome addition rather than a necessary update. Finally, many of the stories transitioned nicely, particularly the housewife (sic) / prostitute (kudos to E. Faye Butler) and the retiree / caregivers.
However, the real treat was the fact that the language of the stories was both authentic and often deeply personal. More than once I found myself touched more deeply than I ever expected, and it was this fact that took the production from simply being a well-crafted, well-performed musical to an experience worthy of high recommendations.
Mr. Terkel's positive bias for the blue collar - and against executives - is transparent and unapologetically presented. Even the staging takes up the theme, making the stage crew and musicians active parts of the production. The set itself is ingeniously tied to the lighting, rendering the industrialized rendition of Hollywood Squares into a fluid, vibrant landscape. The actors and stories rip apart the cubical walls and allow us, in their finer moments, to be touched by the real people struggling within.
And, speaking of the actors, the six individuals who portray the 26 stories are a superbly talented ensemble, particularly Ms. Emjoy Gavino, whose voice, acting and dance all come together powerfully in "Millwork" (music by James Taylor).
Many of the stories were noteworthy, and in fact the only ones that struck slightly sour notes were those where Mr. Terkel painted the executives with too broad of a caricaturist's brush. The addition of the story of a project manager and a callroom staff in India helped modernize the flavor, but that was a welcome addition rather than a necessary update. Finally, many of the stories transitioned nicely, particularly the housewife (sic) / prostitute (kudos to E. Faye Butler) and the retiree / caregivers.
However, the real treat was the fact that the language of the stories was both authentic and often deeply personal. More than once I found myself touched more deeply than I ever expected, and it was this fact that took the production from simply being a well-crafted, well-performed musical to an experience worthy of high recommendations.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Woyzeck at the Chopin Theatre: Recommended
This, I hope, is the most challenging review I will ever have to write.
Woyzeck is a play by Georg Büchner that is comprised of a set of unfinished scenes composed sometime between 1836 and 1837. I attended the energetic, avant garde and decidedly attention-grabbing production mounted by The Hypocrites company at the Chopin Theatre cold - I knew nothing about the play, the story line, or the author. This turned out to be a significant error, and yet I can recommend the production anyway.
The story line can be found briefly on Wikipedia or here (not that I endorse either of those sites). As it is presented on each site, it seems to be a compelling, linear story. As presented by The Hypocrites, it is anything but linear (unless one knows the story), and is a swirling mass of symbols, energy, blood and creativity.
The staging itself is compelling: a melange of props, each with their own deeply-rooted symbology, an elevated stage with a river running through it, and one of the more intriguing openings I have seen. Much of the sound effects are provided by the actors, often in a Greek chorus-meets-acapela percussion that is both unsettling and convincing. The lighting is dramatic, and the direction seemed quite crisp.
The actors threw themselves expertly into their roles, but (owing to my lack of knowledge) I was not always initially clear on what they were attempting to convey beyond the immediate scene. Yet slowly certain themes emerged, through clever repetition: the thumping of the heart accompanied by pulse-taking; the religious undertones, the drama of red blood on white fabric. I soon gained the compelling understanding that something deeper, richer was being communicated - I just couldn't tell you what it was.
Having skimmed the play, I can attest to its openness to such an avant-garde production as was mounted, although I suspect it could be mounted more traditionally as well. My recommendation: digest at least the story line (the play is available in English here) before seeing this excellent production. Were there more hours in the day (or days in the week), I would definitely return for a second viewing after such a reading.
On a side note, this was my first visit to the Chopin Theatre, and I am completely entranced with it overall. This is one venue I expect to be returning to many times.
Woyzeck is a play by Georg Büchner that is comprised of a set of unfinished scenes composed sometime between 1836 and 1837. I attended the energetic, avant garde and decidedly attention-grabbing production mounted by The Hypocrites company at the Chopin Theatre cold - I knew nothing about the play, the story line, or the author. This turned out to be a significant error, and yet I can recommend the production anyway.
The story line can be found briefly on Wikipedia or here (not that I endorse either of those sites). As it is presented on each site, it seems to be a compelling, linear story. As presented by The Hypocrites, it is anything but linear (unless one knows the story), and is a swirling mass of symbols, energy, blood and creativity.
The staging itself is compelling: a melange of props, each with their own deeply-rooted symbology, an elevated stage with a river running through it, and one of the more intriguing openings I have seen. Much of the sound effects are provided by the actors, often in a Greek chorus-meets-acapela percussion that is both unsettling and convincing. The lighting is dramatic, and the direction seemed quite crisp.
The actors threw themselves expertly into their roles, but (owing to my lack of knowledge) I was not always initially clear on what they were attempting to convey beyond the immediate scene. Yet slowly certain themes emerged, through clever repetition: the thumping of the heart accompanied by pulse-taking; the religious undertones, the drama of red blood on white fabric. I soon gained the compelling understanding that something deeper, richer was being communicated - I just couldn't tell you what it was.
Having skimmed the play, I can attest to its openness to such an avant-garde production as was mounted, although I suspect it could be mounted more traditionally as well. My recommendation: digest at least the story line (the play is available in English here) before seeing this excellent production. Were there more hours in the day (or days in the week), I would definitely return for a second viewing after such a reading.
On a side note, this was my first visit to the Chopin Theatre, and I am completely entranced with it overall. This is one venue I expect to be returning to many times.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Stage Kiss at the Goodman - Recommended
This is a very pleasant comedy from the pen of Sarah Ruhl, staged at the Goodman. It is full of plenty of insider theater references, has its fair share of belly laughs and truly innovative non-sequitirs ("Its like giving bacon to a starving vegetarian"), and - as expected - it shows off the considerable set design talents of the Goodman staff. Kudos to Todd Rosenthal for set design!
The plot mines all-too-familiar territory (a bad play mounted by a largely incompetent staff in a small regional theater), with some delightfully terrible plot lines for the plays-within-the-play. I only shudder to think that these "romance novels set to stage" may one day actually appear in print...
The twist that Ms. Ruhl provides is yet another well-mined issue: where is the line between what happens on stage and reality? Can an onstage romance re-kindle one abandoned many years ago? It must be said that, while the territory and twist are familiar, the play and its production are entertaining and on many occasions quite hilarious.
Most satisfying amongst the actors are, ironically, Sarah Tolan-Mee in the character of the teenage daughter, Angela, and Scott Jaeck in the role of husband - the two characters most firmly rooted in reality. In particular, Ms. Tolan-Mee's performance significantly outshines the rest of the troupe, who all put on solid if not stellar performances.
Some of the comic turns are wonderful, in particular the "false exit" routine. Others, like the repeated injuries, would do better without repetition.
The music nicely reflects the slapstick of many moments in the play, and Jenny Bacon in the lead role as "She" demonstrates a particular talent for physical comedy.
So, what keeps this from being "highly recommended?" One reason is that the writing could be tighter: at 2:15, it could easily shed 15 minutes, perhaps 30. The play never really drags, but it misses the opportunity to take off, and my sense is that some editing would help in that matter.
The second is more structural. For me, the highlight of the play was the encounter between the husband, daughter, He, She and Laurie, "His" girlfriend. Suddenly, the possibility of an encounter with real people emerges, and it is electrifying. There is a slight return to this reality at the closing of the play, but for a moment there was a glimpse beyond the farce, which Ms. Ruhl abandons. A missed opportunity, to say the least.
All in all, it is an entertaining and pleasant experience. Add the positive elements together - clever humor, fantastic set, a talented and energetic performance - and it's a night well spent at the theater.
The plot mines all-too-familiar territory (a bad play mounted by a largely incompetent staff in a small regional theater), with some delightfully terrible plot lines for the plays-within-the-play. I only shudder to think that these "romance novels set to stage" may one day actually appear in print...
The twist that Ms. Ruhl provides is yet another well-mined issue: where is the line between what happens on stage and reality? Can an onstage romance re-kindle one abandoned many years ago? It must be said that, while the territory and twist are familiar, the play and its production are entertaining and on many occasions quite hilarious.
Most satisfying amongst the actors are, ironically, Sarah Tolan-Mee in the character of the teenage daughter, Angela, and Scott Jaeck in the role of husband - the two characters most firmly rooted in reality. In particular, Ms. Tolan-Mee's performance significantly outshines the rest of the troupe, who all put on solid if not stellar performances.
Some of the comic turns are wonderful, in particular the "false exit" routine. Others, like the repeated injuries, would do better without repetition.
The music nicely reflects the slapstick of many moments in the play, and Jenny Bacon in the lead role as "She" demonstrates a particular talent for physical comedy.
So, what keeps this from being "highly recommended?" One reason is that the writing could be tighter: at 2:15, it could easily shed 15 minutes, perhaps 30. The play never really drags, but it misses the opportunity to take off, and my sense is that some editing would help in that matter.
The second is more structural. For me, the highlight of the play was the encounter between the husband, daughter, He, She and Laurie, "His" girlfriend. Suddenly, the possibility of an encounter with real people emerges, and it is electrifying. There is a slight return to this reality at the closing of the play, but for a moment there was a glimpse beyond the farce, which Ms. Ruhl abandons. A missed opportunity, to say the least.
All in all, it is an entertaining and pleasant experience. Add the positive elements together - clever humor, fantastic set, a talented and energetic performance - and it's a night well spent at the theater.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Romeo & Juliet - Babes with Blades at the Raven: Highly Recommended
This one has it all: great acting, great "violence," great writing (of course, it's the Bard), a great ensemble, and great directing. Even the minimalist set (dictated by space and budget) was innovative and evocative. Get ready, there's nary a nit to be found in this review!
This production by the Babes with Blades company at the Raven Theatre is truly a gem. The story itself was effectively edited by the director, Brian LaDuca, who manages through excision and conflation to keep the heart of the story intact and the running time to two hours. He highlights enough of the bawdiness of the Bard to keep the pace entertaining, and is true to the language. Well done!
With the cast being completely women, I wondered what gender-inspired changes there would be, and the good news is - none. Not that I would have objected, mind you, but the audience's inability to distinguish man from woman based on their physical appearance means we must focus on the characters themselves. And this company is clearly capable of strong acting - not just amazingly compelling "violence."
Special kudos are due to Amy Harmon as Mercutio, and Eleanor Katz as Nurse, and Ashley Fox as Juliet - though there wasn't an actor "beneath the salt." Ms. Harmon in particular had her dialogue, timing and acting down cold, and managed some of the more challenging fight scenes with such skill that they seemed effortless.
The set - a two-story affair, with a trestle between up- and down-stage - was used very effectively to allow scene transitions to begin in the back while the former finished in front. The effect of this was to keep the pace ratcheted up an extra notch, and the cast certainly was adept at maintaining that energy.
All in all, the classic story was told in a slightly unconventional way that did not intrude, but in fact enhanced the original tale. The language was easily understood, elocuted clearly and punctuated nicely by smart direction. And the fight scenes were glorious, as one can expect from Babes with Blades.
Hie thee to the Raven, and see this gem before it departs on 30 April.
This production by the Babes with Blades company at the Raven Theatre is truly a gem. The story itself was effectively edited by the director, Brian LaDuca, who manages through excision and conflation to keep the heart of the story intact and the running time to two hours. He highlights enough of the bawdiness of the Bard to keep the pace entertaining, and is true to the language. Well done!
With the cast being completely women, I wondered what gender-inspired changes there would be, and the good news is - none. Not that I would have objected, mind you, but the audience's inability to distinguish man from woman based on their physical appearance means we must focus on the characters themselves. And this company is clearly capable of strong acting - not just amazingly compelling "violence."
Special kudos are due to Amy Harmon as Mercutio, and Eleanor Katz as Nurse, and Ashley Fox as Juliet - though there wasn't an actor "beneath the salt." Ms. Harmon in particular had her dialogue, timing and acting down cold, and managed some of the more challenging fight scenes with such skill that they seemed effortless.
The set - a two-story affair, with a trestle between up- and down-stage - was used very effectively to allow scene transitions to begin in the back while the former finished in front. The effect of this was to keep the pace ratcheted up an extra notch, and the cast certainly was adept at maintaining that energy.
All in all, the classic story was told in a slightly unconventional way that did not intrude, but in fact enhanced the original tale. The language was easily understood, elocuted clearly and punctuated nicely by smart direction. And the fight scenes were glorious, as one can expect from Babes with Blades.
Hie thee to the Raven, and see this gem before it departs on 30 April.
Friday, April 22, 2011
From Generation to Generation at Stage 773 - Recommended
Musicals and community theater are a risky business: they depend upon a broader range of talent than non-musical plays, and sour notes can be more off-putting than a flubbed line. Fortunately, it all comes together quite nicely in Stage 773's production of Karen Sokolof Javitch and Elaine Jabenis' "From Generation to Generation."
The voices of this large cast are strong and confident. Along with the other musical components - orchestra, choreography and sound - they give this production the solid backbone upon which it successfully builds the rest of the play. The only weak link here is the lyrics: sometimes Javitch tries to fit too many syllables into a line (with apologies to Tom Lehrer), and it shows.
So, what about the story?
The line is pretty straightforward: Rose is dying of cancer, despondent, and is encouraged by her rabbi to leave her as-yet-unborn granddaughter an ethical will. What follows is much more of a memoir than an ethical will, albeit a wide-ranging and largely pleasing one. There is enough humor and uncertainty to keep everything interesting and moving forward, for after all this is basically a "feel good" play.
The set is far more versatile than it appears and deserves special mention: it provides a much richer palette for the rest of the production than one would initially suspect. And several of the actors display some real acting chops as well, not just a facility to sing and dance.
So, all in all, if you're looking for a talented company performing a story from the heart that will bring more than a few chuckles and the occasional tear - as it did for me - then this is your play.
Why didn't I give this "highly recommended?" It's probably due more to the structure of the play itself, which briefly held the promise of raising issues and conflict, and instead settled on the aforementioned memoir approach. I would have loved to see more acting and a richer line for character development, but even without these it's a play worth seeing.
The voices of this large cast are strong and confident. Along with the other musical components - orchestra, choreography and sound - they give this production the solid backbone upon which it successfully builds the rest of the play. The only weak link here is the lyrics: sometimes Javitch tries to fit too many syllables into a line (with apologies to Tom Lehrer), and it shows.
So, what about the story?
The line is pretty straightforward: Rose is dying of cancer, despondent, and is encouraged by her rabbi to leave her as-yet-unborn granddaughter an ethical will. What follows is much more of a memoir than an ethical will, albeit a wide-ranging and largely pleasing one. There is enough humor and uncertainty to keep everything interesting and moving forward, for after all this is basically a "feel good" play.
The set is far more versatile than it appears and deserves special mention: it provides a much richer palette for the rest of the production than one would initially suspect. And several of the actors display some real acting chops as well, not just a facility to sing and dance.
So, all in all, if you're looking for a talented company performing a story from the heart that will bring more than a few chuckles and the occasional tear - as it did for me - then this is your play.
Why didn't I give this "highly recommended?" It's probably due more to the structure of the play itself, which briefly held the promise of raising issues and conflict, and instead settled on the aforementioned memoir approach. I would have loved to see more acting and a richer line for character development, but even without these it's a play worth seeing.
Monday, April 11, 2011
El Nogalar at Goodman Theatre - Not Recommended
I really didn't want to give this one a negative review. After all, it's not without merit. But it's not worth the price of admission, in my opinion. If you get a reduced rate, go for the positives I'll mention below, but otherwise - redirect your hard-earned ticket dollars in another direction.
El Nogalar is a re-working of Chekov's The Cherry Orchard done by Tanya Saracho for Teatro Vista. It has a number of intriguing bits and pieces, and - typical of the high quality one comes to expect from the Goodman - the set is stunning. In particular, the use of a huge, beautifully executed doll house to indicate the geography of the scenes - as well as serve as a constant reminder of the importance of the residence itself - was wonderful. Other touches were also well-executed, including the orchard and what I suppose must be called the barbeque pit.
There was a bit of audio punctuation that was used from time to time that could best be described as synthesized verbal buzzing, but I couldn't decipher what it meant to the development of the story. By and large, however, the production values were excellent; alas, they're only one of the legs needed to support the three-legged beast known as a play.
The writing itself is the second leg, and in this case we were presented not with character development but more a series of expositions that were more monologues than anything else. The story lurches forward, one plot element after the next, but very rarely did we get the sense that any growth was taking place, let alone any really challenging conflict.
On the positive side, I appreciate the playwright's attempt to render Chekov into modern times, and I believe that the use of the Mexican drug cartels was a reasonable choice. Likewise, the use of Spanish throughout was an interesting choice, but I believe it needs some refinement. I understand enough Spanish to get through the play, but clearly there were inside jokes in the Spanish that only bits and pieces of the audience "got." Is the author attempting to set up a divide that mimics that between the emigrees and those who stayed behind? I'm not certain - just curious.
The final "leg" is the performance itself, and in this case the acting was uneven and disappointing (but not terrible). It's difficult to assess how much was due to the material and how much to the actors themselves, but it's worth noting that the one character who demonstrated movement (though I wouldn't call it growth) was Dunia, and Yuneun Pardo's performance in that role was the strongest of the lot. At the other end of the spectrum, the role of López seemed to have been ripe for growth, but Carlo Lorenzo Garcia's performance was the weakest.
All in all, this was a disappointing way to spend a couple of hours and more than a few dollars.
El Nogalar is a re-working of Chekov's The Cherry Orchard done by Tanya Saracho for Teatro Vista. It has a number of intriguing bits and pieces, and - typical of the high quality one comes to expect from the Goodman - the set is stunning. In particular, the use of a huge, beautifully executed doll house to indicate the geography of the scenes - as well as serve as a constant reminder of the importance of the residence itself - was wonderful. Other touches were also well-executed, including the orchard and what I suppose must be called the barbeque pit.
There was a bit of audio punctuation that was used from time to time that could best be described as synthesized verbal buzzing, but I couldn't decipher what it meant to the development of the story. By and large, however, the production values were excellent; alas, they're only one of the legs needed to support the three-legged beast known as a play.
The writing itself is the second leg, and in this case we were presented not with character development but more a series of expositions that were more monologues than anything else. The story lurches forward, one plot element after the next, but very rarely did we get the sense that any growth was taking place, let alone any really challenging conflict.
To add insult to injury, there was some very obvious product placement in the dialogue, and it stood out like a sore (and putrefying) thumb. Was it necessary to have repeated references to Apple, in particular their iPad2? This was a shonde, and should have been left out.
The final "leg" is the performance itself, and in this case the acting was uneven and disappointing (but not terrible). It's difficult to assess how much was due to the material and how much to the actors themselves, but it's worth noting that the one character who demonstrated movement (though I wouldn't call it growth) was Dunia, and Yuneun Pardo's performance in that role was the strongest of the lot. At the other end of the spectrum, the role of López seemed to have been ripe for growth, but Carlo Lorenzo Garcia's performance was the weakest.
All in all, this was a disappointing way to spend a couple of hours and more than a few dollars.
Saturday, April 9, 2011
"Radio Golf" at Raven Theatre Company - Highly Recommended
Radio Golf by August Wilson, which had its last performance this evening at the Raven, is another great example of what can be reached by a community theater when they have the resources of an excellent play and a dedicated company. That's not to say that the various elements - play, acting, and set - were without flaws, but rather that it was a rousing evening where I really got the sense that this performance meant something important to everyone - and the audience willingly came along for the ride.
The last of Wilson's "Century Cycle" plays, Radio Golf takes up the difficult topics of assimilation, success, and ethical behavior in a story that stumbles a bit in the beginning, but gains strength and depth as it proceeds. Ultimately, it paints the choices with less ambiguity than I might have preferred, making our protagonist Harmond Wilks (Michael Pogue) more predictably heroic than conflicted.
The characters of Elder Joseph Barrow (David Adams) and Sterling Johnson (Antoine Pierre Whitfield) are clearly and powerfully drawn - and realized by their actors. It helps that Messers Adams and Whitfield also appear to have been the strongest actors in the company, as their monologues were a joyful blend of street sense, common sense and comedy, delivered with great timing and just the right spices.
Wilson's characterizations of the wealthier characters - Wilks, Roosevelt Hicks (Warren Levon) and Mame Wilks (Demetria Thomas) seemed less nuanced, at least until the final scenes of genuine conflict. And while Mr. Levon gave a strong and enthusiastic performance, I found myself wanting to call out "Slow Down!!!" too often in all three of their performances.
The set was fine for the play - if anything, it had more detail around the edges than was called for, especially given the (appropriate) starkness of the center. The lighting cleverly implied motion in a direction opposite to the source (the shadows of the blinds on the floor), a nice rendition of the play's essential tension.
It's a pity I wasn't able to review this in time for others to get out and see it - but it speaks highly to the quality of the Raven Theatre - definitely a gem in Chicago's theater crown.
PS: I've decided to change my ratings to Highly Recommended / Recommended / Somewhat Recommended / Not Recommended, as I wanted to give tonight's play a strong review - without it being a 5 out of 5.
The last of Wilson's "Century Cycle" plays, Radio Golf takes up the difficult topics of assimilation, success, and ethical behavior in a story that stumbles a bit in the beginning, but gains strength and depth as it proceeds. Ultimately, it paints the choices with less ambiguity than I might have preferred, making our protagonist Harmond Wilks (Michael Pogue) more predictably heroic than conflicted.
The characters of Elder Joseph Barrow (David Adams) and Sterling Johnson (Antoine Pierre Whitfield) are clearly and powerfully drawn - and realized by their actors. It helps that Messers Adams and Whitfield also appear to have been the strongest actors in the company, as their monologues were a joyful blend of street sense, common sense and comedy, delivered with great timing and just the right spices.
Wilson's characterizations of the wealthier characters - Wilks, Roosevelt Hicks (Warren Levon) and Mame Wilks (Demetria Thomas) seemed less nuanced, at least until the final scenes of genuine conflict. And while Mr. Levon gave a strong and enthusiastic performance, I found myself wanting to call out "Slow Down!!!" too often in all three of their performances.
The set was fine for the play - if anything, it had more detail around the edges than was called for, especially given the (appropriate) starkness of the center. The lighting cleverly implied motion in a direction opposite to the source (the shadows of the blinds on the floor), a nice rendition of the play's essential tension.
It's a pity I wasn't able to review this in time for others to get out and see it - but it speaks highly to the quality of the Raven Theatre - definitely a gem in Chicago's theater crown.
PS: I've decided to change my ratings to Highly Recommended / Recommended / Somewhat Recommended / Not Recommended, as I wanted to give tonight's play a strong review - without it being a 5 out of 5.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
"Tree" at Victory Gardens - 4 of 5 stars
Tree, by Julie Hébert, is a great example of the strength of community theater in Chicago. Certainly, Victory Gardens is one of the better "second tier" theaters here, and as such I've come to hold it to higher standards than others. Tonight, it lived up to those standards - quite nicely!
Probably the best dimension of this play is the writing. Ms. Hébert knows her characters: their voices, their demons, their desires. And she's not afraid to take us into the magical realism of Alzheimer's, trusting the audience to piece it together. The puzzle parts are richly offered up, and they eventually coalesce to tell a deeper, more moving story than we thought was in store for us.
The presentation of difficult issues - racism, abandonment, neglect, Alzheimer's, gender stereotyping - are portrayed authentically and with an excellent balance of humor and pain. Only once did one of these issues get "short shrift" - Leo and Didi's exchange at the very end about her love life - and I take that one lapse as the exception that proves the rule. Well done, Ms. Hébert!
Probably the best dimension of this play is the writing. Ms. Hébert knows her characters: their voices, their demons, their desires. And she's not afraid to take us into the magical realism of Alzheimer's, trusting the audience to piece it together. The puzzle parts are richly offered up, and they eventually coalesce to tell a deeper, more moving story than we thought was in store for us.
The presentation of difficult issues - racism, abandonment, neglect, Alzheimer's, gender stereotyping - are portrayed authentically and with an excellent balance of humor and pain. Only once did one of these issues get "short shrift" - Leo and Didi's exchange at the very end about her love life - and I take that one lapse as the exception that proves the rule. Well done, Ms. Hébert!
The acting is fine by community standards, and in particular Leslie Ann Sheppard as JJ (the strongest of the lot, despite her relative youth) and Celeste Williams as Jessalyn give spirited and well-rounded performances. While it may seem trivial, I was particularly moved by Ms. Sheppard's singing at the end of the play - her voice carried the angst of the entire story in a way that was profound.
Be ready for some coarse language, though I never found it offensive. It worked best for me when it was surrounded by the humor that Ms. Hébert is quite skilled in evoking, but less so - mainly on the strength of the acting, in my opinion - when it was purely the servant of anger.
The set was a visual treat, though the choice of the boat rising from the mist at the play's opening seemed overly symbolic. The lighting design was also quite good, and the use of a few audio tricks was in the main effective.
The "bookends" of the story were the weakest, particularly the ending. Stop reading now if you don't like spoilers.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Welcome!
I love theater. I love storytelling. In fact, I'm a professional storyteller, amongst other occupations.
I moved to Chicago a year ago, and have been pleasantly overwhelmed with the wealth of opportunities for theater here in the Windy City. In fact, my closest friendships here have emerged directly from the community of theater lovers.
So far, I've attended plays across the spectrum that Chicago has to offer: at the Steppenwolf, the Goodman, Chicago Shakespeare, Victory Gardens, the Raven, the Greenhouse, DCA, Lookingglass, and a whole panoply of independents / store fronts. I love it!
So, why shouldn't I share my thoughts and experiences? I know I would have loved this kind of a blog when I first arrived, and I hope my readers will contribute their comments as well.
Look for reviews of the following in the upcoming weeks; with any luck, I may go back and reflect on other shows I've seen (and can still comment on in sufficiently worthwhile detail).
"Tree" and "The Gospel" at Victory Gardens; "El Noglar," "Stage Kiss" and "Chinglish" at the Goodman, and "Romeo and Juliet" at the Raven.
Enjoy!
Jim
The only way to tell a Truth is with a story.
I moved to Chicago a year ago, and have been pleasantly overwhelmed with the wealth of opportunities for theater here in the Windy City. In fact, my closest friendships here have emerged directly from the community of theater lovers.
So far, I've attended plays across the spectrum that Chicago has to offer: at the Steppenwolf, the Goodman, Chicago Shakespeare, Victory Gardens, the Raven, the Greenhouse, DCA, Lookingglass, and a whole panoply of independents / store fronts. I love it!
So, why shouldn't I share my thoughts and experiences? I know I would have loved this kind of a blog when I first arrived, and I hope my readers will contribute their comments as well.
Look for reviews of the following in the upcoming weeks; with any luck, I may go back and reflect on other shows I've seen (and can still comment on in sufficiently worthwhile detail).
"Tree" and "The Gospel" at Victory Gardens; "El Noglar," "Stage Kiss" and "Chinglish" at the Goodman, and "Romeo and Juliet" at the Raven.
Enjoy!
Jim
The only way to tell a Truth is with a story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)