RSS

Death Takes a Holiday – Review

In the hands of a deft director (Doug Hughes) skillful musicians and excellently cast actors, Death Takes a Holiday is a simply wonderful experience.  The new (Rondabout Theatre) musical is staged at the very compatible (425 seat) Laura Pels Theatre.  The intimacy of the theatre is perfectly suited to this delicate production.  The set (Derek McLane) is rather reminiscent of the recent revival of Ragtime, which ostensibly was a concert version of the musical.  (I was not surprised to learn that Mr. McLane did in fact design Ragtime.)  I am left with a bit of a chicken and egg question in wondering if Mr. McLane was hired to lend an air of a staged concert to this production, or if this production feels like a staged concert due to the set.  Regardless, the device works.  The orchestra(-lette) is set behind a scrim in the fly.  While it is always nice to see the musicians (no matter how few there are) the upstage fly is the perfect placement in this theatre.  With the (diminutive) orchestra upstage, the actors should be perfectly comfortable without microphones in a theatre this size.  But alas, no.  More than once I was reminded of the Lena Lamont mishaps in Singin’ in the RainPerhaps taping the body mic to the forehead rather than the side of the face, would help?  Perhaps it is time I simply gave up this cause?

Even with the excessive amplification, there is a lovely old fashioned quality to this musical.  I am a huge fan of simplicity and a City Center Encores devotee.  I am not bothered in the least by the lack of dance in this musical.  I suspect some ticket holders might be disappointed, but I am of the “less is more” and “if you can’t do it well, don’t bother” school.  I’d much rather see a lovely performance of honest portrayal than a casserole of all things to all people. 

The book, by Peter Stone (1776, Titanic) does not alter the original storyline or add superfluous sidelines.  (There were two incongruent attempts at lewdness with which Mr. Stone should not have sullied himself.)  In the film to musical genre, it is as straightforward (in the very best sense) as The Light in the Piazza was/is.  Maury Yeston (Titanic, Nine, Grand Hotel) wrote the lyrics and music, and clearly is also no stranger to the movie – musical genre.   There are a few absolutely delicately pretty songs in the show.  Nothing one would necessarily hum, but quite nice.  I did have an issue with the scoring of the music.  Many of the numbers are written in a far too expansive range.  Nothing would have been lost by bringing down the excessive high notes.  The actors, rarely hit them, and when they did it was with effort and flop sweat.  It was distracting to the audience and made me wonder what was motivating Mr. Yeston.  The best musical numbers are those with the household staff.  Their humor and vocal prowess were an absolute delight.  There is also a number, performed sitting on the apron, by the three youngest female characters, that is very memorable.  The three part harmony is splendid.

The casting of this production seems to be a nod to the past as well.  There are boldfaced theatre names (Matt Cavenaugh and Rebecca Luker) but no US magazine veterans.  Mr. Cavenaugh’s role is tiny, which I found surprising, considering his recent lead roles (West Side Story, A Catered Affair.)  Ms. Luker’s role was much more significant.  Oh, to hear her sing!  Even in a mostly forgettable song.  Had it not been for her solo, I would have considered the entire cast all quite very good singers.  She transcended them all.

The performance I saw was the first in which the lead had dropped out.  He was the same actor who was a recent no-show for opening night.  The cause stated is laryngitis.  One has to wonder about the preparation younger actors are receiving.  More often than not, I have witnessed no-shows at matinees (and they are always the under 35 set,) leading me to wonder about their physical preparation for 8 shows a week.  I am also at a loss as to how an amplified, rather subdued score (it’s no Phantom!) can be so straining.  I do not wish to sound unsympathetic.  Truly.  I simply wonder if more is owed this generation of performers.

Digression aside, I thoroughly enjoyed this show.  Even without an overture, I knew in the first 5 minutes that it was going to be a good time.  I love seeing new things, and what a joy to see something lovely and devoid of gimmick.  There were no mindless repetitive thumping bass lines, no screaming lyrics and no sound effects.  There were instead; honest portrayals of human beings, with a score that continually worked to move the story along.  Much is made of bright and shiny these days.  Even more is made of everyone’s 15 minutes and spotlights.  We are often in pursuit of perfection, in material objects, in others, etc.  In musical theatre there is an embarrassment of perfectionBut for every Gypsy or Showboat, there is a Starlight Express, and in between, there is a whole lot of real estate.  I am very happy to live in the neighborhood of Death Takes a Holiday.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 20, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Unnatural Acts – Review

I have been meaning to see The Classic Stage Company’s production of Unnatural Acts, (based on the true story of Harvard University’s persecution of homosexual students) since the play opened.  That I chose to see it on the eve of New York State issuing the first marriage licenses to gay couples, is somewhat poetic.

Unnatural Acts takes place at Harvard University in 1920.  It is based on actual records which were uncovered at the end of 2002 by a Harvard student.  The records, of a tribunal and subsequent persecution of 38 students, is compelling for its layers of inhumanity.  The university’s rather flaccid response and comment to the discovery of the records, only compound the impact of the story.

The play was conceived by its director, Tony Speciale and written by the members of the Plastic Theatre (who comprise most of the cast.)  This is a true ensemble piece as demonstrated by the absolute fluidity of story, staging and character.  The actors are so perfectly cast as their characters, it is difficult to imagine anyone else embodying the roles.  The thrust stage transforms into various Harvard locales, and once, through a genius use of lights above the fly, a train station.  The story is told in a riveting dramatic manner, never resorting to sentiment.  From the moment the stage lights come up, we know it is 1920 and can feel all that that implies.   We watch the young men perform their toilette while discussing their friend’s recent death (he was found dressed in a suit, in his childhood bedroom, gassed to death.)  Their varying reactions and relationship to one another tells us so very much about the pressure to conform.  The subtlety in the layers of social class in the ivy league setting are timeless and lend a very modern feel to this very period piece (the actors even have 1920’s haircuts.)

So much could be said about the story itself, about the implications of institutionalized bigotry and the absence of reparation.  However, space and attention span, sway me to discuss the production itself.  Unnatural Acts is the closest thing to a musical, without music, you will ever see.  Exquisitely choreographed, the actors are positively fluid.  The second scene actually has 8 men on stage moving in slow motion at a party.  Couples transition into real time as we hear their conversation.  It is a real party, but slowed down.  Every detail and facial nuance is entirely authentic.  Every piece of this production is up to the scrutiny of slow motion.  Even set changes are beautiful to watch. 

The final scene is the most musical of them all.  I was reminded of the power of Bill T. Jones’ Spring Awakening classroom scene.  The sounds and movement were so incredibly powerful.  I regretted sitting in the first row of a thrust theatre, as there really is no way to hide the hiccuping sobs.

I simply cannot remember having seen something this flawless and powerful.  This play has been extended (for the third time) only through July 31st.  I urge you to have this experience.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 20, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Shoemaker – Review

Have you ever watched a soap opera?  It’s okay, you’re among friends.  No, really.  Fine, I’ll start.  I have watched soap operas.  I have done so because quite frankly there is some amazing acting on those shows.  Like a tree in Brooklyn, it survives amongst some truly awful acting and absolutely ridiculous storyline.  The dialogue, like the acting, can go from 0-50 in mere seconds.  There doesn’t seem to be much consistency of either.  There is something almost Olympic about watching a very good actor utter the most absurd lines.  What can I say?  It’s fun.

Which explains why I liked The Shoemaker at the Acorn Theater.  This new play by Susan Charlotte, has a thin and clumsy plot.  The dialogue is stilted at times and excruciating at others.  A voice-over is used awkwardly as expositionAt one point I was so embarrassed by this, I fantasized about hiding under my wrap.  Perhaps all this was a nod to Ms. Charlotte’s previous gig at Guiding Light?  The heavy-handed subject matter; the attack on the World Trade Center and The Holocaust, partly saved this play.  Sounds a bit counter-intuitive, no?  I am no fan of “neuralgia” (as it’s called in my home) and I do abhor cheap sentimentality.  But even I can concede that these subject matters transcend bad writing. 

Now add the rawness of the subjects with the presence of Danny Aiello, and you have the makings for a pleasant afternoon.  Mr. Aiello is just heartbreaking.  I know how ridiculous I was choking back sobs as he recited one of the four questions.  In Hebrew.  But hey, a gal can only take so much.

The play takes place in a (nicely set) shoemaker’s shop.  There are some flaws in the set decoration, but there are bigger issues with which to contend.  Mr. Aiello is joined on stage by Alma Cuervo, a delight.  Saddled with dialogue and monologue entirely incongruent with the events of the day (9/11/01) they still manage to create some very lovely moments.  Mercifully, the voice-over (with varying degrees of technical accuracy in volume control) is held to a minimum in the first act.  Unfortunately, the first act ends with a glimpse of what’s in store.  A third character (Lucy Devito) walks on stage with all the dramatic believability of a lost audience member.

The only thing keeping one in their seat during the second act are the monologues of Mr. Aiello.  He rises above the muck and finds his own beautiful truth.  This would simply not be possible in lesser hands.

One need only read the program to ascertain how this play got to the stage.  The playwright produced it.  The relationships between the actors and the donors are extensive.  Lucy Devito, so very painful to watch, is probably the most egregious of the nepotism at play.   But, it seems The Acorn has carved out a certain niche for themselves.  Their next performance is The Pretty Trap, starring Katharine Houghton.  You remember her.  She was last seen asking her Aunt Katherine; “Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner?”
 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 20, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Hot Town

Back of my neck getting burnt and gritty

When I was 6, we moved to Brooklyn on the 1st of July.  We were welcomed by the sound of illegal fireworks.  Day and night.  For a week.  That was my introduction to the very uniqueness of summers in the city.  My little suburban self knew nothing of italian ices, ice cream men, fruit men, and perhaps the most magical of all; the carnival ride man.  Actual rides (hopefully) bolted onto trucks would arrive on our block.  Real rides!  It was a step beyond awesome. 
On the more sweltering of days, a grown-up would open the hydrants for us.  The braver and older of us, would charge right into the spray.  The smaller and lighter-weight of us, played in the puddles.

We moved out of the city the following winter, but I still think of these city summer hallmarks.  They mingle with the images of people sleeping on fire escapes and sunbathing on tar roof, and the mass of humanity at Coney Island.

Yesterday I experienced a brand new (to me) summer in the city phenomenon.  It was about 87 degrees (not sweltering, but a breeze would have been nice.)  I made my way into the subway (at a location I had never frequented) and saw grown men (18-35 years) using the subway platform as a clubhouse.  Some had brought folding chairs.  Now what is still so puzzling about choosing to hang out on a subway platform, is that we were all of 2 blocks from Riverside Park.  What kind of bet do you think they lost?  Do they do this every day?  Perhaps only on weekends?  Did I mention that there wasn’t a cloud in the sky?  I’m so very puzzled.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 20, 2011 in Cultural Critique

 

Tags: , , , ,

Table Manners

Celebrity interviews seem to always include a question about celebrity itself.  This question is answered more often than not with the wholesale disingenuous; “Well, it does get me a good table in a restaurant.”  No doubt this reply has become shorthand for; “I am hesitant to admit what we all know, which is in fact that I am worthy of special treatment.”  Okay, that’s fine.  I have no issue, per se, with self-delusion.

What does baffle me, is what in the world a “good table” is?  For me it means; clean, not directly under the air conditioning or speaker system, non-teetering and the right size for the party.  But I think it means something entirely different in this context.  Recently I watched a (current) movie in which a diva character pitched a fit about not being at a “good table.”  I’ve even had dining companions make reference to “getting a good table.”  Clearly, once again, I am socially clueless.

I am almost certain that there are few if any tables actually by the kitchen door.  (I’m thinking of the night club scenes in On The Town and certain Carol Burnett sketches.)  So what then is the criteria for a “good table” and what exactly does it have to do with the dining experience?  I suspect perhaps it has something to do with visibility?  But this is where it gets tricky.  To be seen or not to be seen, that is the question.

If you consider yourself a celebrity, is being seen a plus?  Can’t being too visible threaten one’s air of elusiveness?   Doesn’t being front and center in a venue filled with one’s lessers merely tempt intrusion and hangers on?  Or is a “good table” one in fact that allows a peaceful dinner, similar to those had by mortals?  If so, wouldn’t the party be better served in private (a la Nicky Arnstein?)

Perhaps it means nothing.  A temporary and disposable bon mot meant to fill a void.  If you look at a paper moon long enough…

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 20, 2011 in Cultural Critique

 

Tags: , , ,