Quantcast
Channel: arts & leisure – queer voices
Viewing all 93 articles
Browse latest View live

review: “summer, the donna summer musical” is a jukebox flop

$
0
0

Everyone may love “She Works Hard For the Money,” “Hot Stuff,” and “Last Dance” but liking Donna Summer’s music is no guarantee you will enjoy “Summer,” the new biopic jukebox musical that opened on Monday at the Lunt-Fontanne Theatre. In fact, if you are a real Donna Summer fan you would have a much better evening reading her Wikipedia page with a Spotify playlist on than you will at “Summer.”

Like its equally unlikeable neighbor, “Escape to Margaritaville,” this musical includes all the hits from a single artist. But while “Margaritaville” adapts them into a plot, “Summer” attempts to use Donna Summer’s songs to tell her life story. However, book writers Colman Domingo, Robert Cary, and Des McAnuff (who also directed), do seem to not care about accuracy, controversy, clarity, or telling her life in order. Together they wrote perhaps one of the worst books for a musical in modern history.

The entire musical is framed as “a concert of a lifetime” in which a slightly aged Donna narrates to a crowd how she became the Queen of Disco. This lazy frame device is used to justify having three Donnas. Yes you read that correctly: Diva Donna, Disco Donna, and Duckling Donna. This triple casting makes almost no sense and seems pointless. Other than some striking stage pictures of all three hitting the same pose, the triad structure is uncalled for and underutilized — they don’t even have amazing trio harmonies.

The musical goes through the life of Donna Summer, but not in any particular chronological order, jumping rapidly from contract negotiations, recording sessions, childhood sexual abuse, marriages, legal battles, cancer diagnoses, domestic abuse, a suicide attempt, motherhood, and homophobic rants. Early on Diva Donna says “I never see the whole picture, you know? All I see are fragments.” This must have been the mantra of the book writers and director, who clearly made no attempt at crafting a nuanced (or accurate) narrative.

Anything that was difficult or unlikable the musical quickly jumps over. Donna Summer’s infamous “Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” comment is whisked away in a single line. Her mental health struggles are wrapped up in a brief scene. She narrates being molested by her priest between verses of a song. Everything that doesn’t pertain to a hit song is rapidly and tactlessly dealt with, all so the musical can get back to crowd favorites like “MacArthur Park” and “Bad Girls.”

That being said, the crowd favorites are incredibly well done. The Donna Summer fans in the audience clap and even dance along, proving the stereotype of jukebox musical fans who don’t care if it is a good musical they only care about the good music. Undeniably, the music is good and thankfully our trio of Donnas do quite a good job with the legendary songs.

LaChanze as Diva Donna is magisterial, monarchical, and maternal. Most of the show she walks slowly around in glittering gowns or sits on stools narrating horribly-written inspirational speeches. Her star moment is the 11 o’clock number, “Friends Unknown,” performed at a piano in a single spotlight. She certainly comes the closest to looking and sounding like the real Donna Summer (but even that’s saying something because she doesn’t get that close).

Arianna DeBose gives a more than competent Disco Donna, and although LaChanze is the star of the production, most of the action happens to DeBose. Because of this, DeBose has to act the most and dance the most. She may not be the strongest actor but she makes up for it by fiercely executing Sergio Trujillo’s spectacular disco choreography. Plus, she gets all the best costumes, ranging from miniskirts, to fur coats, to gowns, to fringe and beaded dance costumes (beautifully designed by Paul Tazewell, the only shining star in an otherwise confused design team).

Storm Lever sadly lives up to her character’s name, Duckling Donna, and certainly cannot compare to the more swan-like performance of her costars. She’s sweet and cute and tiny but not very memorable. The blame here is on the writing, it’s not her fault she was given almost nothing to work with.

The rest of the cast is basically inconsequential. Oddly, the almost entirely female ensemble are frequently in drag. This seemed like a desperate attempt at feminism (par for the course in this musical that mentions the wage gap and waits for applause) and was also unnecessary, since there were male actors in the cast. The musical’s lack of male dancers perfectly fits the way the show complete erased Donna Summer’s massive fan base in the gay community.

Regardless of the performances, what made “Summer” almost unbearable was the dialogue, the direction, and the scenic design. The stage was almost completely bare other than several screens that flew in and out, projecting images straight from clip art: a lipstick when Donna is putting on a makeup, cigarettes when she smokes for the first time, a microphone when she is recording. Robert Brill (set) and Sean Nieuwenhuis (projection) will not be forgiven anytime soon for this design flop. In addition to the oddly empty stage, for some unknowable reason the Donnas almost exclusively exited and entered from rising and sinking platforms on the stage. The first time this theatrical device is used it is striking, but using it over 30 times in a 100-minute musical is the definition of overkill.

Unlike “Escape to Margaritaville” or “Jersey Boys,” it is unclear whether Donna Summer has the fan base to keep this musical alive. Pending the likely absence of awards, it would not be surprising if “Summer” announces a swift closing. Maybe in better hands the life and music of the Queen of Disco could have been extraordinary, but here it falls flat.


todd purdum reveals the “something wonderful” of rodgers and hammerstein in new book

$
0
0

There is something distinctly American about the ironic songs and musicals of Rodgers and Hammerstein. Todd S. Purdum in “Something Wonderful” gives a well-researching, sweeping biography of the writing duo that created such legendary pieces like “Oklahoma!”, “Carousel,” “South Pacific”, “The King and I”, “Cinderella”, and “The Sounds of Music.” These great works sparked what he calls a “Broadway Revolution” and have become a staple of American culture, heard not only in theaters across the country (and world) but everywhere from Main Street in Disney World, to championship sports games, to presidential inaugurations.

Purdum is one of the first to write a sweeping, collective biography of both Rodgers and Hammerstein, providing a narrative of their epic collaboration. However, he also goes into their artistic endeavors before they started working together, their separate projects, and Rodgers’ life after Hammerstein’s death. He also provides detailed information about their wives (both named Dorothy), their mistresses, and their children.

In addition to extensive archival research, “Something Wonderful” contains many interviews with actors, designers, directors, dancers, etc. that worked with Rodger and Hammerstein as well as testimonials from fans and family members. Collectively, all these first-hand accounts provide a more complex and nuanced version of the two men’s lives than previous scholarly work had described. Purdum’s work is also differentiated from other biographies because he does not shy away from the more problematic aspects, be it the racist or sexist of the musical or the adultery or alcoholism of the marriages.

The chapters of “Something Wonderful” are mostly structured around each of the major musicals the pair created. Thus, each gives countless detail on the writing process — always working apart, always lyrics first then music — the casting decisions, the rehearsal room tensions, the opening night reviews, and so on. Every chapter gives a complete picture from start to finish of the amazing effort that went into creating the masterpieces and then tells of the unprecedented response from the public each and every time.

Purdum’s work feels especially relevant in light of all the recent Rodgers and Hammerstein pieces that have been on Broadway. Just in the past few years, “South Pacific” was revived in 2008, “Cinderella” received its first Broadway production in 2013, “The King in I” was brought back in 2015, and “Carousel” is on Broadway right now. Just as Purdum’s work deals with the darker aspects of the Rodgers and Hammerstein relationship, many of this productions have been more political revivals. In particular, Bartlett Sher’s “South Pacific” and “The King and I” were stripped down, focusing on the dark material and the racism of the characters. The current “Carousel” stars Joshua Henry, a black actor, as Billy and confronts domestic abuse head-on.

Todd Purdum’s work proves the timelessness of Rodgers and Hammerstein, giving a perfectly explanation of why both Broadway and local stages are constantly doing productions of favorites like “Oklahoma!” and “The Sound of Music.” Despite some personal tensions and some problematic themes in the musicals, Purdum’s well-written new book demonstrates the undeniable magic, the “Something Wonderful” of Rodgers and Hammerstein.

review: “travesties” is a comedic triumph

$
0
0

No one ever said that a Tom Stoppard play is for the faint of heart; you must pay attention, understand the references, and keep track of endless moving parts and plot lines. That being said, Roundabout’s production (from the Menier Chocolate Factory) of “Travesties,” which opened at the American Airlines Theatre on Tuesday, is surprisingly palatable, even digestible, a rare word to describe the dense Stoppard drama. But Patrick Marber’s production keeps things light, rapidly-paced, and comedic; it embraces fragmentation and excess and turns it into a non-stop party.

For those unfamiliar with the expansive Stoppard piece, “Travesties” is a memory piece told by Henry Carr (Tom Hollander), the British consul in Switzerland, of his (often incorrect) recollections of a brief period in 1917 when he interacted with Vladimir Lenin (Dan Butler), James Joyce (Peter McDonald), and Tristan Tzara (Seth Numrich). Using the word “founder” loosely, each man founded a major movement: Russian communism, British modernism, and European Dadaism. Carr interacts with these three iconic men in a public library in Geneva and develops a friendship with each of them. Most notably, he is given a part of Algernon (or as he calls him “the other one”) in a James Joyce-led, English Players production of Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest.”

If you seem confused by that brief introduction you are probably feeling the intended effect of the play. In every way, “Travesties” is confounding. It is a memory play that is jumbled, confused, and repetitious: as Carr struggles to recall his interactions the same scenes play over and over again with slight variations. To make matters worse — or better depending on if you are a diehard Wilde fan like I am — many of Carr’s memories are marred with dialogue from “The Importance of Being Earnest.” But to an untrained ear, it is impossible to know when Carr, Lenin, Joyce, and Tzara are speaking their own conversations or regurgitating Oscar Wilde.

To continue this spiral into the palimpsestuous mind of Carr, two characters in the play, Cecily and Gwendolen, are taken directly from “The Importance of Being Earnest,” but they are also real people; Cecily (Sara Topham) is the local librarian and Gwendolen (Scarlett Strallen) Carr’s sister. Also in the mix are Carr’s not-so-secretly socialist butler, Bennett (Patrick Kerr), and Lenin’s wife Nadya (Opal Alladin).

Unsurprisingly, in a group this of literary, political, and cultural elites, conversations are rather intellectual, riddled with references, allusions, uncited quotations, and never-ending strings of alliterative adjectives. On the surface, the complexity of the text and the overly academic style of the dialogue could make this play a slog for the audience. But thankfully the Patrick Marber has devised a version of “Travesties” that clips along at light speed. We cannot understand it all and for once we are not meant to. Every ingenius little literary Easter egg Stoppard hid in the text is spoken radiply. Of anything, the production satirizes the overly academic nature of the play and turns the would-be elitism into comedy.

At the center of course is Tom Hollander, who performs not only as the sprightly Henry Carr of 1917, but also an aged, senile version years later struggle to recall his own past. Although Hollander’s performance is certainly noteworthy and he does carry the show, he is outshined by some of his more comedic costars. In particular, Seth Numrich as Tzara steals every scene he is in, perfectly portraying the wacky Dadaist who was famous for cutting up Shakespeare sonnets, putting the scraps in a hat, and pulling out a new poem. Numrich is wild and child-like, and all his arguments about art end in him screaming “dadadadada” in such a way that is it always hilarious. McDonald’s Joyce is so comedically uptight he makes a perfect scene partner for Numrich. On the other end of the spectrum is Butler’s laser-focused Lenin. All three men are ready to change the world, and in this play, we are more than happy to laugh at their hubris, seriousness, and unintended elitism.

The men of “Travesties” are certain hilarious and each give an amazing portrait of their real-life characters, but it is the women of the play who are the true comedy geniuses. Just like in “The Importance of Being Earnest,” the women have the best parts. Scarlett Strallen and Sara Topham (re)interpret the Wilde characters in a delicious new way. The men in their lives may be changing the world, but they are doing all the work behind the scenes. Both actresses give what might be the most comedic performances of the season. Stoppard’s version of the infamous garden Cecily-Gwendolen confrontation scene is a musical number inspired by a vaudeville song, but even without this list of references, the scene is show stopping. Rarely in a play does a scene end with thunderous applause, but after their masterful and hilarious song-scene Strallen and Topham certain earn an ovation.

To help establish the world of confused memories, allusions, and intertexts, set and costume designer Tim Hatley created a maze of books and papers and folios and teacups and even some tasteful taxidermy pieces. Lighting by Neil Austin helped us seamless transition from frame narration to memory and sound and original music by Adam Cork helped denote the resetting of a scene or memory, denoted by the sound of a library help desk bell.

“Travesties” is certainly the most pleasantly surprising revival this season; instead of a dated, elitist, hard to understand play, Patrick Marber and his extraordinary cast have managed to strike comedy gold.

full list of tony nominations 2018: surprises and snubs

$
0
0

The nominations for the 72nd Tony Awards were announced this morning by Katharine McPhee and Leslie Odom, Jr. at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts. The Tony Awards will be held on Sunday, June 10th. Mean Girls and SpongeBob Squarepants tied for the most nominations, with The Band’s Visit, Angels in America, and Harry Potter and the Cursed Child trailing close behind.

Here is a complete list of the nominees:

Best Play
The Children, by Lucy Kirkwood
Farinelli and The King, by Claire van Kampen
Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two, by Jack Thorne
Junk, by Ayad Akhtar
Latin History for Morons, by John Leguizamo

Best Musical
The Band’s Visit
Frozen
Mean Girls
SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical

Best Revival of a Play
Angels in America
Edward Albee’s Three Tall Women
Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh
Lobby Hero
Travesties

Best Revival of a Musical
My Fair Lady
Once On This Island
Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel

Best Book of a Musical
The Band’s Visit, Itamar Moses
Frozen, Jennifer Lee
Mean Girls, Tina Fey
SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical, Kyle Jarrow

Best Original Score (Music and/or Lyrics) Written for the Theatre
Angels in America, Adrian Sutton
The Band’s Visit, David Yazbek
Frozen, Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez
Mean Girls, Jeff Richmond and Nell Benjamin
SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical, Music & Lyrics: Yolanda Adams, Steven Tyler & Joe Perry of Aerosmith, Sara Bareilles, Jonathan Coulton, Alex Ebert of Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros, The Flaming Lips, Lady Antebellum, Cyndi Lauper & Rob Hyman, John Legend, Panic! at the Disco, Plain White T’s, They Might Be Giants, T.I., and Domani & Lil’C

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role in a Play
Andrew Garfield, Angels in America
Tom Hollander, Travesties
Jamie Parker, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Mark Rylance, Farinelli and The King
Denzel Washington, Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role in a Play
Glenda Jackson, Edward Albee’s Three Tall Women
Condola Rashad, Saint Joan
Lauren Ridloff, Children of a Lesser God
Amy Schumer, Meteor Shower

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role in a Musical
Harry Hadden-Paton, My Fair Lady
Joshua Henry, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel
Tony Shalhoub, The Band’s Visit
Ethan Slater, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role in a Musical
Lauren Ambrose, My Fair Lady
Hailey Kilgore, Once On This Island
LaChanze, Summer: The Donna Summer Musical
Katrina Lenk, The Band’s Visit
Taylor Louderman, Mean Girls
Jessie Mueller, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel

Best Performance by an Actor in a Featured Role in a Play
Anthony Boyle, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Michael Cera, Lobby Hero
Brian Tyree Henry, Lobby Hero
Nathan Lane, Angels in America
David Morse, Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh

Best Performance by an Actress in a Featured Role in a Play
Susan Brown, Angels in America
Noma Dumezweni, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Deborah Findlay, The Children
Denise Gough, Angels in America
Laurie Metcalf, Edward Albee’s Three Tall Women

Best Performance by an Actor in a Featured Role in a Musical
Norbert Leo Butz, My Fair Lady
Alexander Gemignani, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel
Grey Henson, Mean Girls
Gavin Lee, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical
Ari’el Stachel, The Band’s Visit

Best Performance by an Actress in a Featured Role in a Musical
Ariana DeBose, Summer: The Donna Summer Musical
Renée Fleming, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel
Lindsay Mendez, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel
Ashley Park, Mean Girls
Diana Rigg, My Fair Lady

Best Scenic Design of a Play
Miriam Buether, Edward Albee’s Three Tall Women
Jonathan Fensom, Farinelli and The King
Christine Jones, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Santo Loquasto, Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh
Ian MacNeil and Edward Pierce, Angels in America

Best Scenic Design of a Musical
Dane Laffrey, Once On This Island
Scott Pask, The Band’s Visit
Scott Pask, Finn Ross & Adam Young, Mean Girls
Michael Yeargan, My Fair Lady
David Zinn, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical

Best Costume Design of a Play
Jonathan Fensom, Farinelli and The King
Nicky Gillibrand, Angels in America
Katrina Lindsay, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Ann Roth, Edward Albee’s Three Tall Women
Ann Roth, Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh

Best Costume Design of a Musical
Gregg Barnes, Mean Girls
Clint Ramos, Once On This Island
Ann Roth, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel
David Zinn, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical
Catherine Zuber, My Fair Lady

Best Lighting Design of a Play
Neil Austin, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Paule Constable, Angels in America
Jules Fisher + Peggy Eisenhauer, Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh
Paul Russell, Farinelli and The King
Ben Stanton, Junk

Best Lighting Design of a Musical
Kevin Adams, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical
Jules Fisher + Peggy Eisenhauer, Once On This Island
Donald Holder, My Fair Lady
Brian MacDevitt, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel
Tyler Micoleau, The Band’s Visit

Best Sound Design of a Play
Adam Cork, Travesties
Ian Dickinson for Autograph, Angels in America
Gareth Fry, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Tom Gibbons, 1984
Dan Moses Schreier, Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh

Best Sound Design of a Musical
Kai Harada, The Band’s Visit
Peter Hylenski, Once On This Island
Scott Lehrer, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel
Brian Ronan, Mean Girls
Walter Trarbach and Mike Dobson, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical

Best Direction of a Play
Marianne Elliott, Angels in America
Joe Mantello, Edward Albee’s Three Tall Women
Patrick Marber, Travesties
John Tiffany, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
George C. Wolfe, Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh

Best Direction of a Musical
Michael Arden, Once On This Island
David Cromer, The Band’s Visit
Tina Landau, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical
Casey Nicholaw, Mean Girls
Bartlett Sher, My Fair Lady

Best Choreography
Christopher Gattelli, My Fair Lady
Christopher Gattelli, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical
Steven Hoggett, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two
Casey Nicholaw, Mean Girls
Justin Peck, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel

Best Orchestrations
John Clancy, Mean Girls
Tom Kitt, SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical
Annmarie Milazzo & Michael Starobin, Once On This Island
Jamshied Sharifi, The Band’s Visit
Jonathan Tunick, Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel

Total Nominations by Show:
Mean Girls — 12
SpongeBob SquarePants: The Musical — 12
Angels in America — 11
The Band’s Visit — 11
Rodgers & Hammerstein’s Carousel — 11
Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two — 10
My Fair Lady — 10
Eugene O’Neill’s The Iceman Cometh — 8
Once On This Island — 8
Edward Albee’s Three Tall Women — 6
Farinelli and the King — 5
Travesties — 4
Frozen — 3
Lobby Hero — 3
The Children — 2
Junk — 2
Summer: The Donna Summer Musical — 2
Latin History for Morons — 1
Children of a Lesser God — 1
Meteor Shower — 1
1984–-1
Saint Joan — 1

Surprises:
— 
Amy Schumer (the only nominee for Meteor Shower) was not popular among critics so her nomination in a major category was surprising.
— 
6 nominees for Best Actress in a Musical, including LaChanze and Taylor Louderman
— In addition to LaChanze, Ariana DeBose’s nomination was unexpected since Summer has been universally disliked
— Michael Cera’s nomination for Featured Actor unexpected, especially since he is arguably the main actor/character in Lobby Hero
— Grey Henson’s Featured Actor nomination for Mean Girls is well deserved but slightly surprising
— Renee Fleming was certainly a surprising nomination, especially since she is competing against her Carousel co-star Lindsay Mendez in the Featured Actress category
— 1984 was nominated for Sound Design but it getting any nominations afters its controversy and bad reviews is surprising
 Latin History for Morons surprisingly got a Best Play nomination in addition to a Special Tony Award

Snubs:
— 
Barrett Wilbert Weed, who gave one of the best (and most vocally demanding) performances of the season was not nominated at all for Mean Girls, odd because she seemingly could have been Lead or Featured Actress
— Wesley Taylor is a hilarious and evil Plankton in SpongeBob and was an expected choice for Featured Actor, but instead Gavin Lee, who plays Squidward, was nominated
— Kate Rockwell, the amazingly ditsy Karen in Mean Girls was not nominated, although her scene partners and fellow Plastics Ashley Park and Taylor Louderman were nominated
— Alex Newell was considered a shoe-in for Featured Actor in a Musical for Once on the Island but was passed over
— Jelani Alladin, Caissie Levy, and Patti Murin from Frozen were all expected to be nominated, but the show received no acting nominations
— Adam Chanler-Berat’s performance in Saint Joan was highly praised but he was not nominated, part of a larger trend of Saint Joan not receiving nominations; Saint Joan’s only nominee was Condola Rashad, but many expected it to be considered for Best Revival, Best Lighting Design, Best Set Design, and Chanler-Berat, Walter Bobbie, Daniel Sunjata, or Jack Davenport for Featured Actor
— James McArdle for Angels in America was highly expected for Featured Actor
— John Lithgow and Michael Moore, who both had one man shows, were not nominated, although John Leguizamo’s Latin History for Morons was nominated

Shows that recieved no nominations:
Terms of My Surrender
Parisian Woman
Escape to Margaritaville
Prince of Broadway
Time and the Conways
M. Butterfly
Marvin’s Room

review: “harry potter and the cursed child” is even more magical than expected

$
0
0

Perhaps the most anticipated theatrical event of the season was last week’s opening of “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two.” This spell-binding new work is the product of three geniuses: the iconic J. K. Rowling (author of the original books), John Tiffany (the play’s profound director), and Jack Thorne (the playwright). Together they managed to create magic onstage in a way theatrical audiences have never seen before.

Perhaps thanks to the 35 million dollar budget (a record for a play) and the massive cast of 40, or perhaps due to the demands of the fantastical source material, “Cursed Child” takes stage magic to an entirely new level. Even the theater itself — a newly renovated Lyric Theatre complete with “H” monograms, gold phoenixes, and several mini-gift stores, transports you to the wonderful world of Harry Potter.

Sadly, before I go any further, I must be upfront and I say I am bound by the Laws of Magic and forbidden to reveal any of the secrets of the play or even to discuss the plot. All I can say is that the play’s use of special effects and magic is unprecedented; you will never see a wire, or a trap door, or a body double. Objects disappear, actors seemingly teleport across the stage, wands produce spells, furniture flies, bodies are transfigured — all with the help of a dark, hollow stage, the perfect amount of fog, and genius of the creative team.

Special credit to Jamie Harrison, the cited “Illusions and Magic” supervisor, but equal praise must be given to Christine Jones (set), Katrina Lindsay (costumes), Neil Austen (lighting), and Gareth Fry (sound) who together make the magic happen and beautifully reinterpret the world we know and love from the books and films. The entire two part, 5 hour spectacle will leave you asking over and over and over again, how did they do that? But just as I have no answers, neither will you, and this is what makes the play so magical.

What I can say is that “Cursed Child” picks up roughly around the time of the now-famous epilogue to the final book. Harry, Ginny, Ron, Hermione, and Draco are all dropping their children off at platform 9 3/4 to begin their journeys to Hogwarts. But of course, can we possibly expect that both Harry — and his child Albus Severus Potter — can stay away from danger? Unsurprisingly, chaos ensues.

Although it is certainly difficult to be critical of “Cursed Child” I will try for a brief moment. The script is certainly not stellar. Overall there are some bizarre pacing issues, ironic in a play about the passage of time. Part Two in particular suffers from structural confusion, and perhaps suggests that this could have been a perfectly good single play, but the desire to make it two parts required stretching one plot line and then quickly creating another, unrelated one. But these flaws are entirely with the script, in production there is so much magic that it is all too easy to get swept up and not even notice the problems in the writing.

The only flaw in the production itself I can site is, surprisingly, the choreography. Perhaps you are wondering, why is there choreography in a play?, and the case of “Cursed Child” are you certainly correct in your confusion. The play is rather long as it is and the extended choreographic scene transitions are unnecessary and do not add anything to the piece. They mostly consist of swirling capes and moving actors on staircases. But just as the magic saves any textual issues, the fantastic music by Imogen Heap gives the choreography a pass.

Now that that’s over, back to singing the praises of this ground-breaking play. In a season otherwise filled with non-theater celebrities (I’m looking at you, Denzel Washington, Amy Schumer, Uma Thurman, Chris Evans, Andrew Garfield, and Lauren Ambrose) this play is refreshingly filled with mostly British actors unknown to us. They may not have the celebrity privilege of receiving applause on their first entrance, but by the end of the five hour marathon they certainly prove worthy of the standing ovation.

Though there is no one main character, time is basically split equally between the (infamous) trio of Harry, Ron, and Hermione and the younger generation, mostly Albus Potter and Scorpius Malfoy.

Jamie Parker plays an older Harry, as cavalier and confident as ever but now dealing with working in the government and raising moody children. His performance seems to be a perfect updating of the Harry we know and love. Noma Dumezweni plays Hermione in a way quite different from the previous incarnation, although no less intelligent, strong, and powerful. Paul Thornley is a hilarious Ron, who seemingly will never grow up, nor would we ever want him to.

The parental trio may be the characters we grew up with, but it is the children who catalyze the action, getting into their own misadventures of massive proportion and impact. Sam Clemmentt plays a moody Albus Potter and Anthony Boyle is lonely Scorpius Malfoy, an unlikely friendship of two teenagers living unhappily in the shadows of their famous dads. Both do quite a good job, but there is something undeniable charming about the eccentric enthusiasm of Boyle.

It will come as no shock that “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child” is sold out for months and that tickets are already rocketing to “Hamilton” prices. Nor is it even slightly surprising that the play received ten Tony Award nominations. In a somewhat unmemorable Broadway season, the unprecedented magic of “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child” is the show to see and the one to try to beat come awards night. Get a ticket while you still can.

review: “light shining in buckinghamshire” fails to stir a revolution

$
0
0

Caryl Churchill is not known for being an easy playwright. Like her contemporary Tom Stoppard, her plays are often difficult, didactic, and heavily based in historical texts. But Churchill takes this a step further, often eschewing realism and embracing the theories of Bertolt Brecht, the German theatermaker famous for his ideas about education theater and the alienation effect in acting.

Despite her difficulty, Churchill has many beloved plays, such as “Top Girls,” “A Mouthful of Birds,” “Cloud Nine,” or the recent “Love and Information.” However, “Light Shining in Buckinghamshire” is not a part of this list of iconic, beloved Churchill plays. It is not frequently performed or studied in the classroom, unlike her other works which have become canonical in the professional and collegiate worlds. “Light Shining” deals with the English Civil War, the Interregnum, and the Restoration, a tumultuous period of history that is seldom talked about or depicted.

“Light Shining” proves that perhaps the Interregnum is not fit for the stage. Her play, revived at New York Theatre Workshop (where it premiered in 1991), is directed by the visionary director du jour, Rachel Chavkin, who works hard to find connections between that revolution and our current political climate. Chavkin is of course known for her beautiful anachronisms and timeless parallelism: in “Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812” she made Napoleonic Russia relatable and in “Hadestown” a tale from Greek mythology feels integrated into the every day.

Chavkin here attempts to make the connections between Levellers, Diggers, and Ranters of the English Civil War and our modern protesters. Mostly, the connections seem obvious, forced, and not supported in the text. Chavkin’s effort is nonetheless laudable, but it seems like her largest mistake was in selecting this play; if she wanted to create a piece about political revolution there are much better options.

At its core, “Light Shining” is not a great play. It is made of 21 disjointed scenes, with various characters played by 6 actors. It spans the prewar discontent, the battlefield, the Putney Debates about a new constitution, and the eventual failure of the Interregnum. If you are not well-versed in British history prepare to be confused; even the supertitles and playbill note can’t help you.

The play drags on at almost three hours, seemingly plotless and often coming across more as a British history lecture than a piece of theater. However, the Putney Debates lengthy sequence (which ended the first act) was an interesting intersection of history textbook and theater; the text was taken from historical sources but Chavkin dramatized it in an agonizing way that perfectly encapsulated the futility and unproductivity of democracy.

A few other moments managed to shine, like when two women looked in a broken mirror stolen from an aristocrats household, perhaps seeing their reflections for the first time. Or late in the play when a woman, starving to death, gave up her baby, and then immediately transformed into a butcher, who screamed at wealthy patrons for eating so much meat when others are starving. These abstract scenes about suffering were the most powerful and poignant, but they were sadly marred with hours worth of historical speeches and political rants delivered (oddly) through hand-held microphones.

It is clear that the problems of this production lie in the text. The director certainly had a clear vision, and combined with the costume designer Toni-Leslie James, managed to eloquently fuse the 1640s with the 2010s — corsets and doublets meet iPhones and Diet Cokes, gowns and armor melt into tee shirts and hoodies. The actors, too, are worthy of some praise. The diverse group (both racially and in terms of ability) worked hard to make it through such a dense, actionless play. Vinie Burrows, Rob Campbell, Matthew Jeffers, Mikeah Ernest Jennings, Gregg Mozgala, and Evelyn Spahr handled their task with an impressive level of professionalism and flexibility.

But a good director and a more than competent cast cannot save “Light Shining in Buckinghamshire.” The play charts the failure of a revolution: those who start as egalitarian soldiers ready to fight the monarchy become feuding bureaucrats and eventually devolve into drunken, raving religious zealots. Their political cause fails. The monarchy is restored. If you want to stage play that connects to our modern desire for political revolution, why pick a piece where the protesters fail? Like the Levellers, Diggers, and Ranters, “Light Shining in Buckinghamshire” fails, doomed to be remembered only in a remote corner of Wikipedia.

review: a “boys in the band” for the rupaul’s drag race generation

$
0
0

Joe Mantello’s 50th anniversary production of “The Boys in Band,” which opened at the Booth Theatre on Thursday, could be described as a lengthy kiki, an extended reading challenge, a special 110-minute episode of UnTucked. If you are confused by those terms you are likely to be equally lost during the play, which is deeply based in gay culture.

Mart Crowley’s 1968 play “The Boys in the Band” changed the theater forever, allowing gay men to be characters onstage in a play completely about being gay. The play was incredibly radical and arguably gave birth to a gay theatrical canon, paving the way for “Angels in America” and “Torch Song,” not to mention the more recent “Dada Woof Papa Hot” and “Significant Other.”

Despite the importance of “The Boys in the Band” it is a somewhat unpopular play; after all this is technically its Broadway premiere, 50 years after the original Off-Broadway production. To put it mildly, “The Boys in the Band” is complicated, as its relationship with both the theater community and the gay community. People often view the play as dated, offensive, and inherently rooted in a self-hating gayness of the late 1960s.

However, Ryan Murphy and Joe Mantello saw something in this gay relic, and got together a team of nine openly gay actors to do a revival, playing during Pride month in New York City — the significance of this production cannot be understated.

Although “The Boys in the Band” predates the Stonewall riots, the AIDS crisis, same-sex marriage, and the very concept of “gay pride” and pride parades, Mantello and his star cast have breathed a new life into this production. Despite the fact that they did not update the script, they managed to find unexpected connections between 1968 and 2018.

The way the characters embrace their gayness, express femininity, and position themselves counter-culturally feels exactly the same as the current generation of gay men, who live in a world where RuPaul’s Drag Race has become popular culture. In the world of “Boys in the Band” and in our current moment of Drag Race fandom, femininity and gay culture is in. Somehow, the two worlds feel deeply connected: after all, how different is “Oh, Mary” from “Yaaas Qween”?

The play tells the story of a group of men together for a birthday party, and for the first two-thirds, they all hang out, drink, dance, jokingly insult each other, and complain about relationships. If the format and repartee feels familiar, it is because seems to be a predecessor to RuPaul’s Drag Race: UnTucked.

Just as fans have their favorite drag queens, audience members are likely to pick a favorite character here. Jim Parsons is at the helm as Michael, the party’s host who spirals out of control and becomes what we drag fans call “a messy queen.” However, without a doubt the stage-seasoned Parsons is the strongest actor and the largest character, and he keeps everyone else on his level throughout. A crowd favorite is likely to be Zachary Quinto as the birthday boy Harold, a marvelously Oscar Wilde-esque dramatic dandy who languidly scoffs as the drama unfolds around him. The true Miss Congeniality of the night, however, is Robin de Jesus as Emory, the fan-twirling scene stealer whose witty jokes, perfect references, and hilarious reads are impossible not to laugh at.

These three are clearly the strongest actors, but a shirtless Matt Bomber and a twinky Charlie Carver provide the audience with more than enough eye candy, a requirement in any gay play. Meanwhile Andrew Rannells and Tuc Watkins bring the relationship drama, as Larry (young and cute) and Hank (older and mid-divorce) have a fight about monogamy that is shockingly relevant. It is Michael Benjamin Washington as Bernard, the token black friend, and Brian Hutchinson as Alan, the straight/closeted unexpected guest, that reveal just how old the play is.

The first two thirds of “The Boys in the Band” is a hilarious comedy where a group of shady queens read each other and have a great night. But in the final third, comments turn from petty to pointed, to prejudiced, to painful. Everything turns when Michael starts drinking. This production goes out of its way to signal the importance of this moment: the whole cast freezes and the lights shift as Parsons decides to pour a drink (kudos to Hugh Vanstone’s sensual lighting design). The emphasis here is essential, because it is at this point that “The Boys in the Band” becomes another play, a never-ended UnTucked fight, a cringe-worthy tragedy so rooted in the 1960s it feels completely separate from the fun, resonant previous part of the play.

Soon Michael goes around the room insulting everyone, calling Bernard the n-word, telling Harold he an ugly Jew Quasimodo, and shouting at Emory that only someone from Braille school would sleep with him. He then forces everyone to play a telephone game where they have to call the man they really love. This leads to arguments, relived traumas, and Michael screaming at Alan to admit he is gay.

Throughout the racism, antisemitism, ableism, and internalized homophobia, the audience noticeably cringes and becomes uncomfortable. However, the characters onstage do not. Although to us this party is a shocking event that would certainty end friendships, for those onstage it seems like just another Saturday night. After all the screaming and tears, everyone calmly leaves, hugging on the way out; Harold tells Michael he’ll call him tomorrow to chat. Somehow this final third, demarcated clearly by a tonal shift, tries to be both serious and casual, offensive but unacknowledged.

Part of what makes this portion so jarring is that it that it is the only part of the play that feels dated. The sets and costumes by David Zinn are quite simply gorgeous, but other than the landline phone they do not scream 60s. Uninformed audience members may miss the small note of “April 1968” in the program and may not know that this is a period piece. Thus, when racial epithets fly and self-hating gayness comes out, the play becomes startling, feeling unresolved and leaving a bad taste in your mouth.

Like RuPaul’s Drag Race and its fandom, “The Boys in the Band” is imperfect. Just as RuPaul makes transphobic comments, fans attack black queens online, and judges critique contestants for not having slim enough waists, this play too had moments that make the audience cringe and think aren’t we past this?

But just as Drag Race, despite its problems, is important for providing a platform to showcase queer artists, this this all-gay, Pride month, 50 anniversary production of “The Boys in the Band” is a deeply significant event for the gay community and the theater community. We certainly need to critique it, but we also can use it as an excuse to celebrate queerness and we can be proud that we live in an age where we can have art like this on Broadway.

idina menzel soars in “skintight”

$
0
0

Joshua Harmon, the current playwright du jour of Broadway (“Bad Jews,” “Significant Other,” “Admissions”) has a new play, “Skintight” commissioned by Roundabout, playing at the Larua Pels Theatre, and staring Idina Menzel. Yes, you read that correctly: the same Tony-winning musical theater actress famous for “Take Me or Leave Me” and “Defying Gravity” is currently performing in an Off-Broadway play.

Although audiences may be initially confused — or disappointed even — to see legendary belter Idina Menzel not sing a single note in this new play, they will leave pleasantly surprised. Menzel has proven her acting chops, clearly ready to conquer the world of straight dramas just like she did musicals.

Last time the theater community saw Menzel onstage it was for “If/Then” her forgettable musical that certainly did not become anyone’s favorite, not even for diehard Idina fans. Lets just say If her last show had Joshua Harmon as a writer, Then it would have been much better.

Thankfully this time she has found a stellar team to work with: not only Mr. Harmon but Daniel Aukin, who directed both “Bad Jews” and “Admissions.” Mr. Aukin tackles this play with a fierce exactitude that revels in Harmon’s signature ethical ambiguities. The play concerns middle aged Jodi (Menzel), whose ex-husband left her for a 20-something cycling instructor. To make matters worse, when she visits her fashion design father, Elliot Issac (Jack Wetherall), she discovers he is in a serious relationship with a 20-something former porn actor, Trey (Will Brittain). Also thrown into this dysfunctional tale of age, beauty, and (homo)sexuality is Jodi’s gay son, Benji (Eli Gleb).

The Elliot-Trey relationship is a thinly veiled adaptation of the infamous affair of Calvin Klein (71) and Nick Gruber (23). Gruber notoriously claimed that he isn’t gay, a sentiment echoed in the play by Trey, who says he doesn’t do labels and is “just Trey.” To further cement the parallels between Elliot Isaac and Calvin Klein, set designer Lauren Helpern constructed a minimalist chic apartment of slate grey that screams Calvin Klein.

Despite the intense arguments that ensue between the family members (and the wanna-be family member, Trey) about age disparity, youth, health, beauty, and the nature of love, the play is remarkably comedic. In particular Menzel and Gleb act as hilarious spectators equally shocked, offended, and fascinated by the relationship between 70 year old Elliot and 23 year old Trey. Menzel gracefully transitions from hilarious insults, judgmental stares, and passive aggressive suggestions, to filial concern, maternal affection, and heartfelt monologues about what it means to be in a committed relationship. The only problem with the comedy in this production is it seems as though the actors don’t realize how funny they are, and often neglect to pause and give time for the audience to laugh.

As with all Harmon plays, all of the characters are quite flawed and audiences never know who to side with as the ethical debates get messier and messier (not to mention angrier and louder). Benji is entitled, Jodi is elitist and sex-shaming, Elliot is youth-obsessed, and Trey is greedy. Despite all their imperfections, the audience is likely to side with Jodi, not only because Menzel gives the most convincing performance, but because it is almost impossible to side with Trey or to understand what Elliot sees in him.

Trey seems to be a reincarnation of Cowboy in “Boys in the Band” or Spike in “Vanya and Sonya and Masha and Spike” — a pretty boy, but a stupid boy. However, Trey has even more stage time and more lines than either of the earlier versions of the character, and all he manages to do here is annoy the audience and come off as an idiotic sex symbol (he has an entire scene where he wears only a jockstrap) who is clearly with Elliot for the money.

Perhaps “Skintight” is less powerful, poignant, and timely than Harmon’s other recent works, but it still is a fascinating play that leaves the audiences with quite a lot to think and talk about it — most of all, the spectacular performance of Idina Menzel, who hopefully will give this acting thing a chance, sans belting.


“head over heels” is the queerest show on broadway

$
0
0

Down the street, straight white men may have an entire show, but here in Arcadia, it’s no straights allowed.

Imagine it: Sir Philip Sidney’s 16th century tale The Arcadia combined with the rock music of the 80s girl group, The Go-Go’s. Admittedly, it’s not a likely combination, but somehow Jeff Whitty thought of it and gave birth to “Head Over Heels,” which opened at the Hudson Theatre on Thursday. The production, directed by Michael Mayer, may be a period piece but it certainly isn’t stuffy or old fashioned in any way.

Our story concerns the King and Queen of Arcadia (Jeremy Kushnier and Rachel York), and their daughters Pamela (Bonnie Milligan) and Philoclea (Alexandra Socha). Things turn sour quickly as Pamela rejects her rich suitors, Philoclea wants to marry a shepherd (Andrew Durand), and the King is given a prophecy about the fall of kingdom, delivered by the oracle, Pythio (Peppermint, of RuPaul’s Drag Race, Season 9 fame).

If you seem a bit overwhelmed, that’s natural. To this Renaissance plot add famous rock hits “We Got the Beat,” “Our Lips are Sealed,” and “Heaven is a Place on Earth” (played by Broadway’s first-ever all female band). Then add 16th century costumes, flimsy cardboard sets, modern choreography, and a sexy, queer, scantily-clad ensemble.

But wait, there’s more: Pamela falls in love with her maid, Mopsa (Taylor Iman Jones), the shepherd becomes a drag queen, and the oracle Pythio comes out as non-binary. We are certainly not in 16th century Arcadia anymore, Toto (or should I say, Go-Go?).

To somehow make this all work, the musical embraces it’s own ridiculousness, playing into every campy element possible. Perhaps it’s too campy, but in an age where “Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again” is a box office smash, maybe camp is exactly what we all want right now. Maybe in these dark political times, camp is what we need. Who knows, this might me the dawning of a new age of High Camp.

Although the show often references its own preposterousnesss and goes out of its way to be campy, it is hard to look past some of its larger flaws. Most odious among them are its book, recently adapted by James Magruder. Despite the new changes, it is still riddled with seemingly never-ending scenes spoken in iambic pentameter.

The painful book scenes are somewhat tolerable in the first act, which has enough memorable production numbers to keep the audience alert. But the second act has far too many scenes, far too few songs, and has a major issue with tone: a duel to the death and an extended funeral song just doesn’t scream “fun and campy musical.”

The combination of modern choreography by Spencer Liff, tacky period costumes by Arianne Phillips, and far too cheap-looking sets by Julian Crouch are equally jarring. The failures of this musical seemed avoidable. Look at “Something Rotten,” “Gentleman’s Guide to Love and Murder,” and “The Plays That Goes Wrong”— all of which successfully combine period piece source texts, camp, old costumes, and sets that are meant to look low budget.

Despite all it flaws — and it certainly has many — the audience has an amazing time. This may have something to do with the fact the bar is selling full bottles of wine for audience members to bring to their seats. Regardless of the alcohol consumption, the musical is worthy of significant praise for its progressiveness and for the representation it provides to queer people, drag performers, trans people, people of color, and more.

To start, the show features Peppermint, the first trans woman to originate a principal role on Broadway. But it gets better: her character is also trans*, and help to educate the public about transitioning, non-binary genders, living your authentic self, and the gender-neutral pronoun “they.” As expected, Peppermint is a transcendent goddess of fabulosity.

Next up: Princess Pamela. Quite simply, Bonnie Milligan is a star; she is fierce and hilarious and gorgeous and oh girl can she belt. She is a self-described big girl, and plays the beautiful princess, the prettiest girl in the land — creating perhaps the most body positive message in the history of Broadway. Her two major songs, “Beautiful” and “How Much More” are some of the best in the show; in the first she is self-obsessed with her beauty and in the second she belts while breaking props and sets in jealousy. Without a doubt, in “Head Over Heels” the big girl wins (sorry, Eureka). To add to this, in the course of the musical she discovers she is a lesbian, in love with her maid, who is played by a woman of color (Taylor Iman Jones).

But the sapphic love of Pamela and Mopsa is just one part of the romantic ending, our other couples include a princess in love with a shepherd-turned-drag queen and a viceroy (Tom Alan Robbins) falling in love again with his wife-turned-non-binary Oracle. That’s right: big girls, women of color, drag queens, and non-binary people can be sexy, have romantic relationships, and live happily ever after.

For a summer otherwise only marked by closing announcements, this new musical is an oasis in the desert. Maybe this musical is a bit messy, but it’s fun and it is doing some very important work for representation and visibility on Broadway. In “Head Over Heels” it seems like no one is straight, and thank god — it’s about time for a musical that takes place in a paradise where everyone is queer, racially diverse, and body positive.

“be more chill” is a teenage dream

$
0
0

It is rare that a show that premieres in a New Jersey theater gains a massive online following; it is even rarer for this to lead to a sold-out off Broadway run. But for “Be More Chill” this is exactly how it happened, all thanks to a devoted teenage fanbase that fell in love with a bootleg video and a casting recording. If nothing else, this musical proves the power of the people.

When you enter Pershing Square Signature Center, you’ll likely see massive throngs of adolescents, many of them wearing merchandise that replicates costumes from the show. But wearing t-shirts is not the only way they prove their devotion, they also give thunderous applause and laughter after every song and joke and key moment — and they know exactly when they are coming. The audience at “Be More Chill” is as devoted, emotional, and loud as those at the recently-closed, record-breaking revival of “Hello Dolly.” However, “Hello Dolly” is a beloved classic musical with period costumes, massive sets, hilarious gags, and canonical songs. “Be More Chill,” on the other hand, is a small-scale musical about a group of high schoolers.

Logically, the question is: so what makes this show so beloved?

The answer isn’t simple. Perhaps the show just speaks to teenagers of this generation. Maybe it’s something in the Joe Iconis songs or the Joe Tracz book, or even in Stephen Brackett’s direction. The angst, the crushes, the anxiety, the annoying parents, the cliques, it all just vibes with teenagers and their experiences. But how is “Be More Chill” different from, say, “Mean Girls” or “Dear Evan Hansen”? In many ways, it’s no different; of anything this musical handles less important themes. What makes “Be More Chill” most distinct is its science fiction element.

The musical tells the story of a quintessential loner, Jeremy, played by Will Roland (of recent “Dear Evan Hansen” fame). His only friend is a social outcast and stoner, Michael, played by George Salazar, who has become a rockstar celebrity to teens across the country because of this role, especially his song “Michael in the Bathroom.” Jeremy has a crush on the quirky Christine (Stephanie Hsu, fresh from “SpongeBob Squarepants: The Musical”). However, Christine is not interested in Jeremy, and neither are any of the kids at school. Jeremy is offered a grey oblong pill called a Squilp that contains a nanocomputer that will tell him what to do to “be more chill” and become cool.

Unsurprisingly, he takes the pill. The Squilp is represented as a Keanu Reeves lookalike, played by Jason Tam. In a rather expected turn of events, the Squilp makes him abandon his only friend Michael, and date a cool girl, Brooke (Lauren Marcus), instead of the nerdy girl he actually likes. Jeremy becomes less and less like himself as the Squilp manipulates him. Chaos ensues and Jeremy must decide what’s more important: being cool or being yourself.

Rarely is every single cast member in a show spectacular. But in “Be More Chill” everyone is impressive, hilarious, and superbly talented. In addition to Will Roland, George Salazar, Lauren Marcus, Stephanie Hsu, and Jason Tam, Jason Sweetooth Williams (as all the adults), Katyln Carlson (as the queen bee Chloe), Gerard Canonico (as the bully Rich), Britton Smith (as the jock hearthrob Jake), and especially Tiffany Mann (as the gossip Jenna) all rock the house down.

It is very easy to dismiss everything about this show, from the sometimes annoying teenage fans, to the ridiculous scifi plot, to the campy lyrics. However, “Be More Chill” is not a show to ignore; it is likely going to head to Broadway soon, so now is the time to embrace the craze. The show may be somewhat immature, but it speaks to an entire generation, so it is clearly doing something right.

wigstock is back!

$
0
0

Lady Bunny and Neil Patrick Harris teamed up to bring back the iconic drag festival Wigstock, this time located at Pier 17 at the South Seaport in New York City. Wigstock began in 1984 and was made famous in the 1995 movie of the same name, although it has not existed for several years. The all-day festival included over 8 hours of drag performances, ranging from veteran queens from the original Wigstock days, to girls from RuPaul’s Drag Race, to new performers. Although the show featured queens from all over, New York City local performers were featured most heavily.

Among the many many notable performers were Bianca del Rio, Sherry Vine, Lypsinka, Alaska Thunderfuck, Willam, Jinkx Monsoon, Sharon Needles, Peppermint, Pixie Aventurra, Marti Gold Cummings, Tina Burner, Latrice Royale, Scarlet Envy, Amanda Lepore, Jackie Beat, Alex Newell, Bob the Drag Queen, Heklina, Dina Martina, Jada Valenciaga, Kevin Aviance, Linda Simpson, Shequida Hall, and more.

The acts ranged from lip synching, to ballroom dance, to a drum core, to live opera, to performance art, to house music dancing, to poetry readings–there was something for everyone. Throughout the show Lady Bunny (who changed outfits and wigs almost 10 times) and Bianca del Rio acted as hosts, with Neil Patrick Harris and his family shooting wig canons into the audience. Neil Patrick Harris and Lena Hall also performed a medley from “Hedwig and the Angry Inch.”

Unlike DragCon, where you get to meet famous queens but don’t get to see them perform, this event was all about the performance, which is exactly what drag is all about, according to Lady Bunny. She noted that many people only experience drag through RuPaul’s Drag Race, and on the show, the only time the girls perform is when they are about to be sent home, and it lip syncing to song they don’t know well. Unlike that, Wigstock features a massive array of queens all performing at their best, doing their favorite routines in their best outfits and wigs. At the start of the show, Lady Bunny said that drag has become mainstream, but that does not mean we should stop having festivals like this, to honor and praise all the types of drag that don’t make it on television.

Wigstock has not happened for years, but with drag more popular than ever, this was a perfect time to bring it back. In a country filled with so much hate and discrimination, now is the moment to have an entire day devoted to celebrating queerness and performance. For many, the event felt historic: older queens were proud to be performing at Wigstock again and young queens were thrilled to be fulfilling their fantasy of being at the legendary event. Hopefully Wigstock will become an annual tradition once more.

review: “bernhardt/hamlet” starring the divine janet mcteer

$
0
0

The last time we heard from Theresa Redbeck she was writing for “Smash,” letting two major actresses embody and tell the story of an even more famous actress from the past, Marilyn Monroe. In a similar vein, Redbeck, in her new play commissioned by the Roundabout Theatre Company, gives Janet McTeer the opportunity to become Sarah Bernhardt.

Perhaps you don’t know who Sarah Bernhardt is, a confusion that is representative of the general problems of the play — it is often too historical, too dramaturgical, too smart. “Bernhardt/Hamlet,” currently playing at the American Airlines Theatre, tells the true story of a celebrity actress in late nineteenth century France who boldly chose to play Hamlet. In many ways, it comes across very similar to a Tom Stoppard play. In fact, while watching this piece I ironically kept thinking about “Travesties,” the Stoppard play that Roundabout produced in the same theatre this Spring.

Both plays are rooted in both literary and biographical history, and assume the audience can follow along as the throw obscure references out left and right. What makes both play ingenious, however, is that they both parallel the structure of their source text: the language of “Travesties” mimics “The Importance of Being Earnest,” Dada poetry, limericks, and political manifestos. Similarly, “Bernhardt/Hamlet” is seemingly structured on “Hamlet” and its characters, plot structure, and most noticeably, its excessive talking and lack of action.

Although the device of mirroring the text the play is based on is quite creative from a literary perspective, from a theatrical perspective it is not necessarily noticeable or convincing, unless you are very well versed in the original. To make matters worse, this type of play only works when the source text is enjoyable, like “Earnest,” but when you base a new play off of a lengthy, brooding, melancholic, overly poetic play, your are bound to bore the audience with too many “words words words.”

Throughout the play Sarah and the other characters debate Hamlet’s age, women playing male roles, the concept of authenticity, sexuality, the poster design, and excesses of Shakespeare’s use of poetry in “Hamlet” — an argument that it seems dominates every single scene. The play seems to lack structural coherence: although most of the first act is “Hamlet” rehearsals, in the second act we spend more time with “Cyrano de Bergerac” than with the Prince of Denmark (Sarah had an affair with Edmond Rostand, another historical figure you probably haven’t heard of). Ironically, although this play expects a massive amount of background knowledge from the audience, it also deviates from the historical record, moving events around to fit the dramatic action. The most upsetting structural element, however, is the fact the after over two hours of rehearsal and debate, we are never given a glimpse of Sarah’s actual performance as Hamlet.

Despite all the plays problems, there is certainly a great deal to praise to be given, almost entirely to the extraordinary Janet McTeer. In this — and in all plays she is in — it’s everyone versus her, and unsurprisingly, she wins. She commands the stage whenever she graces us with her prescience, which in this play was, thankfully, most of the time. Much like her Sarah Bernhardt, Janet McTeer has become iconic, legendary, and to use the title most frequently given to her character, divine. In late nineteenth century Paris everyone went to see whatever show Sarah Bernhardt was in, simply because they wanted to see her; over a hundred years later and we are doing the same thing, going to see plays just to be amazed at masterful acting by Janet McTeer.

One of the play’s central questions (there are too many) is not simply, can a woman play Hamlet, but why should a woman always have to play Ophelia? Are there not better options? In the strongest and most politically relevant moment of the play, Sarah goes on a rant against Roxane, the perfect embodiment of feminine virtue Rostand wrote for her to play in “Cyrano.” Roxane may be a man’s idea of perfection, or even a playwright’s, but she is certainly not the ideal for a woman, or for an actress. Sarah refuses to play the role, taking an amazingly feminist stance by arguing that playing ingenues is beneath all actresses; she says that women deserve better parts, roles that are as difficult, complex, and yes, wordy, as men.

If nothing else, Janet McTeer has here proven how true her line is: women deserve difficult roles, given them a chance and they will soar.

review: “the nap” falls flat

$
0
0

It may be early, but I am confident when I say that “The Nap” is the low point of the Broadway season. This new play by Richard Bean, directed by Daniel Sullivan, is a Manhattan Theatre Club transfer from London, where it should have stayed. “The Nap” is supposed to be a classic British farce, but it is tragically unfunny, consistently offensive, and devoid of any quality.

The main subject of the play is snooker, a British variant on pool or billiards. Here in America no one knows anything about snooker, nor will they learn much about it from watching this play. Don’t go to the show expecting to have the rules explained to you, this never happens. The one time they do mention the logistics of the game, it is in the final scene and is done in a way that makes this mysterious foreign game even more confusing. The plot of the piece concerns a protege snooker player who is forced to throw part of a championship game so gamblers can make money off of him.

Into this already bizarre mix, add an ex-drug dealer who can’t do basic math, an over-zealous agent, an actress/pole dancer/con artist/cop, a disabled trans woman gangster, a woman who sells stolen steaks out of her purse, and our central snooker player, who is a passionate vegetarian. There is no other word to describe this cast of characters than ridiculous — and not in a funny way, in a deeply annoying way. The characters are constantly making jokes about these preposterous traits, and the shtick gets old very quickly. To make matters worse, the majority of the jokes are rather offensive. In the course of the first scene alone, they managed to mock Native Americans, vegetarians/vegans, disabled people, trans people, queer people, Christians, sex workers, and Thai people — and those are just the ones I remember.

This awful first scene lasts over an hour, a staggering length for a play that totals two and half hours. Not only is this run time overly long for such a badly written and poorly plotted comedy, but the structure of the scenes is equally haphazard, with the opening scene taking up almost half the play and other scenes being mere minutes.

Perhaps the only not cringe-worthy part of the play was the two snooker scenes, where the main actor, Ben Schnetzer (no comment), faced off live against an actual snooker champion, Ahmed Aly Elsayed (who is not an actor and did not speak a single word). These scenes were clearly meant to be the climax of the play, since they included live matches that were broadcast on to a large screen so the audience could see every shot. Obviously, the potential for error here is high. Although screwing up these pivotal scenes would be on par for the production, at the performance I went to everything went smoothly — mostly because the professional snooker player does all the work, and sets up our actor, Mr. Scknetzer, to only have to hit a small number of very easy shots.

It is remarkably unclear why the playwright felt the need to include a disabled trans woman gangster in the show. The character, Waxy Bush, is missing an arm, but has a bad prosthetic that does not move, and is covered in a black rhinestoned glove — unsurprisingly they make almost as many ableist jokes about this as they do transphobic jokes about Waxy “before the operation.” But wait, it gets worse. Waxy also has a bizarre verbal tick where she messes up common phrases, such as “I never imagined this in my wettest dreams” or “I look on the bright side, I’m an optometrist.” These idiotic, poorly written excuses for word play spew out of her mouth every time she talks. The only good thing about her character is that she is played by an trans actor, Alexandra Billings. I’ll give the show points for casting a trans actor to play the trans character, but they get points for literally nothing else.

After unhappily sitting through the entire ordeal of a production, I am still utterly confused as to why Manhattan Theater Club wanted to do this production. Who does it appeal to? Who would possibly enjoy it? It is very telling that at the end of the show, not a single person stood for a standing ovation, a true sign of failure for a Broadway show today.

5 most amazing things about nyc

$
0
0

As a global cultural hub, one of the sexiest cities in the world, and a place Pride can easily call home, New York is truly the mecca for the LGBT community, and a city every gay person should add to their bucket list ASAP. Now that I have you looking for the best flight tickets for NYC, let’s go over several of the most vital gaytastic spots you need to visit, and experiences you need to have while in this great city!

A new way to cabaret

No one can put on a show quite like NYC, and if you need further proof (as well you should), head to some of the city’s famous, beloved drag shows and cabaret clubs eager to greet newcomers from all walks of life. If you’re lucky enough to crash a bachelorette party or a gay birthday, you’ll see what I’m talking about, life doesn’t get much better than New York cabaret with the local divas.

Head to Lips in the very heart of Manhattan, where you can enjoy a classy, perky performance by some of the finest drag queens you’ve ever laid eyes on, all clad in the most dazzling neon shades, sparkles, glitter and all. For a cabaret to remember, don’t miss out on what Le Scandal has on the show while you’re there – you will not be disappointed.

Awake the gay culture vulture within

Have you ever seen a collection of photos or paintings by a currently trending gay artist anywhere near your hometown? If you’re lucky to live in a queer-loving city, absolutely, but it will still pale in comparison to what NYC has to offer. A single glance at the current exhibitions of the Leslie-Lohman Museum of Gay and Lesbian Art in Soho is enough to have you in tears of joy. They will gladly show off the brightest and the boldest gay artists, even the kind of erotica all other joints would ban.

The Fringe Festival is another worthy visit in case you’re in the city, as they are famous for their gay content, from dance performances, all the way to comedy shows.

Thriving bar and foodie scene

If you’re anything like me and you enjoy a good burger and booze with a classy twist, then you’re in for a treat, because NYC is truly the perfect blend of both for the gay guy with a refined palate. They’re so eager to flaunt their LGBT love that you’ll even find a place by the name of Big Gay Ice Cream in the West Village (ain’t that just the perfect spot?), where you’ll gladly treat yourself to their massive portions of delicious menu items.

On a more upscale note, the gay bar scene has never flourished as much as it does today. One of the latest trends includes their love for queerlicious cocktails served with canapés to die for. Nowadays, you can easily find an expert mixologist in NYC serving some of the most authentic blends you’ve ever encountered – from the classic Cosmo to the inventions only your cocktail master can name.

Pick a gay-perfect stay

While you’re there, you should definitely opt for a hotel that is in the same gay vibe as the rest of the establishments you’re going to visit. A great pick is The Muse, whose devotion to the LGBT community starts with the management and staff, and includes the deals they offer for gay events like Pride.

A more boutique option is the Algonquin Hotel in Manhattan, with a perfectly intimate look and feel and all the chic NYC décor to wish for. Chances are, you’ll fall in love with the place so much, you’ll go back any time you have an excuse to do so.

Gayborhoods to explore

As vibrant and chaotic as this city may be, you’ll find yourself particularly welcome in several of its well-known hoods. It doesn’t matter where you come from, as soon as you step foot on some of these gay grounds, you’ll feel right at home. As an homage to the LGBT movement and history, you should go straight (just this once, I promise) to Greenwich Village, one of the most significant places for the liberation of all things gay.

Chelsea is another must-see choice for its many gay bars that you won’t be able to resist. From the Flaming Saddles Saloon, all the way to the Eagle, you’ll find your evenings far more eventful if you spend your time in this part of the city.

review: “the ferryman” is full of whiskey, children, and the ira

$
0
0

Broadway plays of the current generation seem to all have small casts, muse on ethical dilemmas, and run 90 minutes with no intermission. Jez Butterworth’s “The Ferryman” has cast of 22 (including a baby, a goose, and a bunny), is three acts and runs over three hours. The play is also unique in that its story is set in Ireland in 1981, and tells the tale of a very large family celebrating the harvest and dealing with the aftermath of a relative who was murdered by the Irish Republican Army.

While the cast size, run time, and setting of the play may feel new, just about everything else feels perhaps too familiar. The excessive drinking, short dance break, silent sexual tension, and family secrets are classic fare for a canonical realist drama. In many ways, the play is a merely “A Long Days’ Journey into Night,” “All My Sons,” and “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof” put together. The characters of “The Ferryman” seem lifted right out of the pages of O’Neil, Miller, and Williams: the distant hypochondriac mother, the mentally disabled neighbor, the elderly family member with visions, the forbidden sibling-in-law love, the violently patriarchal men, the rebellious sons.

Despite the play’s potentially formulaic nature and stereotypical characters, it is still quite a gripping drama. The play includes an almost never-ending exposition — it takes a while to learn who is who in this never ending Irish family of children and cousins and in-laws and older generations — but it has some pay off of emotional drama in the third act, not to mention a very sudden climax. The play is like a slow burn, a galaxy orbiting around a silence, a secret, a dead body.

This body was shot in the head and hidden in a bog, where it remained undisturbed for ten years. But when it is found, it brings up questions, tensions, and family drama with it. The tone throughout the whole piece is one of general unease, as people keep secrets, eavesdrop, avoid conversations, and of course, keep pouring more whiskey.

Although the play serves a large heap of drama, it does not feel new, nor does it justify its size or length. The pacing of the first two acts feels slow and anticipatory, leaving the audience waiting for plot events that don’t happen until the final moment of the play. Similarly, the innumerable number of family members are often one-note and interchangeable: the young ones are loud, the old ones are nostalgic, the adults are repressed.

Quinn (Paddy Considine), may be the head of the household, but it is Caitlin (Laura Donnelly) who is at the center of the drama. It is her husband’s body the shows up. She (and her son) are the outsiders in the house. Her relationship with Quinn — chaste, but the sexual tension is palpable — is the one causing problems in the household. Donnelly is without a doubt the strongest actor in the cast, and manages to carry this behemoth of a play with some skill.

At this early point in the season, “The Ferryman” seems masterful, but in a this Broadway season full of exciting new plays and upcoming revivals, it likely will not remain memorable as the season goes on. The Irish accents are not enough to make it feel any different than a standard O’Neil drama.

“The Ferryman” is directed by Sam Mendes and opened at the Bernard B. Jacobs Theatre on October 21st, 2018.


a “torch song” for today

$
0
0

On the one hand, Harvey Fierstein’s “Torch Song” can seem quite dated: it takes place from 1971 to 1982 — they use landline phones! However, what is more 2018 than a story about a gay Jewish drag queen in New York City trying to find love, hooking up with guys, struggling with a bisexual boyfriend, dealing with gay bashing, adopting a child, and fighting with his homophobic mother? In the age of same-sex marriage, Grindr, and RuPaul’s Drag Race, “Torch Song” feels more relevant than ever. After all, how different is Arnold Beckoff from Miz Cracker? The piece still works, it feels fresh and revolutionary all over again. It speaks to the gay experience powerfully and emotionally.

When this premiered in the 80s — then as a trilogy — Harvey Fierstein, also the writer, stared as Arnold; it won Tonys for Best Play and Best Actor. This time around, we are graced with Michael Urie, who despite borrowing the quintessential camp from his predecessor, has made the role entirely his own. Yes, he does the limp wrists and the accent, but it feels grounded in something personal. He is captivating, moving, and deeply enjoyable. Mr. Urie has settled into the role, and his performance has changed most since the Second Stage Off-Broadway run last Fall.

The revival, which is directed by Moises Kaufman and opened at the Helen Hayes Theater on November 1st, is a re-imagining of the piece. Mr. Fierstein has made textual cuts, transforming “Torch Song Trilogy” into “Torch Song,” a single play over three hours. Although the direction of the piece may at times seem a bit too minimal, the script edits sometimes don’t work, and the supporting cast is imperfect, none of it seems to matter because it is a joy to watch Michael Urie in this role. He is hilarious and touching, relatable and ridiculous all at the same time.

In the past year we have had revivals of “The Boys in the Band,” “Angels in America,” “Falsettos,” and now “Torch Song” has transferred to Broadway. It seems as if we are in a moment of gay revivals; something about these plays speaks to our current queer zeitgeist. But every time, the actors have to deal with the legacy of iconic performances. Without a doubt, Michael Urie lives up to legendary Harvey Fierstein and manages to surpass all expectations.

Like some of those productions, the sets by David Zinn heavily rely on neon, a trope that has become quite overdone, especially in depictions of gay New York City. But unlike those plays, something about “Torch Song” feels so intimate. There’s never more than four or five characters on stage at once, and most of the play is either monologues and intense scenes between two people.

The play goes on an emotional journey of Arnold’s life as we get to see his drag career, his romantic drama, his sex life, his parenting skills, and his tense relationship with his mother. Ma, here played by the indomitable Mercedes Ruehl, comes in and dominates the third section of the play, which is a nonstop verbal duel with Michael Urie. In the end, Ma leaves, unable to accept her son’s queerness, and we are left with Arnold, hoping he has finally found a boyfriend and a son who will love him “enough.”

Ma’s homophobia may seem old-fashioned to some, but in a world of Donald Trump, hate crimes, and trans erasure, Ma’s desire for Arnold to not make “everything about you being gay” does not feel dated. For better or for worse, “Torch Song” proves not how far we have come, but how much has stayed the same. In 2018, a play about a gay Jewish drag queen looking for love is still radical. You will start the night laughing and end the night with some tears, but it is all worth it because you will get to experience Michael Urie giving a masterful performance.

’tis the season of the lesbian at “the prom”

$
0
0

Broadway musicals are finally starting to have more representation of lesbians, from “Head Over Heels” to“The Prom,” and it is certainly something to be thankful for.

Based on the title alone, “The Prom” may seem like yet another high school show, joining the likes of “Dear Evan Hansen,” “Mean Girls,” and the upcoming “Be More Chill” (not to mention the fact that Casey Nicholaw of “Mean Girls” is also directing/choreographing this show). But don’t be fooled, this musical is quite different: it combines a high school plot of a lesbian trying to go to prom in Indiana with a hilarious group of washed up Broadway actors trying to work a cause celebe for good press after a flop.

Seemingly, the musical (book by Bob Martin and Chad Begeulin, music by Matthew Skylar, lyrics by Chad Begulin), has a lot going on: Midwestern homophobia, teenage drama, a failed Broadway musical, angry PTA, and humor galore. Instead of this feeling like too much, it feels just right. “The Prom” is not another dramatic musical about gay highschoolers nor is it another campy show about actors, but, to quote a song from the show, “something in between.” Think “Bare” meets “The Drowsy Chaperone.”

The desperate Broadway actors include two-time Tony award winner Dee Dee Allen (Beth Leavel), her leading man Barry Glickman (Brooks Ashmanskas), their “Chicago” aging chorus galpal Angie (Angie Schworer), and Julliard actor-between-gigs Trent (Christopher Sieber). After a failed show they head to Indiana to “help” — in the most narcissistic way possible, of course — the local lesbian, Emma (Caitlin Kinnunen) who has caused a town scandal by wanting to take a girl to prom.

If for nothing else, this musical is so refreshing for its focus on female teenage sexuality, especially what that means outside of the stereotypical “coming out” narrative (don’t worry, there’s one of those too, but it’s not for Emma, is for her closeted girlfriend). To get to see the aftermath of the coming out — the bullying, the parental disowning, the day to day struggles — is something new for Broadway.

This show is giving teenage girls something to look at, finally giving young lesbians the representation they have been waiting for on the Broadway stage. Yes, we’ve already had “Rent” and “Falsettos,” but having a young girl who is still working through things can certainly be meaningful to the teens out there watching.

This performance is groundbreaking in more ways than one; the cast performed at the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade and the song included the first ever lesbian kiss in the parade’s history. For all those watching, “The Prom” spread a message that being gay is ok and is it something that families can watch on TV on a holiday.

But back to the show: the songs are incredibly fun, catchy, smart, and energetic. The musical manages to perfectly balance comedy with a heartfelt discussion of some serious issues, like selflessness and sexuality. The six main characters (the actors, Emma, and her girlfriend) all give incredible performances.

Beth Leveal is herself a camp icon, and therefore plays one with such enjoyable ease. Although she can’t compete with the brilliance of her performance in “Drowsy Chaperone,” this certainly gives audiences all they could ask for. Brooks Ashmanskas gives perhaps one of the gayest performances yet, but manages also to tap into his character’s own difficulties with queerness and acceptance. Angie Schworer, the aging Fosse girl, is probably the funniest part of the show, her number “Zazz” is probably the best comedy tribute to musical theater choreography ever written.

At the center of everything (or more often, hiding stage left) is Emma, unhappy to be in the spotlight. Kinnunen plays her with a certain shyness, but not ready to be an icon, but willing to fight for her rights. Her vocals are strong and emotional; she gives the show the emotional core that it needs to hold its otherwise desperate parts together.

“The Prom” has almost as many musical theater jokes as “Something Rotten” or “The Book of Mormon” and will certainly make for an amazing night of inside jokes for frequent Broadway audience members. But what makes this musical so special is that it is not only a comedy, but is in an important piece of theater, a radically queer show that provides a voice, a face, and an anthem to young queer girls out there. This is the exact type of art we need to be making right now.

bww review: elevator repair service’s gatz is an adapted masterpiece

$
0
0

When adapting famous novels into plays, the debate-and often the source of disappointment-is choosing what to cut. Elevator Repair Service has made the boldest, and yet at the same time the most neutral of choices in their adaptation: they have staged a production of F. Scott Fitzgerald‘s “The Great Gatsby” that includes every single word of the novel. As you might expect, this makes for quite a lengthy piece of theater. The entire show runs 8 hours, with two intermissions and a dinner break, placing it among the other gargantuan plays of the past year (ANGELS IN AMERICA HARRY POTTER AND THE CURSED CHILD, or to a lesser extent THE ICEMAN COMETH and THE FERRYMAN).

While all of these are quite long and large in scope, something about GATZ feels incredibly intimate and unique. Where else can you see an entire novel, every single word, play out on a stage, let alone a novel as legendary as “The Great Gatsby”? Fitzgerald’s iconic 1925 novel is a ubiquitous part of American culture and its portrayal of the Roaring 20s still impacts our conception of the era. However, this production of GATZ is nothing like you would expect and is nothing like either of the famous film adaptations. There’s no flapper dresses, no champagne flutes, no old cars.

Instead of focusing on the visual and aesthetic glamour of “The Great Gatsby,” GATZ puts all the emphasis on the words, on Fitzgerald’s poetic prose. Sure, the dialogue is iconic-who can forget “I loved you too” or “Gatsby? What Gatsby?”-but is its Nick’s silent thoughts to himself that make the novel soar, and they are exactly what has been missing in previous adaptations.

GATZ signals to the audience right away that this is going to be more about words than visuals: the set (designed by Louisa Thompson) is a bland, outdated office. At rise, several employees enter, in modern, boring office attire (costumes by Colleen Werthmann). They silently go about their work for quite some time. One employee’s old computer won’t work and he struggles with it, continually resetting it. He eventually gives up when he finds a copy of “The Great Gatsby” on his desk and begins to read it aloud, clearly annoying some of his coworkers. Although it seems rude and unfathomable, he just keeps reading. Here it becomes apparent to the audience that he is not going to stop, that this is the show.

But then something magical happens, while he reads the first chapter, other coworkers begin to slowly transform. A woman in the office starts reading a golf magazine. A service worker takes the computer away for repairs. A female lounges on a couch. A hulking man angrily reads mail. Although our reader (Scott Shepherd), who here stands in for Nick, initially does all the dialogue himself, soon the coworkers join in, each assuming their role of Jordan the golfer (Susie Sokol), George the mechanic (Aaron Landsman), Daisy the debutante (Tory Vasquez), and Tom, her cheating husband (Pete Simpson). This transition is shockingly smooth. To help, we never fully go into a production of “The Great Gatsby;” it always clear that in at least some realm of possibility, these are all still just coworkers putting on a bit of a show. Only Shepherd reads from the book, everyone just miraculously knows their lines, they are all somewhere between an office worker and Gatsby characters.

Part of what makes this liminality clear is that the actors are not really acting as much as they would if this were a regular staged adaptation of the novel. They have the essence of their characters, but everything feels a bit more casual, a bit less dramatic; everything has an aura of an understatement. For the first few hours, this makes the major plot moments and iconic lines feel a bit underwhelming and gave a slight indication of potentially unclear direction by John Collins. In a similar vein, several major moments, instead of being high stakes and stuffed with emotion, are played for laughs, as if this whole thing is employees doing the scenes for fun instead of characters going through crises.

The comedy, however, breaks up what otherwise at times feels a bit never-ending (the dinner break was also a much need restive). In a play that runs 8 hours, it is no surprise to hear that it felt very long. The show certainly has lulls and less interesting sections, but immense praise has to be given to the expert and adept team of actors for maintaining energy for such a long performance-especially Shepherd who speaks almost constantly.

Part of what makes the play not fly by was the static nature of the design. The office environment, which is clearly important to the dramaturgy of GATZ and is brilliant in some aspects, can feel monotonous (and perhaps it is supposed to). We are never given a set change, the most dramatic thing to happen is a chaotic throwing of papers and playing cards during the party Myrtle (Laurena Allan) throws in New York. Ironically, her small gathering has more of a dramatic set change than any of Gatsby’s legendary soirees; in fact, for the first Gatsby party Nick attends, the party guests on stage (a small number, since the cast here, is only 13) spend the whole time cleaning up the paper from the previous scene, not doing the Charleston and drinking, as would be expected and as Nick describes in his narration.

At times, the dissonance between the narration and the lack of stage visuals and actions was powerful, but at other times it felt odd. The costumes contributed to this inconsistent dissonance; some actors bizarrely and randomly donned outfits mentioned in the narration (an evening gown made a brief appearance, as did Gatsby’s white linen ensemble and his famous pink suit), while other stayed in modern office attire.

Despite the length and sometimes incongruous design, everything comes together in the final act in a way that is equally unexpected and extraordinary. Shepherd (or should I say Nick?) puts down the book and does the last act from memory, an emotional and effective device. Here, our reader falls deeper and deeper into “The Great Gatsby” and the line between the office and novel becomes increasingly blurred. As he recites the final, tragically beautiful pages of the novel, all of his coworkers pack up, turn the lights off, and leave the office for the day. Maybe this was not some magical pop-up production at all, but just an employee staying at work all night reading an American classic. Shepherd here proves himself to be an astoundingly impressive actor, perfectly capturing the poetry of Fitzgerald’s prose.

In this last section, the direction for the entire piece becomes remarkably clear and deeply thoughtful, proving that GATZ is a superbly beautiful slow burn of a production. GATZ is an unmissable, one of a kind experience, a stunning, extraordinary theatrical event unlike anything else. It is probably one of the most impressive and imaginative production you will ever see on a stage, a flawless translation of Fitzgerald’s beloved novel into a new medium in a way that is at once magical and masterful.

The post bww review: elevator repair service’s gatz is an adapted masterpiece appeared first on queer voices.

review: “to kill a mockingbird” from page to stage

$
0
0

Aaron Sorkin certainty undertook a difficult task when he chose to adapt Harper Lee’s beloved novel, “To Kill a Mockingbird” into a play. Almost every school child reads this novel and so expectations were high. In an attempt to please (or should I say appease?) lovers of the book, Sorkin’s adaptation, currently playing at the Shubert Theatre, tries its best to directly replicate all the scenes and dialogue from the original.

Sorkin did, however, make some changes. Instead of the beloved Scout narrating, her brother Jem and neighbor Dill share the duties. This seems odd and unjustified, as does the choice to have the three children played by adult actors (more on that later). The other major change was some restructuring: the play does not advance chronologically, by starts at the end in a frame device, goes back to the beginning, and repeatedly jumps to the courtroom. Unlike the choices about the narrators, this works rather well. In particular, the splitting up of the courtroom scene is very effective. It is without a doubt the best scene as well as the most famous, so breaking it up allows us to enjoy it throughout the entire 2 hours and 45 minute play.

A lot about “To Kill a Mockingbird” feels hauntingly relevant: violent racism, a skewed justice system, and the terrors of patriarchy. The play is clearly trying to make a statement about how eerily similar Trump’s America of 2019 is to Maycomb, Alabama in 1934. On the other hand, there is quite a bit about “To Kill a Mockingbird” that feels dated and un-timely. Is now the moment for a story about a false rape allegation? Do we need KKK members and the n-word on stage right now? Should we be applauding a white man who covers up a crime? I’m not sure.

The larger issue here is that in this story about racism, the black characters are given very little chance to speak for themselves. Sorkin did expand the roles of Tom (the accused, played by Gbenga Akinnagbe) and Calpurnia (the maid, played by LaTanya Richardson Jackson), but it still feels like a story of a white man talking about blackness. It has some valences with “Green Book” where instead of focusing on the victimized black man, the protagonist is the heroic white savior. Atticus ends quite literally as a savior: standing on a platform offering his hand to help raise Calpurnia up to his level.

As our savior in a tan suit, Jeff Daniels impressively helms the show. The same, sadly, cannot be said of Celia Keenan-Bolger as Scout, who is bizarre, unconvincing, and one of the many actors in the production who can’t seem to master the Alabama dialect. The other adults playing children, Will Pullen as Jem and Gideon Glick as Dill are much more successful casting choices. Glick’s performance is masterful; his blend of comedy and fragility often steals the show. The rest of the cast feels a bit bland, blending into the neutral-tones of the Miriam Buether’s set and Ann Roth’s costumes, but this is most likely a byproduct of the writing. The play may have a large cast, but it is a story about Scout and Atticus and the personal journeys they go on; everyone else is just there for filler sadly.

This play has all the stylistic markers of a Barlett Sher production: a big cast, smooth but large-scale set changes, and an attempt at political relevancy. Sometimes his updates are extraordinary, like his “King and I” in 2015, but at other times they seem minimal at best, like the still-running “My Fair Lady.”

“To Kill a Mockingbird” was radical when it was written. But now? Not so much. Despite this, the play has a sense of magnanimity that makes it absolutely worth seeing.

The post review: “to kill a mockingbird” from page to stage appeared first on queer voices.

“the scarlet pimpernel” for the lincoln center crowd

$
0
0

It was certainly a surprise when Manhattan Concert Productions announced it would be staging a one-night only concert production of “The Scarlet Pimpernel” at Lincoln Center. This musical has mostly lived in the forgotten footnotes of Broadway history: Frank Wildhorn’s French Revolutionary romp went through two Broadway theatres, several recordings, and four revisions (five if you count this concert, which still made changes and does not exactly reflect any of the “official” versions). Despite its enigmatic position, somehow it was given a massive concert at Lincoln Center with a star-studded cast, a full orchestra, and a chorus of over 200 singers.

A bit of self-disclosure: I was in a misbegotten high school production of “The Scarlet Pimpernel,” which has become a bit of a running joke, since everyone I mention this fact to either dislikes the show or has never even heard of it. Thus, I did not know what to expect for this elite concert. To my surprise, the David Geffen Hall (usually home to the New York Philharmonic) was full to the brim with audience members in suits and gowns. After every song they applauded for such a long time the actors on the stage had to hold before starting the next scene.

Perhaps “The Scarlet Pimpernel” has never had such an enthusiastic and devoted audience. This musical, which clearly has some sort of niche fandom, certainly would not survive a Broadway revival, but this one-night only concert was the perfect venue to give the mob of devotees exactly what they wanted.

By no measure is “The Scarlet Pimpernel” a well-crafted musical. It is one of the most bizarre shows tonally: it jumps from the Comedie-Francais to the mob at the guillotine to a wedding to counter-revolutionaries dressed in pastels at a masked ball to a duel. We have romance, melodrama, violence, blackmail, metatheatricality, comedy, a secret society, and more than a dash of French Revolutionary history (Robespierre even makes a cameo).

The director of this concert, Gabriel Barre, seemingly made no effort to give this strange piece a coherent tone. The show began quite ominously and was leaning into the possible political relevancy of the mob, but then as the evening wore on any vestige of seriousness was thrown out the window and a duel to the death was swapped out for a tap dance battle (possibly the oddest moment of the concert).

The large chorus was also used to odd effect, especially since this musical’s ensemble is only in a few songs. Although they made an incredibly effective mob for the guillotine sequences, elsewhere their presence was unnecessary, superfluous, and at times even ridiculous, especially since Wildhorn’s ensemble vocal arrangements are often quite simple.

Despite the weak and sometimes incoherent direction, the concert still made for a very enjoyable evening, especially for the crowd of adoring “Scarlet Pimpernel” fans — who apparently used to refer to themselves as “the League” and made a “Be More Chill”-style rally to get to show to Broadway for renewed incarnations after its initial failure. The cast was undeniably talented, and if for no other reason, this concert was a perfect excuse to hear Laura Osnes and Tony Yazbeck perform, flanked by an impressive and unexpected cast featuring Corey Cott, Alex Newell, Drew Gheling, and more.

Although she was a bit miscast, Laura Osnes managed to surprise me and deliver a formidable Marguerite St. Just. This former Cinderella does not have the sensuous, fiery intensity usually associated with the role, but her superlative vocals and commanding stage presence make up for any other lack. Tony Yazbeck was a practically flawless Percy Blakeney: foppish, flippant, hilarious, conflicted, and passionate. Although he ignored any legitimate seriousness and exclusively embraced the comedy of the role, it worked quite well and the audience adored him for it.

The same level of praise (or any level or praise) cannot be given to the usually stupendous Norm Lewis, who here played the French Revolutionary villain, Citizen Chauvelin. Although some of the actors held scripts briefly during the dialogue scenes, Norm Lewis held his for the entirety of the show and and seemed completely unfamiliar with the character, his songs, his lines, his blocking, his costars, and the show as a whole. He came off as disengaged, under-rehearsed, and unenthused.

Overall the soloists performed in a very classical style, with massive vibrato that made the entire endeavor feel more like an opera than a musical. But maybe this is for the best, maybe “The Scarlet Pimpernel” can only work as an over-the-top, nowhere-near-realism opera. The main accusation against Wildhorn’s musical style is that is it too pop-influenced, but in this formal setting, the musical felt more grand and operatic than ever.

Though the musical may be a bit of a mess, some of the casting was not ideal, and the evening was plagued with microphone and sound balance issues (a great deal of entrance lines could not be heard and soloists often struggled to be heard over the orchestra and massive chorus), the concert overall felt like a success, especially for the audience. Much like the die-hard fans who give a standing ovation when the dame walks down the stairs in “Hello Dolly,” this audience was clearly just so ecstatic to see “The Scarlet Pimpernel,” loving it despite its many, many flaws.

The post “the scarlet pimpernel” for the lincoln center crowd appeared first on queer voices.

Viewing all 93 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images