"Cyrano" at Aurora Theatre Company

 

Aurora Theatre Company production photo

There are always risks with doing classic plays. With a play like Edmond Rostand's Cyrano de Bergerac, there have been many translations, many interpretations, and many, many stars playing the title role. It's very well known, and audiences have expectations.

On the other hand, some classics don't age well, so there is a temptation to update them, or at least tweak some aspects to make them a little more appealing to modern sensibility. That's the case here, where Aurora Artistic Director Josh Costello decided to do his own adaptation of Rostand's play, called just Cyrano so we know it's not the original.

The Play

You know this story. I'm not going to try to summarize. Suffice it to say that we know about the gallant, poetic soldier and swordsman with the large, unattractive nose who lends his gift for words to the handsome but dull-witted Christian, helping him win the heart of Roxane, the woman they both love.

The problem with this plot line, in modern terms, is that Roxane is usually portrayed as rather shallow and clueless, falling in love with the pretty Christian instead of the witty, devoted Cyrano. Costello's adaptation attempts to give Roxane more agency, a bit more with and perception, so she's less the empty vessel the men compete over and more of a self-guided woman who on some level steers her own life.

The other big change in this adaptation is that Costello has cut the cast down to only five characters: the aforementioned Cyrano, Roxane, and Christian, plus another soldier, Cyrano's friend Le Bret, and Count de Guiche, a nobleman who has power over the Guards in which all the soldiers serve and who also has designs on the lovely Roxane.

The difficulty with that change is that it changes the overall dynamics of the story. Rostand's story is centrally about Cyrano's relationship with the world: he's a brilliant swordsman and wit, beloved by his fellow Guardsmen, but generally shunned and belittled by the rest of society because of his appearance. But cutting down the cast means there is only one character standing in opposition to Cyrano, and that's de Guiche. That's a lot to put on one character, and it causes some problems of its own.

The Production

As usual, Aurora uses a minimal but high-quality set (designed by Carlos Aceves) and maximizes the exposure to the audience on its intimate 3/4 thrust stage. That mostly works well here, though the size of the stage rather limits the swashbuckling that is often a signature of productions of Cyrano de Bergerac. That facilitates the small cast, of course, but the small cast also limits the story. We don't get to see what a polarizing figure Cyrano is, loved by his friends and loathed by his enemies, purely because there aren't enough of either here for us to see that.

A second issue in the performance we saw is that Cyrano's famed nose just wasn't very large--not nearly as long as the one in the photo above. Although Cyrano (William Thomas Hodgson) wore a prosthetic nose, it was more bulbous and not so long. That might have been workable, but for the fact that this nose wasn't really noticeably larger than the unaugmented noses of Christian (Steven Flores) or de Guiche (Ron Campbell, pictured above with Hodgson). If Cyrano's nose isn't absurdly large, pretty much the entire plot just fizzles.

My third issue is Count de Guiche. One of the key opening scenes in Rostand's play has Cyrano taunted by a drunken, witless fool, and Cyrano challenges him with his sword, then composes an extemporaneous ballad while they fight, ending with a touch. It's brilliant theater, and a classic scene. Unfortunately, the only foil available to Cyrano in this adaptation is de Guiche, who gets rendered as clownishly foolish, which is not a stance that holds up in his later role, trying to seduce Roxane or commanding the troops in battle.

And finally, and most critically, by upgrading Roxane to be witty and self-aware, this adaptation kneecaps the tragic ending of the story. Rostand's concluding scene ends with Roxane suddenly realizing, years later, that it was Cyrano all along who loved her and wrote all of Christian's beautiful love letters. In this version, when she tells us that she knew it all along, we no longer have a tragedy (except for Cyrano, I guess, who has been strung along for no reason after Christian's death), but really just a bad romantic comedy or something, where the lovers not only never get together, but fail to do so for really bad reasons.

The Bottom Line

I really wanted to like this play, because I love Cyrano de Bergerac and its brilliant language and wit. I appreciate the effort to make the story a bit kinder to its one real female character, but sadly, this attempt to do that makes the story both uninteresting and dull. Where we used to have only Cyrano's pride standing in the way of his love for Roxane, now we have Roxane apparently just holding him off, even though she knows he loves her. And instead of de Guiche being a worthy foe, he's been turned into a witless clown, so Cyrano has no capable foil in the story.

I feel like this adaptation wastes the talents of some quite good performers. Adrian Roberts is quite wonderful as Le Bret, and Campbell does a lot with his role as de Guiche, in spite of the incoherence of the script in that regard. Leontyne Mbele-Mbong is a fine Roxane, if only her role made sense.

This feels like an adaptation that tried to do too many things, and didn't quite manage to make any of them work. I suspect that if they had workshopped this adaptation instead of sending it straight to their main stage, they would have discovered some of these failings soon enough to deal with them. Instead, they have a remarkably unappealing version of Cyrano.

You can still catch the play at Aurora through May 7th, if that appeals to you. I wouldn't bother.

"A Distinct Society" at TheatreWorks Silicon Valley

 

TheatreWorks production photo by Michaela Vatcheva

We rarely venture down to Silicon Valley for plays, but now and then something comes to TheatreWorks that makes us think it's worth the trek. Friends wanted to see this play, so we joined them on a midweek evening. It's the world premiere of a play that's been developed through TheatreWorks' new play program, A Distinct Society by Kareem Fahmy.

I will note that TheatreWorks uses two different stages for their shows, and it's sometimes confusing to figure out which one you should go to. As a result, we had dinner in Palo Alto, then had to run to Mountain View to see the show. Partly our fault, but TheatreWorks could make it clearer on their website, particularly the mobile version.

Anyway...

The Play

Straddling a border is a traditional dramatic trope, and this is no exception. The Haskell Free Library and Opera House is a real place, with it's front door in Vermont but part of the building extending across the meandering U.S.-Canada border into Quebec. Thus we have the set-up for a play about borders and immigration, inspired by the Trump administration's "Muslim ban" that prohibited citizens of certain specified nations (notably Iran) from entering the U.S. for a time.

So we have a remote, quiet, American library run by a Quebecois librarian that sits cheek-by-jowl next to a U.S. Border Patrol office. One of the border patrol officers, Bruce, visits the library frequently. Partly because he is bored, and partly because he has a crush on Manon, the librarian. Meanwhile, Internet rumors indicate that prohibited citizens can take advantage of the "no man's land" aspect of the library to clandestinely meet with relatives in the U.S. Such would be the plan for an Iranian doctor, Peyman, and his U.S.-based medical student daughter, Shirin.

The fifth character in the play is Declan, an Irish teenager whose parents brought him to Quebec, where he utterly fails to fit into Quebecois society. So he spends a lot of time in the Haskell Library, reading graphic novels, particularly about the Green Lantern.

Things heat up as Bruce has to crack down on the informal meetings, per U.S. law, while everyone tries to negotiate a path that will work for all the parties. Conflict ensues.

The Production

TheatreWorks must have a pretty big budget, as their sets (at least in the Montain View theater) are always impressive. Here the Haskell Library (complete with a "border line" down the middle of the floor) is impressively rendered. Nice design by Jo Winiarski there--it definitely says "library" without having too many shelves of books interfering with the flow. The casting is strong, with local stalwart Carrie Paff as Manon and suddenly-everywhere Kenny Scott as Bruce. Scott is getting stronger with each show I see him in lately, giving broader, deeper portrayals. There's a lot going on in Bruce's world, and we see how that's affecting him.

The real breakthrough, acting-wise, is Daniel Allitt as Declan, making his professional acting debut. Although a recent college graduate, he was utterly convincing as a nerdy, bullied, rebellious teen. I look forward to seeing more of this newcomer!

The Bottom Line

There's a lot to like here, but the topic doesn't seem very timely at the moment. It's been over six years since the Trump ban went into effect, and the debates over border control seem to have moved on. Still, there are relevant issues about borders. cultures, and such. Ultimately, I think the play is trying to do too much. The parallels between the U.S. Muslim ban and Quebecois separatists are interesting (and the source of the play's title), but when we then add the personal stories of all five characters and the background information on the Haskell library, it becomes a bit much for a play that's currently less than 100 minutes.

I suspect future iterations of the play will do well either to edit some of the material down, or perhaps expand on the content so it's more fully fleshed out. That would make for a more satisfying play overall. Still, for a new play, this wasn't bad.

The run ended April 30, so if you want to see this, it will have to be a different production. This one was pretty good, all things considered.

"Mondragola" at Central Works

 

Central Works production photo by Robbie Sweeny

Plays at Central Works are always kind of hit-and-miss. For over thirty years, they have been producing only world-premiere plays, Mondragola being their 70th, written by founder and company co-director Gary Graves and directed by fellow founder and co-director Jan Zvaifler. I'm going to say up front that this is not the best work by the company, by a long shot.

The Play

At a scant 65 minutes, the play seems pretty minimal, considering all it's trying to accomplish. In 1522, playwright Niccolo Machiavelli (yes, that guy) is in Florence, delivering a play to be performed before Cardinal Medici. The play is a silly farce called "La Mondragola", which means "the mandrake root", a supposed aphrodisiac. Although they spend a fair amount of the start of the show explaining this little play, neither the play nor its subject matter ends up being important to the plot of Graves' play, which seems odd.

Mostly what we get is a lot of fussing over the fact that the hired actors have run off with their fees, so there is no one to perform, so Battista, the guy who hired them, Luigi, the loopy guy who seems to have no actual job, and Zenobia, whose presence never makes any sense, will somehow learn and perform the play in one day.

All of this is merely a front for political machinations (hey, it's Machiavelli, after all) by Battista and Zenobia. Given some more time and attention to the writing, I think this premise could perhaps have turned into a decent play, but this isn't it. It definitely feels like it wasn't thought through, and then wasn't very thoroughly written.

The Performance

Given that they don't have much to work with in the script, the actors try to pull something together, but there is really no depth here, and they mostly end up kind of flailing. I wish there were some ray of hope I could glean from this, but really, just no.

The Bottom Line

I'm not sure what they were thinking here. I've seen much better work from all the people involved here: Graves, Zveifler, and some of the actors. I have to believe that something went wrong in the process, and they were committed to putting this on stage. But really, it wasn't ready, and wasn't up to the standards I expect from Central Works.

The production has finished its run, so this mostly serves to remind me what I saw here. Overall, a forgettable effort, and I hope it's just a one-time glitch in the Central Works story.

"Poor Yella Rednecks at ACT

 

ACT production photo by Kevin Berne

Here's a play that we were supposed to see in Ashland a few years ago, but it was canceled by COVID. Having enjoyed its predecessor, Vietgone, both in Ashland and at ACT, we were looking forward to seeing this, eventually. The original play was really powerful, and as I noted at the end of my Ashland post on it,

It made me think about things I thought I understood in a different way, from a different perspective, and that's what theater is for.

Pretty heady stuff, and a pretty high bar. So let's see what comes next!

The Play

Following our characters from the previous play, now seven years later, somewhat settled in Arkansas, this play has a more narrow focus that the original. This is the story of a family trying to come to grips with what it means to be Vietnamese in America, when the Vietnam they came from really doesn't exist, and how do we pass along a story like that when maybe we're not so proud of it all.

So this is a much smaller show in scope than its precursor. This is playwright Qui Nguyen trying to get to the heart of the story of his parents (and grandmother) after the fact, uncovering details he was unaware of as a child. Interestingly, his childhood avatar, "Little Man", is represented by a puppet. Taken at face value, I guess that tells us a lot of what Nguyen thinks of his role in the family, but I suppose it's also a way to keep from having an actual child in the cast, when the rest of the characters are pretty foul-mouthed and amorous.

The other sort of interesting feature is the way various characters just burst out into rap. I'm not quite sure what to make of that. Rap was not a terribly common feature of Arkansas, circa 1981, so I'm still not quite sure what I'm supposed to take away from this.

The Performance

On the whole I thought the production was well done. The acting is a bit uneven, but nothing terrible. The set design is pretty simple, with a raised box representing the family's apartment and a rotating portion that serves numerous functions. The turntable is a bit of a distraction, but otherwise Tanya Orellana's set works well.

Jomar Tagatac (Playwright, many other roles) is seemingly omnipresent in Bay Area theater these days. He's good and versatile, and that stands him in good stead here, as he has to switch between numerous small roles, as well as being the playwright's adult avatar. The other actor who particularly stands out is Will Dao, in part because he manages to bring the wooden puppet of Little Man to a remarkable degree of life. I'm not a fan of puppets in plays, but Dao manages to infuse the jointed puppet with nuanced gestures and apparent feelings, backed up by nice vocal work. Since I'm told he actually has no real training in puppetry, this is a notable achievement!

I will note that although I didn't find much meaning in the rap numbers that kept appearing in the show, they did seem to rev up a portion of the audience, who reacted quite favorably, hooting and cheering to some of them. So maybe it's just me.

I'll add one other note, which is that for a newly-renovated theater, the Strand is really quite awkward to navigate, and the seats are not comfortable. I used to really look forward to going to this stage, as it was convenient to my work and shiny and new. But the narrow corridor, hard seats, and strangely-located restrooms make the whole experience rather less pleasant that it ought to be. That's disappointing.

The Bottom Line

Given that I'd had several years to look forward to this show, I had built up fairly high expectations. Overall, I don't think the play itself is nearly as strong (or as much fun) as the original Vietgone, though that was a pretty high bar. I read in the program that there is a third installment of this saga in the works, so maybe this is just the traditional let-down in the second volume of a trilogy. I hope that's the case. Nguyen has a clever voice, and I hope he'll find a strong ending to this series.

I can't say I'd go out of my way to see it again, but on the whole I guess it was worthwhile. The show runs through May 7 at ACT's Strand Theater, so there are still chances to catch it.

Reading: "Thirty-Six" at Shotgun Players

 I've been a big fan (and sponsor) of Shotgun's Champagne Staged Reading Series for many years now, and while a few of the readings have disappointed for one reason or another, they generally pull off something pretty special.

In this case, I had a chance to read the script for Leah Nanako Winkler's Thirty-Six a few weeks ago when I had some time on my hands. It's a rather amazing piece, but I have to say that I had doubts about how it would work as a staged reading. I mean, there would be challenges with staging it fully as a play, but in a staged, script-in-hand reading, it seemed almost impossible.

I've seen a couple of Winkler's plays before, and enjoyed them. Ferocious Lotus did a production of Two Mile Hollow a few years ago, and somewhere I saw a version of Hot Asian Doctor Husband, but I don't have blog posts to document either one; alas. In any case, this play steps out of the Asian-American milieu that I associate with Winkler's earlier plays, and into some very interesting territory.

The Play

The name of the play derives from a list of 36 questions published by the New York Times several years ago, ostensibly designed to improve intimacy and even lead to love between couples. In this play, Winkler has one of the characters, David, reading off the questions from his phone to Jenny, his Tinder date who has no interest in the questions (or intimacy, beyond the immediate hook-up). As David persists, we eventually get a lot of insights into both of the characters and the world they inhabit.

Part of the staging difficulty revolves around the whole Tinder hook-up thing, because the script contains a lot of rather graphic stage directions around the couple having sex. And while modern theater certainly wouldn't shy away from something like that, I found it difficult to imagine how one would stage that for a reading.

But the script manages to steer around the trite dialog opportunities, or at least faces them head-on and self-consciously. The characters realize the situation they are in, and acknowledge when they are and aren't following the expected path.

The Reading

I should not have doubted. Director Michelle Talgarow staged the reading very cleverly, with the two characters seated at tables on opposite sides of the stage. They interact, but they never actually approach each other physically. And upstage center sits a third character, called "The Mechanic" who reads the extensive stage directions to great humorous effect, as well as reciting the thirty-six questions when those come into play. It was a very effective way of defusing what could have been very tricky logistical issues with staging the scenes as a "straight" reading.

I should add that the audience for this reading was very lively and interactive: they were into the show from the start, and clearly that made the endeavor more fun for everyone. I can't imagine how the reading would have played out if the audience had sat there passively, instead of laughing, cheering, hooting, etc. 

The actors were terrific, of course. Lauren Garcia (Jenny) and Soren Santos (David) really nailed the roles and managed to interact with each other from across the stage in ways that were quite wonderful. Nic Feliciano as the Mechanic was delightful, with wonderful timing and expression for the stage directions. That definitely made the whole thing work.

And I would be remiss not to acknowledge the Intimacy Director, Natalie Greene. One might think that in a reading where the actors don't even come near one another, intimacy direction would be pointless, but in fact, I think it was the opposite. The actors managed to create or simulate intimacy in a very effective way that was safe and respectful (and funny!), and I suspect the attention of an experienced intimacy director contributed to that.

And lastly I will add that it was not lost on me that this was all happening on the set of Shotgun's current mainstage production, The Triumph of Love, designed by Malcolm Rodgers. Having the characters deployed across a simulated, Classical-style, 18th-Century garden added a rather ironic romanticism to what is not a traditionally romantic play. That was a nice touch.

The Bottom Line

I like this play. I have no idea how it would play out in a full staging, but I think it would be fun to see. Meanwhile, the staged reading seems to have been a huge success, at least judging by the audience reaction on opening night! Sadly, as is always the case with these things, there were only two nights, and they are past now. So you'll probably need to wait to see whether Shotgun or someone else locally stages the play. I will certainly go see it when that happens!

"Sweat" at Center Rep

Center Rep production photo by Kevin Berne

 I feel like I never know what I'm going to get at Center Rep. I've seen some really good shows there, and then some others that feel much more like community theater productions. So I can't say I pay much attention to their offerings most of the time.

But this time it was a combination of a play I really liked several years ago at Ashland (pre-blogging, sorry!) and a couple of my friends being in the cast. So we had to go check it out.

The Play

I mentioned playwright Lynn Nottage in my recent write-up of her recent play, Clyde's. She's a great writer, and it was my first viewing of this play that really made me believe that. All the characters are quite richly developed and genuinely interesting. The situation is, too. The play takes place mostly in the year 2000, when things are looking pretty rosy unless you happen to live in the industrial northeast, such as Reading, PA, where Sweat is set. There it's a matter of working-class people trying to hold on to what they've had, but it's tough with NAFTA and similar policies.

Sweat takes place in a bar in Reading, where workers from a nearby steel plant come to blow off steam. Even the bartender is a former plant employee. Times are pretty good, and both Cynthia and Tracey are angling for a promotion. Their sons, Chris and Jason, are lifelong buddies who also work at the same plant. Things are pretty friendly until one of the women actually does get promoted, which leads to some friction, and then bad news at the plant causes things to fray even further. It becomes clear just how close everyone is to the edge, as tensions break through the facade of camaraderie and reveal simmering resentments and prejudices.

It's a clever story, very real-feeling, and bolstered with sound clips from contemporary politics and news. It was totally deserving of the Pulitzer Prize for Drama it won in 2017 (Nottage's second).

The Production

Luckily, this was one of Center Rep's better efforts. From top to bottom, it's a first-class production: great cast, design, and direction. The set is very nicely designed by Kelly James Tighe, and director Elizabeth Carter keeps all of the excellent actors on the same page to great effect. The performances are almost uniformly excellent, with particular kudos to Cathleen Riddley (Cynthia) and Lisa Anne Porter (Tracey), who really nail the friend/rival aspect of the relationship, with Porter particularly nuanced and relatable in a tough role. Eddie Ewell (Chris) and Adam KuveNiemann (Jason) also bring it home for the younger generation, doing a great job of portraying the lifelong friends who can't quite figure out why the world isn't turning out for them they way they expected, and how that impacts their friendship. And Robert Parsons is pitch-perfect in his portrayal of Stan the bartender, wisely observing from the sidelines after being disabled on the job after 28 years on the floor at the steel plant.

I could go on, but I think you get the point: this is a top-notch production all around.

The Bottom Line

My only issues with the production are really just nitpicking, and it doesn't deserve that. Even with some small things, the overall production was amazingly good. I wish I could wholeheartedly recommend that you go see it, but unfortunately we saw the closing performance, so it's done.

I will say that Sweat remains as powerful as when I first saw it at OSF in 2015. I believe there have been changes to the script since then (or certainly, there are aspects of it that I don't recall from that viewing), but it's very, very good. The writing is incredible, and the performance here was just terrific.

I will be paying closer attention to Center Rep henceforth. If they keep attracting this level of talent and put on shows this solid, it has a chance to be a much bigger part of the bay area theater scene, which is a good thing, given the struggles of some of the other, more established houses of late.

"Is God Is" at Oakland Theater Project

 

OTP production photo by Ben Krantz

We almost missed this show because we were out of the country, but friends convinced us to squeeze it into our schedule, and that's a good thing. It's a very interesting, intense play, and it features som really strong actors.

The Play

This is the Bay Area premiere of a show that has done well elsewhere, including Off Broadway and London's West End, so this is kind of a big deal for little Oakland Theater Project and their very intimate performance space. Aleshea Harris's script portrays twins, Racine and Anaia, who were badly burned and scarred as small children by a fire that killed their mother. Or so they thought, because the play opens with Racine revealing that she's had a letter from their mother, who is alive but dying, and wishes to see her daughters. So they hit the road to see her, learn the story of the fire, and receive a mission to seek vengeance on their father.

The play then follows them as they track down the father (including his new family) and come to grips with whether and how they can fulfill the quest given by their mother. The twins each have their own issues to deal with: Anaia is the more visibly scarred, as her face was terribly burned, making her more reclusive. Racine's injuries are to her back, shoulder, and arm, so it's easier for her to hide them. But she also has a much more aggressive outlook, so the two twins definitely don't see the world and their paths the same way.

It's an interesting and often intense script that involves questions about how and whether one can take control of one's life and its narrative, to shat degree one owes any allegiance to a parent who has been entirely absent from one's life, and to what lengths one will go to reach vengeance, and whether revenge can bring peace.

The Production

As noted earlier, OTP's performance space is tiny. I think it has about 60 seats, but it's basically a black box theater built in a small commercial garage. They do some pretty cool things with the space, but for this show in particular, set designer Karla Hargrave has created a backstage area, so the actual stage is quite small and surrounded on three sides by seats. So the show is very much in your face. There is no avoiding the scars on the twins and their mother, and any violent actions are right there. Director William Hodgson takes advantage of that to maximize the impact of the action scenes, but there are also a lot of tense moments between actions, and you can just see the thoughts behind the faces as the expressions change and characters wrestle with choices.

Particularly outstanding in the cast are the twins, played by two really outstanding local actors, Rolanda D. Bell (Anaia) and Jamella Cross (Racine). I've seen Bell in three very different roles over the last year, and she's been terrific in all three--very impressive range. Anthony Rollins-Mullins (Scotch/Man) is also quite impressive, particularly as "Man".

The Bottom Line

I thought the show was very powerful and intense. A friend with us who had seen the show previously in New York felt it was less effective in the up-close setting than it had been on a traditional stage. I can't speak to that, but I thought it was extremely effective here.

I don't really have a lot to add, since I can't get too specific about things without spoiling the show. But it was well worth seeing, both for the play and for some really good performances. The show runs through April 23rd, so there are still chances to catch it, and I would advise doing so if you can.

"The Triumph of Love" at Shotgun Players

Shotgun Players production photo by Ben Krantz

 I wasn't sure what to think about this play going in. On one hand, Shotgun Artistic Director Patrick Dooley is very excited to be directing it, a friend tells me it's his favorite 18th-Century play, and when I read it, I was impressed with a lot of the word play, which is impressive for a translated work. On the other hand, I didn't feel like the play itself had a lot of substance. But it seemed like it ought to be fun, at least.

The Play

Pierre de Marivaux's script, translated by Stephen Wadsworth, is nothing if not complex. One might even call it convoluted. Princess Leonide, whose grandfather usurped the throne, has located the rightful heir to the throne, Agis, who is being raised and educated secretly by a reclusive philosopher, Hermocrate, and his equally reclusive sister, Leontine. Leonide decides to disguise herself (and her maid, Corine) as a man to gain access to Hermocrate's estate and get close to Agis. Things get complicated when Leonide falls in love with Agis from a distance, then decides to seduce both Hermocrate and Leontine to be allowed to stay. Add in Hermocrate's comical servants, Harlequin and Dimas, and there is much deception and co-option going on.

As love stories go, this one isn't terribly convincing--the whole thing takes place over a period of less than two days. But if you jut kind of go with the flow and enjoy the twists and turns and puns and malapropisms, it's a pretty fun ride.

The Production

As usual, Shotgun puts together a solid cast. Veronica Renner as Leonide has to carry a lot of the show, as that character (in one guise or another) is in nearly every scene, fast-talking and manipulating virtually everyone with layer upon layer of deception and misdirection. She handles it well, but at times she seems to lose her way, as she's so busy manipulating others that we kind of lose sight of the point of the story and who she really is.

The supporting cast is good. David Boyll and Mary Ann Rodgers, as Hermocrate and Leontine respectively, make good, stoic foils for Leonide's inventions. The servants are quite good, notably Jamin Jollo as the masked, acrobatic Harlequin and Wayne Wong as the tongue-twisting Dimas. The whole play takes place in Hermocrate's garden, designed beautifully by Malcolm Rodgers, with on-stage seats that let the actors interact a bit with the audience to good comic effect. All in all, it's a pleasing and fun performance.

The Bottom Line

I liked it. I don't love it, but I appreciate that it's a complex and difficult piece that sort of hints at having more depth to the story than is obvious at first glance. But ultimately it kind of reminds me of how my mother described her least-favorite Shakespearean comedy, which she noted was extremely aptly named: Much Ado About Nothing. Here, too, there is a great deal of convoluted plotting, and that's fun to watch and unravel, but ultimately that's in service of a fairly minor plot goal.

Still, it's a fun play and the performances are good. It's worth seeing, and it has been extended to run through April 30th.