"Summer, 1976" at Manhattan Theatre Club

MTC production photo by Jeremy Daniel

This show has gotten a fair amount of buzz from critics and audiences, in part because (hey, it's Broadway) it has star power (Laura Linney is half the cast). I didn't know much about it, but we chose to go because of all the buzz. Also, it's written by David Auburn, whose Pulitzer-winning play Proof is a favorite of mine. So we give it a chance.

The Play

Two women met sort of by chance in the summer of 1976. Diana, an erudite artist, college instructor, and single mother, and Alice, a hippie married to a graduate student, meet because of their children. Both mothers are part of a babysitting co-operative (devised by Alice's economist husband; this is a much bigger plot point than it ought to be), and though they ostensibly have little in common, they come to spend a lot of time together because their daughters become friends.

The play takes the form of reminiscences by both women, who are initially sitting at opposite ends of a large table. It's like they're looking back over coffee or something, but not quite, and frankly they don't interact all that much. It's generally one woman telling a story, then the other amending, adding, or contradicting. Ultimately, neither character serves as a very reliable narrator.

What we basically have is a story about two women, neither of whom is terribly happy with her lot in life in 1976, sharing some time together, then drifting apart. The do cross paths again later, but not in the way we see initially on stage, so the chronology of the whole thing is a bit unclear.

The Production

Under the direction of Daniel Sullivan, the production is pretty clean and simple: two women sitting at a table, telling stories of their shared past. The women seem to be doing this in the early 2000s, so roughly 25 years after the initial meeting and friendship. Unfortunately, neither actor seems particularly into their role. Though the show has been running for a while, each of the actors stumbled on some of their lines, and both sort of declaimed their lines in an odd style rather than just speaking as characters. Their respective affectations didn't really seem appropriate, and just became annoying.

Linney portrays the aloof, unhappy artist Diana, who seems not terribly pleased with anything in her life, hiding behind an arrogant intellectual facade that masks a lack of real achievements. Her obvious attraction to Alice goes nowhere, and apparently mars the ensuing years. Unfortunately, a story of her inability to finish anything (her degree, her art, her relationship with Alice) isn't a very satisfying story for us, either. 

And Alice (Jessica Hecht) seems untethered to anything, whether because she's a dope-smoking hippie kid or just a ditzy flake. She seems to exist mostly as a foil for Diana, but doesn't offer much. And Hecht does some rather bizarre things with her voice that make little sense in the context of the play. I have no clue what that was meant to mean.

The Bottom Line

It was kind of dull and just OK. Not a satisfying story, no great theatrical moments, just brilliant performances. Just a rather uninteresting story, which seemed like a waste of some very experienced actors. It's not awful, but just not very interesting, either. So I can't say I'd recommend it. It runs for a while longer at the Samuel J. Friedman Theatre, but really, there are much better shows out there right now. Don't bother.

"Fat Ham" at Roundabout

Roundabout production photo by Joan Marcus

I've been looking forward to this one. I've been interested in James Ijames's work since seeing Kill Move Paradise several years ago, and since Fat Ham is meant to be a riff on Hamlet, I thought it ought to be a good time.

The Play

This is, in many ways, Hamlet, but set in the American South sometime in the last half century or so. The central character, Juicy, is working with his friend Tio set up the back yard for a wedding reception. Juicy's father, Pap, died in prison only a few days ago, but his mother, Tedra, has suddenly married Pap's brother, Rev. Rev has also taken over the family BBQ business. The other guest for the wedding reception are the loquatious Rabby and her grown children, Opal and Larry.

Of course, Pap's ghost appears (first to Tio, then to Juicy), revealing that his murder was set up by Rev, and that Juicy must avenge him by killing Rev, smoking the body and eating the meat. Needless to say, Juicy has reservations about all that. Next we learn that Tedra and Rev have siphoned off the money that Juicy was using to pay for his online college studies in Human Resources to pay for the wedding and some renovations on their house.

So Juicy has plenty of motivation to get rid of Rev, but he's still not terribly inclined to do so. We learn a fair amount about his long-time friendships with Tio and Opal and Larry while Tedra and Rev show off their home improvements and such. There are nods to Hamlet throughout, which is fun, and also provides some guideposts to where Ijames is both following and varying the plot of Shakespeare's play.

Overall I found it very cleverly written.

The Production

The whole play is set in the back yard of Tedra's house, with a good-sized porch dominated by a big BBQ smoker. The lawn around it has various accoutrements for a party, and big sliding doors lead into the house. It's pretty simple, but evocative. Marcel Spears is really good as Juicy, bright but brooding, and definitely in control of his faculties. Nikki Crawford (Tedra) and Billy Eugene Jones (Pap/Rev) play way over the top, in ways that manage to be both goofy and menacing at the same time. Add in the incessant babbling of Rabby (a wonderful Benja Kay Thomas), and the older generation is clearly the source of everyone's issues. Meanwhile, the taciturn Marine Larry (Calvin Leon Smith), the sullen teen Opal (Adrianna Mitchell), and the loose, stoned, inappropriate Tio (Chris Herbie Holland) provide the grounding that Juicy really needs.

The whole production under the direction of Saheem Ali (who directed Goddess at Berkeley Rep last year) does a great job of balancing the familiar threads of Hamlet with enough surprises and twists to keep us on our toes and make sure we understand where Ijames is taking us with his retelling. By making the ghost scenes comical and putting more emphasis on Juicy's relationships with his younger peers (especially Larry), /Fat Ham/ explores story lines that many recognize in Shakespeare's play, but without needing to inject too much extraneous material. It's really quite a remarkable job of writing and producing.

The Bottom Line

I really liked this show. Nearly all the actors are making their Broadway debuts in this production, but all are worthy of being there. The blending of the familiar aspects of the classic Shakespeare play with a very specific family story in a particular time and place brings out both the universality of Shakespeare's story elements and adds extra power to Ijames's riff. The audience was delighted, and deservedly so.

All told, I thought this was great, and look forward to seeing this play again sometime. I expect it will make it to the Bay Area before too long. Check it out!

"Kimberly Akimbo" at Booth Theatre

Official logo borrowed from kimberlyakimbothemusical.com

This is one of those cases where the play has a name I've heard of for years, but no idea what it is/was or what it's about. And then someone has turned it into a musical, which is now on Broadway. OK, that suggests there is something there. And then a friend or two rave about how I really have to see it. Great: let's go!

The Play

I have no idea how this play relates to the original, non-musical play of the same name. I assume it's at least reasonably close, as the program says that the book and lyrics are by David Lindsay-Abaire, who also wrote the play. And then we layer in music by Jeanine Tesori, who is a known quantity. So I'll assume this is roughly the same story, but now with music.

The story features Kimberly, who appears to be a teenager played by a much older actor, which is true as far as it goes. I at first assumed this was some kind of flashback, with Kimberly looking back on her younger self, which seemed like it could be interesting. But it turns out Kimberly has a rare genetic disease that causes her to age 4-5 times more quickly than normal, so although she is just shy of her 16th birthday, her physical age is more like 70.

So that explains why she's something of an outcast, exacerbated by the fact that her family has only recently come to town (somewhere in Bergen County, NJ) from Lodi (but we're not supposed to talk about that). It doesn't help that her dad, Buddy, is a drunk and a jerk, and her mother, Pattie, is pregnant and a narcissist (and pretty useless, as she just had surgery on both of her arms, so can't really do much). Eventually she befriends another outcast of sorts: Seth, the nerdy, tuba-playing kid who works at the roller rink in town (because this is 1999, and apparently everyone roller skates).

There is also a foursome of kids who each have crushes on another member of the group, none of which are mutual, so it's sort of a ring of misery, complicated by the fact that half of them are straight and half are gay, and none of them seems to know any of this. But they sing and dance (sometimes on skates), and are hoping to compete in the national show-band championships, but they can't afford fancy costumes, so they're really bummed about that, too.

And finally we have Kimberly's aunt Debra, who is the reason the family fled Lodi (something about killing a neighbor and other misdeeds), but who has tracked them down in New Jersey. Anyway, it turns out that Debra isn't actually a terrorist, just a scam artist, and since everyone needs money, she gets all the kids to help out in her big scam that will score enough money for everyone's needs. Yay!

Oh, and there's a ticking clock (figuratively) because people with Kimberly's disease rarely live past the age of (you guessed it) sixteen. So she needs money to take her family's dream vacation to Graceland and Disney World and such.

The Production

It's Broadway. They've got a pretty big budget. They've even got two stand-by actors for Buddy (one of whom performed in the matinee we attended). There's even a real tuba. Victoria Clark portrays Kimberly, and I guess she really is older, which is effective, but somewhat limits what the character can do in the singing and dancing department. The other kids are all pretty young, and can plausibly pass for teenagers.

Pattie (Alli Mauzey) has a terrific singing voice, but her character is really, really unlikeable. The same is pretty much true of Buddy (Jim Hogan in our performance). Debra (Bonnie Milligan) turns out to be pretty likeable for a psychopath, but again, you can't really feel like rooting for her when she's so manipulative.

So no one except Seth (Justin Cooley) has Kimberly's interests at heart. Her parents seem to have occasional pangs of guilt and responsibility, but they are rare and short-lived. So pretty much all the fun and aughs come at Kimberly's expense, which feels pretty mean spirited. So it's Kimberly and Seth against the world, which might be easier to take if either of them had a bit more dimension to their characters. I mean, they have more than the rest, but that's not saying a lot.

The Bottom Line

I thought it was pretty fun for a while, but ultimately I just found it kind of unsettling and basically cruel. The music and dance are fine, and the show works, such as it is, but truly, I didn't find much to like or enjoy about it.

So I would probably take a pass. Unless you like that sort of thing, I guess.

"Primary Trust" at Roundabout

 

Roundabout production photo by Joan Marcus

Roundabout has long been one of our favorite NYC theater companies, in part because they generally do interesting shows, and also because they are one of the few non-profit theater companies that straddles the Broadway/Off-Broadway divide. I really appreciate their ability to bring less commercial products to the Broadway audience.

Primary Trust is at one of their off-Broadway facilities, the Laura Pels Theatre, which is definitely one of their smaller houses. But it allows them to do some things that just wouldn't work in a big Broadway barn. This show, for example, has a cast of only five actors, and would just disappear on a huge Broadway stage.

The Play

This is one of those plays where I came in knowing basically nothing, and was well into it before I resigned myself to that feeling. Primary Trust by Eboni Booth is a very unusual play. It's almost like it doesn't have the proverbial fourth wall--the main character, Kenneth, addresses the audience from the moment he steps onstage. But at the same time, he's a very unreliable narrator of his own life, despite coming clean with us right off about his only friend, Bert, being imaginary.

So this is a peek into the mind and life of a quite offbeat person, orphaned young in a small town in upstate New York, he's spent his entire life since age 10 either in an orphanage or working in a used bookstore for a guy who doesn't care whether Kenneth talks to his imaginary friend. But now the store is closing, and Kenneth has to face life

Up to now, his only coping mechanisms are talking with Bert and going to happy hour at Wally's, the local tiki bar, drinking mai tais in great quantity. All of this has to change now. And change it does, as Kenneth lands a job working in a bank (called Primary Trust, hence the name of the play) after a tip from one of the wait staff at Wally's.

The ensuing action is odd and disconcerting in many ways, even when it's encouraging and uplifting. I've really not experienced anything like it, and it was truly interesting.

The Production

Nice and simple. The set is a small version of Cranberry, NY, Kenneth's hometown, and the occasional table, desk or chairs show up to represent various venues, and eventually Kenneth's teller window at the bank. But that's about it. William Jackson Harper does a remarkable job as Kenneth, both as the slow, damaged individual we come to know, but also showing flashes of the Kenneth who demonstrates himself to be something of a retail banking savant, flipping back and forth almost instantaneously. Equally impressive is April Matthis as a whole parade of Kenneth's servers at Wally's, jumping in an instant among genders, ages, races, and so on. It's really quite remarkable.

Bert (Eric Berryman) is a constant presence, at least for a while, and dovetails nicely into Kenneth's life during interviews and other events. And Jay O. Sanders fills in as various of Kenneth's employers and a few other niche roles quite effectively.  All of this is backed by a musician, Luke Wygodny, who also serve as something of a stage manager for Kenneth's life.

Director Knud Adams keeps this moving reasonably well, though the pace drags a bit in a few places. But even in slower-paced scenes, the actors keep things interesting--there are some truly pregnant pauses throughout.

Bottom Line

I thought this was a really good and interesting play, and the production was really effective. It's not earth-shaking, brilliant literature, but it's a unique take on the sort of person who doesn't really attract the attention of playwrights or audiences for the most part. In that sense, it's quite unlike nearly every play you can see.

So as long as you're looking for something small and interesting, this is a good option. The show runs through July 2 at the Roundabout's Laura Pels Theatre in the heart of the theater district. Well worth the time if you're in the area.

"The Habit of Art" at 59E59

 

Original Theatre production photo by Carol Rosegg

This sounded like an interesting play. A friend had seen Britain's National Theatre production online and liked the play, and the subject matter seemed intriguing, so we took a chance on it. The production suits the setting at 59E59 Theaters, which is kind of a bare-bones theater space (though a good hall with excellent sight lines). So we headed in for a Sunday matinee.

The Play

This is the New York premiere of a play by a well-known British playwright, Alan Bennett. The Habit of Art is kind of a play-within-a-play, except it's really a rehearsal-of-a-play within a play, and the play being rehearsed involves a writer doing research that will turn into biographies of two of the principle characters in the play, the poet W.H. Auden and composer Benjamin Britten. The two men had been longtime friends and collaborators, then had a bit of a falling out and didn't speak for thirty years.

The play is set in a rehearsal room for the internal play, with the actors, stage managers, and playwright present (but not the director). The action of the wrapping play is a rough run-through of the internal play (called Caliban's Day) with a lot of dialog among the various characters about what they are doing (or sometimes think they should be doing).

Along the way we get to unravel the layers of the play, with each sort of serving as a meta-version of the one(s) within. So for example we have a biographer, Humphrey Carpenter, interviewing Auden, with some discussion of the ethics of biography, when that is exactly what the playwright is doing with Auden and Britten (and Carpenter, for all that), and at another level, it's what Bennett is doing with his play as well. Deep and complicated.

And also quite funny. Bennett has solid comedy chops going way back, and there is much amusement here. But within that is also a lot of difficult stuff about aging, old friends, betrayals, and much more. And discussion of the role of the overlooked, non-starring characters (e.g., Caliban) such as the rent boy Auden has ordered up, or Carpenter). There's a lot, and it's interesting and good.

The Production

This is a British production by Original Theatre, brought over as part of 59E59's annual series Brits Off Broadway. The acting is very good, with particular nods to Matthew Kelly as Fitz, the actor portraying Auden, and Veronica Roberts as Kay, the stage  manager. Kelly has a really tough role, as both Fitz and Auden are complicated, feisty characters, and he moves between them gracefully (with a lot of lines for each). Director Philip Franks seems to have decided that the characters of George, the assistant stage manager (Jessica Dennis) and Neil, the playwright (Robert Mountford) are solely needed for comic relief, as both have been rendered as clownish buffoons, which seems both unkind and unnecessary.

But on the whole the production is quite solid, with difficult material presented in a way that is accessible and fun, but it leaves one thinking through its layers and vagaries for quite some time. That's my favorite kind of play, and this one is very well done indeed.

Bottom Line

We came in with few expectations, and happily, we got a really good performance of a very good play. It made me want to learn more about Auden and Britten and their collaborations, as well as wanting to know more about Bennett's work in theater.

All in all, a fine effort. The show runs one more week, through May 28th, at 59E59 in midtown Manhattan. Check it out if you can!

"Good Night, Oscar" at Belasco Theatre

 

Production photo uncredited

I'm always leery when we go to see a show that stars a famous actor (or more than one), unless I know that person has real stage-acting chops. TV actors scare me the most, because I seldom watch TV, meaning I'm unlikely to know anything about them at all.

Such was the case with Good Night, Oscar, where the lead actor, Sean Hayes, is apparently a very well known TV actor (who also has numerous solid stage credits). I just know nothing about him. The story, written by Doug Wright, on the other hand, has a lot of familiarity for me. My mother was a big jazz fan, a pianist, and a huge fan of George Gershwin's music. And the "Oscar" in the title is Oscar Levant, a close friend and colleague of Gershwin's who was known as one of the foremost interpreters of his piano music. Mom had recordings and told stories. I listened. So I was intrigued by the premise of this show.

The Play

So aside from being a virtuoso pianist, known for playing Gershwin, Levant was also widely known to be a raconteur, a favorite guest/sparring partner for pioneering late-night TV host Jack Paar, who kind of invented the late-night TV shows that we still know today (specifically The Tonight Show, which he hosted before Johnny Carson). What was less known about Levant was that he was quite severely mentally ill, addicted to prescription pills, and sometimes committed to mental institutions.

The play centers around Paar moving The Tonight Show from its usual home in New York City to Hollywood for a week in 1958, where he wants his first guest to be Levant. Unknown to him, Levant has been committed by his wife after a serious breakdown, but she angles to get him a four-hour pass under false pretenses so he can appear on the show.

The play then shows the contretemps over whether he will show up, whether he should be allowed to go on, etc. And when he does show up, we get a view of a very difficult, but seriously funny, man.

Within Levant's dialogue and dissociative interior monologues and hallucinations, we get to see the complications of his relationship with Gershwin, among many other things.

It's really quite a fascinating play about some fascinating characters, based on true events. Right up my alley!

The Production

The overall production is spot-on with its recreation of the late 1950s, from the dark wood paneling of the buildings and the style of the furnishings to the fashions on the actors. Paar (Ben Rappaport) is impeccably kitted out in a tailored suit, and network president Bob Sarnoff (Peter Grosz) sports a great pinstriped power suit. June Levant (Oscar's wife, played by Emily Bergl) wears top-of-the line couture of the time. And Levant (Sean Hayes) manages to make a high-quality suit look frumpy. And there is much smoking, of course. The effect is really great.

Really solid acting from all of the actors mentioned above, with good support from Marchánt Davis as Alvin, the orderly from the institution sent to oversee Levant on his furlough and comic relief from the talkative, star-struck boss's nephew Max (Alex Wyse). 

Without saying too much, one of the highlights comes at the end when we finally get to hear Levant play Gershwin, and it turns out Sean Hayes can seriously play the piano. Truly impressive imitation of Levant's style.

Bottom Line

This is a terrific and interesting play, also very funny at times, but also a pretty intense look at a very disturbed, complicated character. We talked about various aspects of the play for a long time over dinner, and I would happily watch it again if I could. Hayes is totally deserving of his Tony nomination for best actor. The current run appears to go through August 27th at the Belasco Theatre in the heart of Times Square. Go. It's one of the best things I've seen on stage in quite a while!

"Peter Pan Goes Wrong" at Ethel Barrymore Theatre

 

Production photo by Jeremy Daniel

This is a very silly play. Of course we know that going in. Peter Pan Goes Wrong is put on by the UK's Mischief Theatre, who were responsible for The Play that Goes Wrong, which I saw back in 2017 and 2018.

The Play

Instead of spoofing a murder mystery as they had before, this time Mischief takes on the well-known and theatrically-overused story of Peter Pan. Things go wrong. Very, very wrong. Pratfalls, technical glitches, set failures, etc. All the sorts of stuff you would expect from this crew, along with making fun of Peter Pan. What could go wrong?

The Production

I guess I'd have to say that the set is much more elaborate than for the previous show (this one features a revolving turntable for scene changes), but leans more on the personal foibles of the cast members of the show-within-the-show than on the extremely-well-choreographed mishaps. Not that there is a shortage of those; it's just different. This is again the original Mischief cast from the UK, so it's a well-polished group doing what they do so well.

I think a little bit they've lost the spirit of the plucky community theater troupe that came through a bit more in the original Play, but it's still a great deal of fun.

Bottom Line

I got exactly what I expected. It was silly. I laughed a lot. I enjoyed the spectacle immensely, and would recommend it highly to anyone who likes to have a silly good time.

The original UK company will be playing through July 9. I suspect the show will continue thereafter, but don't know for sure. Either way: just go. Laugh.

"Prima Facie" at the Golden Theatre

 Prima Facie by Suzie Miller is a transfer from London's West End. It's a single-actor show, but with a rather involved set with a whole library of books and binders surrounding a couple of imposingly large tables and some chairs, all of which serve as both props and platform at various times. It received rave reviews and many awards in the UK, so its US transfer is much anticipated, and has resulted in many award nominations as well.

The Play

Tessa is a rising star in British legal circles, working as a defense attorney, often defending men accused of sexual assault. Tessa loves the game, loves to win, but also believes that being an effective advocate for the defense is the best way to produce justice: if she unravels the prosecution's case, it just means the prosecutor didn't do their job well enough.

Eventually, though, dramatic karma catches up to Tessa, and she finds herself the victim of a sexual assault by a friend and coworker, and now she has to decide whether and how to subject herself to the same justice system she knows so well from the other side.

Playwright Miller, herself a former lawyer, has written a scenario so as to maximize the difficulties of the case, thus highlighting the Catch-22s facing all assault victims, but especially so with Tessa. Ultimately, Tessa has to choose whether the interest of justice and a chance at vindication outweighs the improbability of winning the case.

The Production

As noted earlier, the set is a big law office/library, full of shelves and shelves of case binders that Tessa (Jodie Comer) frequently refers to in telling her story. The beginning of the play details her background, coming from a modest background to reach the pinnacle of British legal education and a prestigious job in a respected firm. It's a pretty cool set, though Comer spends a fair amount of time moving furniture, which seems a bit unnecessary.

Comer gives a powerful presentation, offsetting the proud and often boastful barrister with insights into moments of doubt.

The aftermath of the trial gets a bit muddled, really turning into a kind of polemic. It's justified, of course, but after the diligence and nuance of the play, it seems to defocus the play, rather than emphasize the key points.

Bottom Line

Ultimately this is a show about injustice, a subject about which Miller (and Tessa) feel very strongly. And we get to see how emotional attachment can cloud judgement and make people less effective. It's painfully clear what Miller wants us to come away thinking, but by reducing the closing argument to a rant, it feels ultimately more sound and fury and less convincing. It feels as if the emotion carries away some of the effectiveness of the arguments.

Not to say that the play isn't powerful: it certainly is. But I can't help thinking it could be more effective with a little more reflection and a bit less raw emoting. Definitely worth seeing, though. The Broadway run continues through July 2nd at the Golden Theater.

Also note if you go: the play definitely runs longer than the advertised 100 minutes. Our show clocked in at just under two hours, which made us late for dinner. Plan accordingly.

"Shadow/land" at The Public Theater

 

Public Theater production photo by Joan Marcus

The Public Theater always seems to find interesting plays to produce. Past triumphs include Passing Strange and Hamilton, just as examples. But as we saw on our last visit, not every new thing they try is a triumph. This world premiere, Shadow/land by Erika Dickerson-Despenza, has high aspirations: it's the first of a ten-part cycle of plays about the New Orleans diaspora brought about by Hurricane Katrina. We decided to take a flyer on this one since it's our first night in town.

The Play

Ruth and her mother, Magalee, are both trying to protect their family's legacy (the bar/nightclub called Shadow/land) as Hurricane Katrina makes landfall and threatens to flood much of New Orleans. The bar itself represents the family legacy, not only because Ruth's father used to play there, but it also has ties all the way back to an ancestor who worked to buy her own freedom from slavery. As such, preserving the business is as much a symbol of continuing the family legacy as it is a means for Ruth to (perhaps) by her own freedom.

There's not a lot of mystery as to what's going to happen here. Katrina is a historical event, after all. But much of the play is interesting, even as the available stage space shrinks down to the middle of the actual bar. And on the periphery, we see the Grand Marshal dancing, beckoning to the aging, moderately demented Magalee to join the procession of ancestors.

The Production

I'm a sucker for special effects, and any time you can flood the stage convincingly, I'm all in. But the dwindling space available for Ruth (Joniece Abbott-Pratt) and Magalee (Lizan Mitchell) to operate might be a little too symbolically linked to their shrinking options in life. (Also unclear is why an operating bar business only has two bottles of water available, but that's the script.) Although the set is visually impressive, I found some of the language hard to follow, partly because it's in Creole dialect at times, but mostly because it was just hard to distinguish. Sometimes I was just missing some nuance of the dialogue, but sometimes a line would land and I would miss it, and now I don't know whether I've missed some important detail. So that was a bit frustrating, and I overheard several audience members saying the same as they left.

Also visually impressive was the performance of Christine Shepard as the Grand Marshal--great costume and makeup, but also wonderful dance and mime work. It's not a huge part of the overall show, but it's very important to the atmosphere and the mythos of the play.

Bottom Line

Ultimately, I don't have a lot to say about the show. The script didn't tell me a lot I didn't already know, but it did it in a pretty dramatic way, though rather predictably. I give the show high marks for atmosphere, but only middling grades for dramatic interest.

I'm unclear whether the remainder of the play cycle is planned to follow this particular family, or whether we'll see other characters and story lines develop. I'm mildly interested to see what comes next, but also not eager to be first in line when the next one comes out.

This premiere run goes through Sunday, May 28th at the Public Theater in lower Manhattan.

"Chinglish" at San Francisco Playhouse

 

SF Playhouse production photo by Jessica Palopoli

It's not often that we get to see a relatively new play twice, in very different incarnations. We saw David Henry Hwang's Chinglish at Berkeley Rep in 2012, and I recall liking it a lot (though this predates my blogging by several years, so I have no detailed notes on this). So I wasn't sure I needed to see the revival at SF Playhouse this year, but heck, we generally like shows there, and our friends were going, so why not?

Turns out the play has been extensively reworked, both to reflect more current geopolitics, but also to reframe the play from one written entirely in English to one largely spoken in Chinese, with the English translations projected onto the set. This makes the casting and production of the play much, much more difficult, and even though relatively few of the audience members in San Francisco will actually understand the Chinese, the crew has gone to great lengths to get it correct, down to the level of local dialect. The program notes on this are quite interesting! (But they no longer publish the program online, apparently, so you have to go see the show to read that.)

The Play

Chinglish centers on the CEO of a midwestern US sign company, Daniel, going to China to try to land the contract to put translated signs in a new, regional cultural center in China. Upon arriving he hires a local consultant, Peter, an expatriated Brit who has lived in China for about two decades and speaks the language fluently, to translate and to help him develop business relationships. Peter sets up meetings with the mayor of the town, Cai, and his assistant, Xi, who use a series of hilariously incompetent translators of their own.

Without spilling too many details, suffice it to say that all the players here have hidden agendas, and all of this is made more complex by the difficulties of understanding (and misunderstanding) another language. As some of the characters strike out on their own, trying to cut out the middlemen (both translators and parties with other interests), some new complications come to light.

The Production

First off, I was blown away by the Chinese in this play. A large portion of the dialogue takes place in Chinese, and according to the program notes, almost none of the cast speak Chinese natively, and none spoke the desired dialect. But from my perspective it came off nearly flawlessly. Not that I can judge the language per se, but it all seemed natural and fluent, and most importantly it all made sense in context. That seems like a big win.

Second, just a very strong cast, with particular emphasis on Matthew Bohrer (Peter), who has to carry off Chinese as well as two different British accents, Nicole Tung (Xi), who manages to sound as if English is very difficult for her, Alex Hsu (Cai) who manages to be broadly humorous without turning into a caricature, and Phil Wong (Bing and Judge Ju Geming), who shows great versatility and range.

And director Jeffrey Lo pulls it all together nicely. This was clearly a difficult show to put together, and it comes off very smoothly. The set (designed by Andrea Bechert) and the projections (by Spense Matubang) worked well, though some of the transitions were a bit needlessly clumsy, and the prjections got off a little at times. But on the whole, really good.

Mostly I was kind of overwhelmed by what an ambitious undertaking this play was--much more so than the English-only version I'd seen a decade ago--and how well it came out.And Robert Sokol's piece in the program detailing the work undertaken by Patrick Chew, the translator and cultural consultant for the production, was just outstanding.

Bottom Line

I thought this was an incredibly effective presentation of a thoughtful and difficult play. And more than almost any other revival/adaptation I can recall, this overhaul of the script into mixed languages was remarkably effective, and added a lot to what was already a pretty good script.

The quality of the production and Lo's direction were really effective. I have to say I recommend seeing this play quite strongly. Lucky for you, the play runs through June 10 (extended!), so you have lots of chances. Go see it!

"English" at Berkeley Rep

 

Berkeley Rep production photo by Alessandra Mello

This is a play I've been wanting to see for quite a while. It's very popular, and it seems like every town I go to, I see this show listed. It was playing in DC when we were there a couple of months ago, and we considered going to see it, even knowing we had tickets to see it in Berkeley coming up, but it was sold out. So it's a very popular play! And it seems very thoughtful, from reading the descriptions. So, can it live up to the hype?

The Play

The set-up for English seems very simple: four students and their teacher, studying English in Tehran so they can pass the TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) to facilitate emigrating to join family members overseas. Three of the students, all women, struggle with the language, while the one male student seems remarkably proficient. The play examines the relationships of people with languages, how languages reflect and create identities, and how non-native speakers relate to others in their learned languages.

There are lots of fascinating topics covered. It's a small play, about a few people and their relationships and their thoughts and feelings around language, country, family, and much more. No big explosions or bombshells (though definitely some surprises!). Just a really solid text.

The Performance

I thought all of the performances were terrific. This play follows the convention that when one is speaking in their native language (Farsi, in this case), they speak unaccented English, and when speaking in their learned language (English, here), they speak it accented to various degrees. I thought all the actors handled that very well. Several characters mention that they feel they are "loud" when speaking in English, though they are not, in fact, speaking loudly. It's just one of the insights about how people feel about speaking in different tongues.

The set (designed by Annie Smart and lighted by Reza Behjat) is simple but effective. It's a very plain classroom with a few desks and a whiteboard, plus a video player that can be rolled out. This keeps the emphasis on the people and their interactions very nicely.

The Bottom Line

I don't have a lot to add about the play, beyond that I really enjoyed it and found it thought-provoking. It's one of the few shows I've come out of lately thinking about the content more than flaws in the presentation. I appreciate that neither the script nor the production tries to do too much: it keeps the focus where it needs to be, on the people and the ideas, rather than on the production. So kudos to director Mina Morita for keeping everyone in line such that the production doesn't get in the way of the play.

The show runs at Berkeley Rep through May 7, and is well worth seeing.

"Natasha, Pierre & the Great Comet of 1812" at San Jose Playhouse

San Jose Playhouse production photo by Scott Donschikowski

 

I'll be honest: I had never heard of San Jose Playhouse until now. And I only know about them now because one of the cast in Shotgun Players' production of this play mentioned that his next gig was going to be a different role in the same show in San Jose. So we looked it up and decided to check it out. All told, I saw the Shotgun production about a dozen times during its long run, so I was looking forward to seeing what this other theater was going to do with it.

As I noted in the Shotgun article, that was the west coast premiere, and also the first time, to my knowledge, that the show had been staged in such a small venue. San Jose Playhouse's home in 3Below Theaters is a bit bigger, I think, though I didn't count the seats. It's a converted movie theater that had been further modified for this production to give it a little runway and a bridge where the fifth or sixth row would normally be. I thought that worked pretty well, although we were seated in front of that bridge, so it was a bit tricky to turn around and see what was happening back there at times.

The Play

Fundamentally, this was the same script and score as that used by Shotgun, though we noted several differences in particular scenes. I suspect those were differences between the Off-Broadway and Broadway versions, but I'm not sufficiently familiar with the Broadway version to know all the differences there. I'd say on that level, the words and music were at least 95% the same.

The Production

This is where we noticed a lot of differences, of course. From looking at their past production list, San Jose Playhouse comes at this from a more traditional musical theater background and approach, where Shotgun is more about plays and sometimes stages a musical. Of course, this being a Dave Malloy show, it's not really a traditional musical, either. But reading the artist biographies, it's also clear that some (notably Musical Director Stephen Guggenheim, who also plays Pierre) have opera backgrounds, and that definitely comes across in the production.

The set design by Jon Gourdine is attractive, but I question some of the choices, such as having double doors upstage center for entrances, but no curtain around it, so we see the actors coming across to that entrance. I realize some of this is probably limitations of the stage in the former movie space, but some discreet curtains or some lighting changes could have smoothed that out. Also, there is a raised section on each side upstage, and characters seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time going up and down for no apparent reason, other than there was a raised area to fill.

The musical and vocal work was strong: lots of instruments, well played, and good, strong voices. There were rather more problems with the mics and sound system than I would have expected from a company that does musicals--mics turned on late, so that lines were missed, and lots of extraneous mic noise. That felt a bit amateurish for a professional production.

There were definitely a few odd directorial and blocking choices, too. Many wouldn't be noticed by the casual observer, but since I happen to be deeply immersed in the show recently, I noticed things such as some stagings that directly contradict the lyrics being sung (e.g., singing "Andrey isn't here" repeatedly when in fact, Andrey is standing right there, or Pierre singing about Natasha standing in the middle of the drawing room while watching her descend a staircase). More serious were some blocking choices such as having Pierre standing directly in front of Natasha in a crucial moment so that many of the audience cannot see what she is doing, or Natasha walking into the room where Andrey and Pierre are having an important, intimate discussion so we can see her mixing and drinking poison, which totally distracts from the scene.

The costumes were really nice. For the most part, everyone has a single costume throughout, which is fine, though a bit confusing when the characters are all dancing about in an ensemble number. Why are Natasha and her family dancing about and celebrating Anatole's impending secret elopement? Put a coat on them or something!

The Bottom Line

Comet is a substantial and difficult undertaking, and San Jose Playhouse does a very credible job with it. They obviously have the resources to hire a good cast and musicians, and produce nice costumes and sets. With a bit more attention to the details of the staging, they could go from a very good show to an excellent one.

The show runs through May 28 at 3Below Theaters in downtown San Jose. Theater options are pretty limited in the south bay, so this is well worth checking out if you're inclined.