Measure for Measure

5
  Last Friday I saw Measure for Measure at the Duke on 42nd Street theater. (Thanks to "Theatre for a New Audience", the adult tickets were 75 dollars whereas the kid tickets were only 10.) Shakespeare's problematic, semi-tragic comedy was directed by Arin Arbus and starring Jefferson Mays as the good Duke of Vienna and Alfredo Narcisco as Lucio.

     The play was done with a minimal set, but this did not in any way take away from the play; on the contrary, it brought out many of the better qualities (it forced you to look at the meaning of justice and mercy for certain people rather than a group, as opposed  to focusing on the effects of a big set) in the play.

     The Duke (among others) was very good (naturally, being British), because he didn’t play the stereotypical role of a confident duke getting the lowdown on his subjects. But when Lucio started trashing him to his face, instead of calmly taking it in, he lost it. He began to yell at Lucio rather than just let him ramble. He got very heated and stood in his face. And speaking of getting heated, the Lucio demonstrated just the opposite of that. He was a very cool character throughout the play, showing how a real ‘playa’ should act. He was extremely subtle, but he was very good when other people were talking, because his reactions weren’t exaggerated. He was very good with small movements.

     Another good performance was the provost (Graham Winton), though he had many lines cut (and some given to Lucio). He was a big guy, yet still begged convincingly for Isabel’s cause. He displayed well the fact that strength did not mean brute mentality. The Angelo was very good and brought a real fire to the mix, because when he was on stage he just radiated authority. The Pompey (John Keating) was impressive because he resembled a Simpson’s character and he was coupled well with John Christopher Jones as the constable. Together they had the audience in stitches.

     But--as in every play--there was a weak link. What was very real was the dilemma between Isabel (Elizabeth Waterson) and Claudio (Leroy McClain.) but what was unreal was lack of passion between the two. Mr. McClain wasn’t actually that bad. He did not have a beautifully clear voice, but he did do a good job portraying the fear of death and being torn between his want of a holy life for his sister and his unwillingness to leave Juliet and his son behind. But the Isabel was nothing short of a wreck. She had no idea how to act outside of just speaking lines.

She had very long arms, which accented the fact that she had no clue what her hands should be doing when she was speaking. She didn’t just hand them at her sides, but she didn’t use them to assist her lines. Instead she clasped them in front of her awkwardly. And her arms weren’t the only problem. She spoke with little emotion and even less hope. She spoke in a slightly monotonic voice witch positively radiated defeat.

    But all in all The Duke on 42nd street’s production of Measure for Measure was a good way to display the moral dilemma of human kind.

Special thanks to Bruce Cohen at Theatre for a New Audience for the photos.

BAM Theatre's The Tempest

The reviews for the BAM's The Tempest in Brooklyn are good but they don’t say that it’s a real classic. With Christian Camarago as Ariel and Stephen Dillane as Prospero, Charles Isherwood reports that “When Prospero rises to signal the start of the show, putting on his magical cloak and a belt of fraying feathers, it is with a palpable sense of resignation-- a book-bound professor called reluctantly away from his task”

The Tempest

 4

 

Last Thursday, I saw The Tempest at Princeton University as a prep for the show I’m going to see on Broadway. It was directed by Jenna Devine and starred students Max Rosmarin as Prospero and Ariel Sibert as Ariel (who was actually named after her character.) Gregor Shubert and Sarah Paton were cast as the young lovers Ferdinand and Miranda.

Though heavily cut, the play was not so heavily cut that the play was unrecognizable and confusing-as I fear the Richard II I'm going to see in a couple weeks will be, having had parts added into it from another play. The Prospero was powerful and had a very clear voice and great enunciation, but he did not have such a good stage presence. The Ariel was ok but they cut many of her lines so she did not have a chance to really perform. She is a fantastic physical actor but she did not deliver her lines with enough passion in some cases like when she begged for freedom and when she talked about the witch who had captured her before Prospero arrived on the island. Another very strong character was the Caliban (Brad Wilson) who did well with the beast part but also portrayed the sadness and futility of the character. When Ariel began to sing and Caliban said that the island was full of mysterious noises, he brought a very strong sense of sadness but also of a slight curiosity and longing. The Ferdinand did everything well but nothing extraordinary. The Miranda left much to be desired, because she not only slurred her words but did not seem to know what to do with herself when other people were talking. The Alonso (Paul Bangola), Sebastian (Julia Keimach) and Antonio (Josh Zeitlin) were all pretty good and had some moments that had the audience laughing hard. The only actor that really ‘caught my eye’ was Elizabeth Swanson as Gonzalo. She showed the good side people where she raised hope that Ferdinand was still alive and tried to cheer up the king. She brought a very cheery attitude to the mix and was a good, solid physical actor with good annunciation. The Tranculo and Stephano were very funny and they were fantastic physical actors. All in all this was a very good performance for what it was, with a good set and lighting, ok costumes and good direction.

It's weird but slightly refreshing to see students perform a play after having seen professionals do so many. The fact that all of the cast members were young brought a strange sweetness to even the most detestable characters.

Plans

I have seen five live performances of Shakespeare's plays so far; Hamlet, Macbeth, Much Ado about Nothing, Love’s Labour’s Lost and As You Like It. I will soon see Romeo and Juliet, The Tempest, Henry IV and Richard II. By the end of 2013 I plan to have seen every Shakespeare play with my Dad. It may be a long shot but it is quite possible, and even if we can't do it in three years we will eventually get it done. The works of Kenneth Branagh have really gotten me into Shakespeare. His direction is genius, and in As You Like It and Hamlet especially he really combines old fashion Shakespeare with modern day action movies. Branagh is great for introducing kids of any age to the works of Shakespeare. 

As You Like It - BAM

3

As You Like It was performed by the same company that will do the Tempest. To be honest, it wasn’t that great. The set, like many other well-directed plays, was minimal. There was a field of weeds in the back and a couple trees, but outside of that there wasn’t really anything. Sam Mendes, the director, did a very good job of making sure that no one stayed still for too long, hence there were no unnecessary stops. There was a beautiful scene (the death of Adam) where as the lights fades, one still shone on his white hair as his eyes closed. But the direction shrank under the feet of the actors. There were a few well enunciated and physically well played performances, but many were on the quiet side.

Christian Camarago (Orlando)

He was very efficient at moving around the stage, filling every corner of the floor. He spoke his lines clearly, with passion and a lot of vigor. But he just didn’t have the feel like an Orlando. I don’t know what it was, but he just didn’t seem to be an Orlando. He was not wreck, but he lacked the real power of Orlando. He should be princely even in poverty and ignorance. It is a hard part, and many couldn’t even attempt it, but he wasn’t the arrogant, strong character that is Orlando.

Edward Bennett (Oliver)
He was a bright star. He really hated his brother, and he showed it. He had a look in his eyes that you could see from the seats. He had an evil air, but it was tamed over the course of the play. He was every bit the slimy, spiteful, jealous brother as he was the transformed, loving man.

Juliet Rylance (Rosalind)

She was amazing as a boy. She had so much fire! She flounced around like a star. She was great. She had no ties to reality. She was most impressive because she created a new reality. She was the epitome of Rosalind. She was very sweet and endearing.
 
Thomas Sadoski (Touchstone)
He was a true fool, even when he wasn’t prancing around the stage. He enunciated. He acted. He conquered. He was very lively, but he didn’t overdo it. He was very joking but he seemed to stumble over the line of seriousness, without overdoing it. He really had a powerful touch on every one, not only Jaques.

Stephen Dillane (Jaques)

Jaques was appropriately desolate because he was solemnly desolate. He had no envy or lust for friends or power, as he has been played. He stayed alone, constantly breaking away from the group. This enhanced the speeches, giving them a desolate air. He was almost tear-jerking. He was very effective and he really brought out the character traits whether melancholy, euphoric, or just passive on all fronts.


The other players were fine as well.

Photo Credits: Joan Marcus for BAM.

LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST

2

  

Shakespeare’s Globe in New York. Three aisles and seats 270 degrees around the main thrust. A wooden balcony lined the upper edges of the entire playhouse, and ¾ was seating. A balcony in back was for musicians. Love's Labour’s Lost is ensemble play, so there are no true spotlight stars. It is made out of small roles, combining into a masterpiece. Like a jigsaw puzzle. Unlike things like Hamlet or Henry V, there is no one character whose name will be known by every child. Many wish to be an Orlando or Prince Hal. But many more are a Don Armando or a Costard. And many more people are in love with someone who scorns them than are fighting tyrants with shield and sword to save their king and father. 

It was a very endearing performance, on all fronts. There was comedy, and no shortage. They had the audience in stitches multiple times, including the famous library scene, where Dumaine at one point actually hid in the audience. The play was also accented by the princess, who was very sweet. Almost all of the actors were helped out at one point by Costard, who made anyone on stage look good. Don Armondo also was fabulous prancing around with Moth in his mock Spanish accent.

Jude Law as Hamlet

Number 1

Also I saw Jude Law do an uncut Hamlet on Broadway, which was fantastic! He had a real stage presence, which was maximized by using a minimal set. He really delivered both the euphoria and depression of Hamlets situation so well that he made it unclear whether Hamlet was truly a madman or just faking it. He made the audience believe he really was at a loss, not sure whether he should kill Claudius to avenge his father.

The play revolved around Jude Law. He had all the lines, all the acting, all the stardom. He didn’t act out the play, he was the play. And the play was him. I mean, he went on stage, and instead of thinking “O my god it’s Jude Law” I thought “Hey, it’s Hamlet.” When he spoke those ancient lines, he wasn’t reciting them, they were his. He was the Hamlet.

But really set him apart was his ability to own the stage. Maybe it’s something you learn as a screen actor. His physical acting was impeccable, but he had a presence besides that. As if he built the stage. The stage was always dark, with no props at all, just a single door. He would look up and light would shine on his face, and he would merge with the stage. It was a magical experience.

25 September 2009

Description

Monkeys are smart. Though they haven't created cars or trains or weapon, they are educated through simplicity. They flourish on what they have, and if something doesn't work, they don't give up, but they evolve to overcome it. Like monkeys, Shakespeare had no thesauraus, no dictionary, no laptop and no editor. But when he came to a spot where he was at loss for words, he made up his own words. Through practice, perseverence and certaily trial and error, he created works that will last forever.