Showing posts with label waiting for godot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label waiting for godot. Show all posts

Saturday, February 8, 2014

Waiting's Not So Bad When the Company's This Good

Review: Waiting for Godot

Professor X and Magneto are currently demonstrating another of their mutant powers, the ability to breath new life into a theatrical stalwart.

Waiting for Godot is a tricky play no matter how you look at it.  Samuel Beckett's absurdist comedy is wholly unconcerned with the trappings of conventional theatre, disregarding plot and significant character development for what on the surface appears to be inane babble.  And while the characters occasionally stumble across a profound thought, the play tends to skim over the implications of said thought with nary a backward glance.  It asks questions it doesn't even attempt to answer, and with no obvious political or philosophical agenda the entire thing is ultimately left up to audience interpretation.  It is not a play for everyone, but those who are interested will find much to enjoy about the finely staged revival currently playing the Cort Theatre, starring theatrical icons Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart in roles they seem born to play.

The play's setup finds Estragon (McKellen) and Vladimir (Stewart) waiting for the mysterious Godot next to a tree in the middle of an unspecified wasteland.  The pair can't seem to remember much about Godot or why they are waiting for him, but both are convinced (at least initially) that he is indeed coming and they must meet him.  During their wait they play games, bicker, and tease one another to pass the time, eventually getting interrupted by Pazzo (Shuler Hensley) and his servant/slave Lucky (Billy Crudup).  And that's about it.  We never learn much more about the characters' backgrounds or what brings them to this tree in the middle of nowhere; we just watch them interact, with often comical results.  But as the waiting stretches on for an indeterminate amount of time, Estragon and Vladimir begin to question everything about their existence, which in turn forces the audience to reflect upon their lives as well.

Director Sean Matthias has staged the play with an extraordinary amount of sensitivity, and does an excellent job of keeping his own views out of the equation.  Matthias simply presents the play as written, with enough specificity to make all the little details stand out without indicating that some of those details are more important than others.  Normally you would look for a director to have a unique take on the material, something to say about it (especially with material as well worn as Godot), but in this case the lack of any attempt to impose some kind of logical order on the moment to moment structure works in the play's favor, resulting in an intensely personal experience for each audience member.  Five people could see the same performance and come away with five entirely different interpretations about what the work is about, which in this case is the entire appeal of the play. Matthias must be commended for fostering that kind of atmosphere in his production.

Of course, he is aided and abetted by the enormous talent and chemistry of his two leading men.  Stewart and McKellen, known for their exhaustive stage and film credits, are so assured in their craft that it looks as natural and effortless as breathing.  The back and forth dynamic between Estragon and Vladimir forms the basis of the entire play, and the actors' well-documented affection for one another translates into stage magic.  The pair employs razor sharp comic timing to elicit belly laugh after belly laugh from the audience, with Stewart's rational straight man acting as the perfect foil to McKellen's impulse-driven clown.  Their expert understanding of the art of speaking finds music in the play's sparse dialogue, even when that dialogue amounts to fart jokes and bawdy humor.  Like two expert tennis players, these old hands bat jokes back and forth with an intoxicatingly precise rhythm and physicality that represents the pinnacle of a lifetime of honing their talents.

It is extremely unfortunate that Shuler Hensley and Billy Crudup have to come and ruin the interplay between these two theatrical giants with their histrionics, although whether the fault lies with the actors, the direction, or the writing is difficult to discern.  One thing that almost certainly originates from Hensley is the misguided choice to have Pazzo speak in a Foghorn Leghorn-esque drawl, causing the character to always sound like he's yelling and making Hensley's performance at best ponderous and at worst insufferable.  Crudup fares better as Lucky, although his wild physicality results in most of his big monologue being incomprehensible.  This moment has the dubious distinction of being the one point in the play where the production seems to deem the text unimportant, despite giving equal weight to every other line of dialogue, no matter how inane.  It is a relief when Hensley and Crudup leave the stage towards the end of Act I, and thankfully their second act appearance is much briefer.

There is an odd beauty in the sparse, vaguely apocalyptic production design, including Stephen Brimson Lewis' crumbling set and tattered costumes.  For all the design's simplicity, it never becomes boring to look at, which is a testament to the artistry of Lewis' work and Matthias' clever staging.  Even the lighting design by Peter Kaczorowski is kept to a minimum, maintaining the production's focus on the actors, the text, and subtle suggestion rather than strict realism.

Even if Waiting for Godot weren't such an important part of the theatrical canon, this production would be notable for the chance to see the indisputably great Stewart and McKellen work their magic together onstage.  McKellen in particular has said that this will probably be his last Broadway appearance, so any fans of the British thespian have extra incentive to catch this limited-run production before it closes in March.  Godot isn't for everyone, but this production is the most accessible and overall well-acted ones we're likely to see for some time.

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Insanely Early 2014 Tony Predictions: Part I

It's never too early to start discussing Tony Award contenders (at least, not for me).  And since we're in the middle of the winter no man's land between the fall and spring Broadway offerings, now is as good a time as any to look back on the first half of this season on the Great White Way.  Obviously we have a lot of shows left to open, so at this point only those who have made a major impression on the theatre-going community can be considered true Tony contenders.  As I do at the end of each theatre season, I'm going to go through all of the major Tony categories and note which productions and people I think have a real shot at recognition come nomination time. 

WARNING:  Occasional snark and a great deal of speculation to follow.

Best Musical

Smartly written and expertly cast, A Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder is easily the best of the fall's new musical offerings.

There were actually (surprisingly) a fair number of productions eligible for the Best Musical category over the past six months.  Unfortunately, there are also a lot more new musicals on the horizon, and this fall's shows (especially the ones that have closed) stand a good chance of being overshadowed/forgotten come Tony time.  If I were to pick the show with the highest chance of securing a Best Musical nomination, I would go with A Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder, which in addition to being hilarious is one of the smarter book musicals to come around in a long time.  If a second fall show sneaks into this category then the well-reviewed After Midnight has a shot, although it's status as a revue rather than a book show hurts its chances with the sometimes snobby Tony voters.

I personally enjoyed Big Fish, but it was a divisive show and that decreases its chances immensely, especially in the face of the formidable-looking spring line-up.  There's also the off chance that Baby Boomer baiting Beautiful scores a surprise nomination, but despite its rosy box office prospects I think it will ultimately be passed over by the more discerning voters.  A Night with Janis Joplin and First Date are ultimately slight entertainments unlikely to gain any serious awards traction, and if Soul Doctor gets mentioned at all on the Tony telecast it will likely be as the butt of somebody's joke.  I mean, does anyone even remember Soul Doctor happened?  And what is it going to take to get a show that lasts more than a few months into the Circle in the Square?

Best Play

As of right now, this is the weakest this category has been in years.  Most of the plays from the fall were star-driven revivals, with only A Time to Kill and The Snow Geese even eligible for this award.  Both were met with critical and audience indifference, and there are enough interesting-sounding plays scheduled for spring that I suspect both will be shut out of the Tonys.  *If* (and that's a very big "if") one of these plays were to be nominated, it would probably be Sharr White's WWI drama The Snow Geese, but I find that highly unlikely.

Best Musical Revival

In something I consider a celebration, there were no musical revivals on Broadway this fall.  Every tuner that premiered was a new show, so currently this is a wide open race.  There are also only 4 revivals scheduled for the spring, and that's assuming Roundabout's remounting of their Tony-winning Cabaret is even deemed eligible for competition (which I suspect it won't be).  So basically, everyone gets nominated!

Best Play Revival

Did anyone think that a 400-year-old Shakespeare comedy would be one of the critical and commercial smashes of the fall season?  But Mark Rylance and the all-male company have made Twelfth Night must-see, hysterical theatre.

Thanks to the repertory productions that took Broadway by storm, there are already plenty of play revivals eligible for this year's Tonys.  The double bill of Twelfth Night and Richard III in particular has been a box office and critical sensation, and I would be shocked if Twelfth Night wasn't nominated (in fact, at this moment I think it's the likely winner).  And while I personally hated it, most critics and audience members have been over the moon about this latest production of The Glass Menagerie, so I'm going to name it the second sure thing in this category.  I also wouldn't be surprised to see one of the Patrick Steward/Ian McKellan shows nominated (probably Waiting for Godot), although their slot is the most endangered should the spring revivals prove particularly strong and/or popular.  Despite fantastic reviews, the Roundabout's revivals of The Winslow Boy and Machinal lack the star power to be serious contenders, and the producers of the Daniel Craig-led Betrayal will likely have to content themselves with the millions of dollars they made from that sold out but not necessarily well-reviewed production.  Betrayal always had the air of being an event that was separate from rather than a part of the Broadway season, and the competition is simply too strong for even the mighty James Bond to conquer.


That's my take on the production races and where they stand so far.  There of course is always the chance for surprises, but history has taught us that shows which fail to make a major impression in the fall don't stand much chance at Tony love once the spring shows open (especially if the fall shows have shuttered before nominations are announced).  I am also making some of these predictions based on the assumed strength of the spring's offerings, so if that becomes a surprise in either direction (really strong or really weak overall), then things will change as well.

Check back soon for my thoughts on how the acting races are shaping up so far.