ACT's Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

I been thinking of something like this for a long time. I feel if we want to grow as artists within our community we must hear some (hopefully) constructive criticism. I even posted about it in my last MySpace journal. I'm glad you've made it happen. I just hope we can use it to grow and not bicker about one another. Hopefully I'll have a lot to say. With that said here is my journal I wrote about Cat On A Hot Tin Roof:

Cat On A Hot Tin Roof
Asheville Community Theatre
Jan. 17 2006

Let me preface this by saying that I saw this show on "Friends and Family" night, which basically translates to the second dress rehearsal, so I must say that what I saw wasn't a finalized production, which might account for the fact that what I did see was rather underwhelming.
The first act, which was probably at least 30 min shorter than the second, really dragged. It didn't help that the two people onstage the whole time seemed to be in different plays. Maggie (The Cat) played by Melissa Menard seemed to be stuck in some neo-Victorian melodrama, where her character felt compelled to direct her monstrous monologues not towards her unsympathetic husband Brick, but towards the larger, more uncaring audience. Brick on the other hand, played by Dan Clancy, seemed stuck in some early Pinter Absurdist play where the character only speaks in mumbled grunts, and short sentences embellished with some kind of hybrid Deep South meets Brooklyn accent.(Something most of the cast seemed to struggle with) These are both fine actors whom I've see put on notable performances in other shows, but here I felt they just never connected on any level. They never engaged one another. I never saw any clear intentions. If Maggie wanted to get Brick in bed, or make him jealous I never saw her follow through with those motivations. Similarly if Brick wanted Maggie to leave, I never saw anything that would provoke her to do so. I would have liked to have seen more danger from both actors. Maggie needed to be more seductive, and I think Brick needed to be more volatile. The blocking never really helped much either. How many times in real life do people just stand in the middle of their rooms and soliloquize. The shame is that there was so much beautiful furniture in the room, and it seemed like the actors weren’t allowed to sit on it, like it was in some museum or something.
The only actor that really seemed to take a chance was Charles Bell who played Big Daddy. He brought an energy to the stage that no other actor could match or even seem to keep up with. This was the only character living on the edge, the only one who you weren't sure what he was going to do next, and honestly the only interesting one in this whole production. His characterization never faltered, his mannerisms were suited to the character, and he was the only character that made me feel something. At one moment I wanted to pat him on the back the next I wanted to punch him in the gut. The others I never really cared about. Most of them were regulated to set decoration and furthering plot points. Gregory Dickens who played Gooper did manage to come alive a little when he was giving his betrayed speech to Big Mama, but most of the time he just seemed to blend into the background. Cary Nichols, who has a commanding stage presence, never seemed to be able to embody Big Mama with any bigger emotion than a nasally whine. I would have liked to have seen something from her other than a subjugated matriarch.
Lysa Kennedy did an adequate job as Mae mother to five chronically upstaging children, but many of her big moments seemed to have an overly presentational quality about them. Many never seemed to come from a real emotional place or stem from real intentions, they just came out because they had to. I felt as if she was a bit too confined in her character. I felt she wanted to break loose but wasn't allowed to. Although I must say after Charles Bell, she was the only actor that seemed to inhabit the world of the play when not delivering lines, often finding good natural buisness.
Kent Smith did a fine job as Reverend Tooker and probably got the biggest laugh of the night for his hastily exit, but I do wish I'd see more vocal range from him. He tends to often get stuck in the same delivery.
Bob Baldridge also did a fine job with Dr. Braugh, but his onstage time was limited, and other times he was kind of regulated to the outskirts.
Aside from the great language, probably some of the best since Shakespeare, and the wonderful performance by Charles Bell, the only other redeeming thing about this play was the amazing set design by Jack Lindsay and always remarkable technical direction by Adam Cohen. It was a really wonderful set, and the false proscenium really added a lot to the over all stage picture. Unfortunately the lighting, while appropriately warm and moody, was a bit spotty in places, but knowing the limitations of ACT I can look past this deficiency in the production.
Unless this production gets significantly better over the course of its run, I really couldn't say it’s the best thing I’ve seen at ACT. Go see this play to hear Williams's beautiful wordplay, watch Mr. Bell's grand performance, or see a truly beautiful set, but I wouldn't expect anything to be much more striking than those.

~Jason Williams