from wnctheatre, http://wnctheatre.livejournal.com
BG--
Edward the King: A Wonderful Play, in Search of a Production
2/20/08 02:54 pm
Crown of Shadows, a joint production from Junction City Productions and Black Swan Theatre, is an offering of three plays by local playwright David Brendan Hopes, on three consecutive weekends, from February 15 through March 2, at the Asheville Arts Center.
The first of the three installments is Edward The King, which will enjoy a full production this coming May as part of New York City’s Gayfest. The play, beyond question, is worthy of a full production. It is unfortunate, then, that the play was not afforded the same luxury this past weekend at the Asheville Arts Center.
The script is simply delightful, filled with whimsy, wit, passion and poetry. It tells the story of young Edward Plantagenet before and during his ascension to the throne, and his deep abiding love for another young man that he meets on his secret journey to the underbelly of his eventual kingdom. The play is unique in that it takes place both then and now: in a world from hundreds of years gone by complete with laptop computers and automatic weapons. The dialogue is truly engaging, and some of the acting is good as well, but there is little to no production value whatsoever, which proves to be detrimental to the overall experience. There is no set designer listed in the program, which is painfully obvious when looking at the stage. The landscape is random, flat and does not help to facilitate any kind of flow to either the physical or the emotional life of the play. Since the stage dressing failed to make clear the production's conceptual merging of two time periods, perhaps this could have been achieved with costuming. However, apparel choices seemed to blend together in a hodge podge of non-specific time periods and styles.
The only other production elements present is provided by Brian Sneeden, designer of the sound and lights, both of which, thankfully, help to create and even at times enhance the world of Edward The King, so terribly lacking in any other aspect of the production.
Another saving grace of the evening is the acting from four of the five cast members, who were splendid. Unfortunately, Piers Gaveston, the one character who truly needed to dominate the world with his sexual energy, blow every girl's skirt up, and make every boy question his own manhood, does none of those things, coming across more as simply amusing and cute rather than dangerous and beautiful. To be fair, the actor seems only partially responsible for his performance. We have to look to the higher chain of command to find where truly the fault lies.
After seeing the performance, I expected to see the same credit in the program for director as there was for set designer: none. Alas, no, there were two! There were several choices made, or not made, on various levels, including acting, staging and design, but most of it seemed arbitrary at best. The actors provided some wonderful moments, but the bigger picture lacked any momentum, continuity or vision.
But once again, I must bow my head and curtsy to Mr. Hopes, who has written what I believe to be a wonderful play. I look forward to the next two plays in the next two weeks. It certainly is an ambitious effort, and hats off to Junction City and Black Swan for giving a voice to a well-written play. Despite the fact that the lack of production and direction detract from the enjoyment of the evening, there are some engaging acting moments. And even if you can’t see all the action all the time, (a distinct possibility, given the lay-out of the space), there is satisfaction to be had in just listening to the words.
21 February 2008
Crown of Shadows
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Excerpted from Mr. Hopes' blog, http://ageofsilver.blogspot.com.
BG--
February 18, 2008
...Edward the King closed its Asheville run this afternoon. I’d say it is the most successful showing of my work in this town, and is so to a degree which creates a whole new classification. I’ve started over. The playwright I was before is gone, and I am new. Steve Lloyd of HART could not stop saying that the script was "perfect. . . flawless. . . ." More people could have come, but all who came are, I think, convinced that we are doing a worthwhile thing.
...Everyone worked so hard. Everything came out so well. Let me remember this blessing for at least a day or two.
February 17, 2008
Sunday morning. Last night’s Edward was better even than the one before, and the audience was yet more in tune. I think we have a great show, and it may have been a mistake not to run Edward all three weekends-–but who could possibly know?
Opening Night
February 16, 2008
...none of the issues that tormented me about the production ended up having any consequence. The actors triumphed over all adversity. I maintain they shouldn’t have had to triumph over adversity, that we could have made it easier for them with better planning, but to go on about this is to devalue the amending spirit which hovers, sometimes, over theater. Everyone is a more upright acolyte at that altar than I am, and I must learn faith.
Last night’s Edward the King at the Arts Center was a triumph. It was a triumph for every single element of the production. The set had a rough, punky, urban feel which fit, in the end, beautifully; tech was perfect; the actors, to a person, had never been better, or as good. Cody stepped back from the over-the-topness of dress rehearsal and was cunning, dangerous, beautiful, heartbreaking. Adam–in many ways Cody’s opposite as an actor, rising from the depths as Cody settles down from the heights– was the support and foundation of the show. Anne-Marie had a new wickedness about her–a wickedness compounded by how great she looked in her dresses–which made the audience gasp. Darren has, almost from the first, been flawless, and for the first time everyone was on his level. Bill’s bishop looked sorrowful for the evil he was doing with outward glee, and that is better than any direction he was ever given. The playwright is the last person to ask about the play on opening night, and, if the truth be told, I’m a little sick of it, and will have to build new enthusiasm for New York, BUT, not once did I cringe or wish I’d written a passage otherwise. Some people said, "This is the best play I’ve ever seen in Asheville." I hope those people were frequent theater-goers. It might have been. What little objectivity I could muster suggested it was damn good.
A couple did walk out, the man saying loudly, "I’ve had enough of this!" when Edward and Gaveston kissed in the first scene. I’d seen them come in, though, and saw in the man’s eyes that he was there to do just what he did, to make a statement, to demand his money back and stomp out, momentarily destroying other people’s enjoyment, if possible.
...[The director]is the tide upon which all this rose. I watched her attending to the details-- thinking of everything, doing everything-- with an emotion of amazement and gratitude. I remembered myself doing the same in the past, but I think that time is gone. I am a playwright now, or an actor, but the production end of things has settled, I think, permanently on other shoulders. I’ve stopped seeing the details which must be attended to. I say too often, "Oh, just let it pass. Do something simpler." I see the play and think the play is words, and, whether it is or not, that now must be my purlieu. Mickey and I quarreled briefly in the midst of the tension before curtain, and she said, "I want you to know that every bit of effort by everybody on this show has been for you." At that moment, things were going so determinedly against my desire that I couldn’t see how it could be true, but what if, in a larger sense, it was the case? Then no gratitude would be enough. One would cripple oneself going around whispering, "but why?"
[Gilgamesh: Wonderful Work, Spread Thin]
Gilgamesh opened last Saturday at the the
Asheville Arts Center as part of the Crown of Shadows
trilogy of plays. I'm very hesitant to review this
show on many levels. Mostly because Saturday night
marked the first night I've set foot in the Asheville
Arts Center, meaning I have no frame of reference when
reviewing technical elements or production value.
On a random beginning note, the night did mark
the worst case of cell phone assery I have witnessed
in some time. A mystery guest in the audience decided
to somehow connect to an insistant customer service
line and let it ride for a whole scene. Imagine while
Gilgamesh questions the nature of his life and destiny
to come, the dramatic underscoring of 'if you'd like
to return to the main menu...press *9'.
My disappointment in the technical production
value of this play is summed up by a single scene.
Gilgamesh encounters the ferryman and demands to be
transported to the land of the dead. The ferryman
agrees, and the lights go down. The lights come back
up and a blue stretch of fabric now spans the stage
being bobbed up and down by two of the actors to
represent water as Gilgamesh and the ferryman walk
leisurely...or I suppose boatily...across the stage.
The lights go down once again, and come back up on an
empty stage. Gilgamesh and the ferryman enter again to
speak the equivalent of "whoa, we're across that big
river!"
One of the problems with this scene is that it
fights against the majority of the production's choice
to embrace the space (much of the actors' time is
spent looking Down Center Stage and saying "See
the...{enter thing that the audience is to imagine
here}").
The other problem is that there is a serious
lighting/scene breakdown issue that cripples the
pacing of this production. The play is enacted on a
sectional set which would give the advantage of using
crossfades to keep the action quick and moving, but
after seeing one crossfade in the middle of an early
scene they are never seen again. Every scene of the
play, no matter how short, seems to be punctuated by a
blackout which sometimes is lifted to reveal the same
characters in the same position, or different
characters that could have just made and entrance on a
different part of the stage.
I also had a slight issue with the sound design.
I did not mind the content of the underscoring music
for the play, and I did feel it created the desired
mood. The amount of underscoring, however, made me
tired of the content throughout the second act. Again,
this may be due to hearing the same content during the
many blackouts.
Usually, I am hesitant to critique production
value of local plays as not everyone has a massive
budget to hurl at the many projects that arise. People
that lack generous funding from donors or personal
fortunes to fill every play they have with a falling
chandelier which can then reassemble itself is not
going to hear a peep from me. I do theatre in this
town as well, and I get my share of criticism.
What I am saying is not some indictment of the
this particular production, but rather that I had
heard wonderful things of Edward the King's script and
found this script to be beautifully poetic at points
but somewhat confused on what reaction its audience
was to have and what genre it was to fit in. Thus, I
am saying it may have been wise to pick one stronger
script and produce that for three weeks. The concept
of producing three full length plays at the same time
with the staff and budget of one full length play
would be a daunting task for a company with full time
interns and an offshore bank account.
So, in the end, I just want to make clear that I
had a problem with almost no performance in these
pieces. Most of the actors seemed to be working as
well as they could with the circumstances. The
performers, designers, and production in general just
seemed to be spread a bit thin throughout the three
productions.
Naturally, my assumptions are unproven as I have
yet to see Hat this coming weekend. I truly felt,
however, that many of the artists involved were doing
wonderful work in this production.
Again, excerpted from Mr. Hopes' blog, http://ageofsilver.blogspot.com.
BG--
February 24, 2008
...Crown of Shadows surpasses my every expectation. I don’t suppose it’s going to be a great moneymaker, but it surpasses my very modest expectations even on that account. I have learned a number of things from it. The lesson which stands out most boldly at the moment is of those things I am not interested in doing anymore, and probably wasn’t very interested in at any time. If it had been purely up to me, the festival would never have happened. I came up with the idea, but without my partner Mickey and her taste for–or at least ability at–organization and plain hard ground level work, it would still be an idea. I fought my own reluctance at almost every point. They may have been my words, but her will delivered them to the community.
...Gilgamesh is better than it was at the Wortham. MM was at the show last night. It must be strange watching a new vision of a show you directed–which you were the first to direct–but he seemed to like it, and probably appreciated, as I did, that intimacy improves even an epic. These actors are better than the last batch, and the light and sound is at least as good-- infinitely better considering that Ann flushed $6,000 down that drain the first time around. The venue is problematic, but that makes less difference than one expected it would. When we arrived last night we had to disassemble a hip-hop concert before we could set up for ourselves. ... Like most things one wants to get agitated about, the mess and the late start ended up making no difference at all.
Actors are continually fascinating to me. ...Everyone is doing fine, no embarrassments, nothing to apologize for. Several of our number are boundlessly talented. I seldom brag about never having taken an acting class, lest somebody say, "Maybe you should," but I always learn a great deal from those I watch on stage. A is very young and so prodigiously talented that the limits of his potential cannot, at this point, be imagined. He also has a gentle wit and personal sweetness that will fend off much of the garbage slung one’s way in the theater. I cannot imagine anyone being his enemy, or grudging him any success in the future, and this is good luck almost as great at his talent. I tell him I love him every night, and I hope he understands how literal I am. C is on some levels the best actor on stage, the best student actor I have ever known, but the best of his acting occurs in rehearsal. For performance he hardens and intensifies, and though intensity is good, too much, or intensity badly directed, is less so. He shouts all through Gilgamesh. I have said nothing beyond a few hints because he is a young actor trying something by his own imagination, and the fact is that Gilgamesh as Blow Hard is an interpretation that actually works. I sit in the dark theater and watch him veering toward the border of Too Much, but never quite hitting it, always staying within the bounds of the interpretation he has carved out for himself. It works less well with the script than the more nuanced character I thought we were developing in rehearsal, but it is a plausible interpretation, and he has the talent almost to bring it off. Plus, I’m essentially a teacher, and if he’s learning by this–I’m sure he is–then I feel he must see it through. How many times has a director let me have my head even when I made his flesh crawl? Thank God I don’t know. But the source of his interpretation bothers me more than its qualities. It seems entirely external. I’m not a method actor. I do not believe I have to have had an experience to portray it on stage, but I believe I must be imagining it honestly and completely at the moment of portrayal. C seems to be doing none of those things. When questioned about a choice he’s made, his answers cluster around the notion that a man like Gilgamesh or Gaveston should be doing such-and-such at this point in the action, a fully external and arbitrary process which harkens back to an older day of bombastic and insincere acting. I fear he is being badly trained by the theater department, which has poured all its energy into a method which teaches you, essentially, how to fake a tantrum when you need one, and not much else. The lucky part of it is that C is such a superb and dedicated student that the energy with which he is absorbing bad advice will, I am sure, be matched and over-matched by the energy with which he will absorb the good, when he learns to discern between them. Professional courtesy makes it difficult even to warn him against the baleful influence. I must rely on the gods of theater, assuming they will do what they can to lead such a bright talent down the right path. T is a completely natural and intelligent actress, always better than you think she could possibly be, always making the best of whatever awkward direction you may have given her. I dwell on her less because I think there is nothing she needs from me, other than opportunity. Her problem will be that her beauty is unconventional, and those who cast according to appearance will foolishly overlook her. We almost missed casting her as Siduri–which she does brilliantly– because she was not the sexpot we thought we wanted. We were wrong. Others, such as D, show that an actor may have fulfillment even when acting is necessarily an avocation. I don’t doubt he could be a professional actor, with his imposing (though also limiting) physical presence, and his elegant, no-wasted-energy method, but he seems to be happy here, getting better parts and more of them than anybody could in New York, having a real job and therefore a shot at a real life. The same could be said of S. The same could be said of me.
...of all the things I’ve done, I think I’ve loved Crown of Shadows the best. Since it isn’t a person, I think I can say uprightly that I’ve loved it because it has been a success.
...Afternoon: The Sunday matinee of Gilgamesh was delayed half an hour while our technician did not appear, did not answer his cell phone. ...Word is he overslept– until 3 in the afternoon. I had to leave before all excuses were made, all explanations rendered, but it should be an interesting beginning of the week next week. I think we convinced B to adapt his ambitions for the set so that we might actually rehearse Hat. ...
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Gilgamesh Opening Night
February 23, 2008
I’m going to stop having opinions about plays and how they’re going to play and how they’ll fly on opening night, for again, last night, Gilgamesh was triumphant against my misgivings. It’s not that I don’t trust the gods of the theater; it’s just that I’m astonished when they bestow their blessings on me. I sat in my back pew mesmerized, as though I’d never seen it before, as though I were a ten year old at a fairy tale. Gilgamesh is a fairy tale, and the power of that medium reached through it without any assistance, or even consciousness, on my part. The house was not full, but it was responsive and it was they who first telegraphed to me that we had another success.
...
Madden's comment is interesting in that he apologizes somewhat for criticizing the design aspects of the show by saying he knows not everyone has a big budget (I'm generalizing here). But the budget isn't the real issue as much as directorial acumen, and Ryan's criticism are valid I think. Based on my experience with "Hat" the script was quite playable and interesting, but needed more coherent and decisive direction. Direction includes design, and above all else, timing, movement and clarity. The show was needlessly slow overall. Blackouts are pointless unless they make a statement. Empty scene changes have no place in a world dominated by cinema. Theatrical logic should always be thoroughly considered and aggressively pursued if we are to bring people to the theatre in larger numbers, and get the financial support we desire.
Since we've moved on to "Hat," here's more from http://ageofsilver/blogspoot.com.
BG--
March 2, 2008
...In terms of attendance, Hat has been our most successful play. I don’t understand it, but I don’t mind it. I think it is, of the three, the script which rolls along without a glitch, almost actor-proof, almost inevitable. It’s where I want to launch from as a playwright from this point on. It felt like silk to me.
Ryan Madden posts a detailed, very professional and plausible critique of the technical aspects of Gilgamesh. It’s not a particularly flattering assessment, but one is flattered when someone takes the time. I realize that I am worse (or better) than others at overlooking technical shortcomings; usually I’m so wrapped up in the words or the acting that I don’t see them. On my own I noticed none of the problems Ryan did–or didn’t think of them as problems-- but once he mentioned them, I understood what he meant, and how a person who was looking for those things could have his experience of the play diminished. Short of my own theater and a whole lot of money, I don’t know what to do about them, except maybe post another sign like the one we did warning of nudity and strong language– "theater professionals may be disappointed at our various unavoidable amateurisms." I can’t even say that we did our best, for I--and probably Mickey too– let some things through which we knew were not the best, or even the best we could do, but to which someone or other had an attachment, and we had decided to take the concept of collaboration seriously. Things happened that made me cringe, but made another smile, and that seemed an upright tradeoff. I think Ryan and Brian have a different feel for what constitutes correct tech for a play, Ryan intending, if I understand things right, to be efficient, elegant, unobtrusive. Brian is more poetical, more responsive to the text, and rather more about self-expression. Both are welcome behind my board any day....
March 1, 2008
Hat’s world premiere went nobly last night, a good performance of the play which is, in terms of simple efficiency of exposition, the best in the bunch. Stephanie has grown into the queen, and the two goddesses never worked better together. Darren was moving as the vizier-- the emotional center of the evening.... Our audience was considerably larger than I expected, perhaps on the basis of word-of-mouth....
Ryan,
Thank you for your review.
Apologies for the delay...
Gilgamesh: The Oldest Story Never Told
The second installment of Black Swan Theatre and Junction City Productions’ Crown of Shadows, (a trilogy of plays by David Brendan Hopes that explore the different ways in which one can be royally fucked throughout the ages), is the epic tale of Gilgamesh. It is not nearly as good a play as Edward the King, the first offering of the Hopes festival, nor does the acting hold up as well either. However, the theme of the plays is becoming increasingly clear. In the world of Hopes, it seems that virtually all human relationships are predicated on sex, sexual tension, sexual innuendo, sexual healing, sexual chocolate…I digress. There is historical supposition that Edward II and Gaveston were actually lovers, and that this relationship in some ways led to Edward’s decline and ultimate demise; certainly that is the case in Marlowe’s play about the two, which inspired Hopes’ work. However, the rather clumsy insertion (heh) of a love story between Gilgamesh and Enkidu was approximately as effective and fitting as having Sam and Frodo make out in Lord of the Rings (for the sake of comparing apples to epics), and then never to really speak of it again. It doesn’t create more depth or profundity in their relationship; it feels forced and a distraction. I like to think that human interaction is complex enough to allow for a variety of life-changing bonds without there always having to be a quirky quasi-romance involved; I am a-Freud (mea culpa) that Hopes does not feel the same. I certainly can’t fault him for having a different world-view or literary interpretation from my own, but I disagree with it. It is somewhat unfortunate; I truly believe Mr. Hopes has some serious talent, and the ability to eloquently examine the human condition in his plays, but the stilted relationships tend to detract from the potentially larger experience the works have to offer.
The production elements were lacking at best, although costumes and lights made a worthy effort. The acting for the most part was flat and disconnected, except when it was presentational and disconnected. Almost as soon as any story or character arc (other than the title character’s) began, it was over, so I felt as though I had seen a dramatization of the Cliffs Notes of Gilgamesh.
It all comes down to storytelling. Being effective, creative and specific is what good storytellers do. There is a wonderful story to be told here. It simply wasn’t.
Hat: Not Just a Chapeau
So I’m in the theatre and the set looks ... familiar. Like ... Sumerian.... But I am more than willing to roll with this because I’ve heard that some of the set construction for the other two shows was taking away from rehearsal time, so perhaps they’ve scaled back for acting’s sake.
Enter two goddesses, Ma’at, the Lady of the White Feather, played by Trinity Smith in a suit once owned by Mark McKinney’s Chicken Lady character on Kids in the Hall, and Sekhmet, the Lioness, played by Mickey Hanley in some manner of feline-print suit once owned by Zsa Zsa Gabor. They are performing a resurrection ceremony... or planning a bachelorette party; it’s a little hard to tell from the casual nature of the dialogue and their Laverne and Shirley affectations. They bring Hat[shepsut] (Stephanie Hickling) back from the dead, and shit starts to hit the fan almost immediately, as Hat begins her journey towards a corrupt, egotistical, and self-serving reign.
In addition to the above, the cast is joined by the rather stoic stylings of Ben Marks, as Senenmut (or Mut, as I have nicknamed him in the spirit of the title, and how he shall henceforth be referred). He and Hat have what I think I can most accurately describe as an anti-climax when Hat confronts Mut about his having slept with her daughter, Neferure (Christina McClellan). (Never mind the fact that Hat married her half-brother in order to rise to power rather than remain faithful to Mut.) Hat appears to be, well, somewhat upset, kind of like if Mut ate the last donut, and Mut tries to explain why he didn’t take the trash out like he said he would. Hat then seals him in her tomb - an effect attempted to be achieved by releasing a single curtain - while Mut tries to create the illusion of layers of depth in the tomb by changing his voice’s volume and clarity, kind of like when Goofy falls of a cliff in Disney cartoons. (Oh, Wikipedia, you are too wonderful for anybody to realize you.)
Mike Coghlan is rather funny as the moronic pharaoh Tuthmosis II, although I am somewhat unnerved by the playwright’s use of “retard” to describe someone in an insulting way, and that we, the audience, are apparently supposed to laugh along with the characters as the word is thrown around on multiple occasions. Darren Marshall, as the teacher and mentor of Tuthmosis III (also played by Coghlan), is a strong presence and delivers a solid performance graced by a nuance infrequently achieved throughout this production.
My primary point of contention, though, is with the play’s lack of conviction and focus in general. Is it a straight-up comedy? Even a black comedy? Sort of. I mean, there were definitely some funny exchanges, but I felt as though I were also expected to care about the fates of the characters, and, in truth, I didn’t. Every time the play got near to reaching any sort of emotional momentum, the lucidity was broken by a smart-aleck remark by one or more of the characters. Sort of a jarring experience in that respect. It is as though the play is afraid to ever take itself too seriously, for fear that we might reject it. Hat breaks up with you before you can dump her to take her hot sister to the prom.
This in: NY reviews of locally born shows...
(from http://www.nytheatre.com/nytheatre/showpage.php?t=edwa6853)
BG
nytheatre.com review
Micah Bucey · May 15, 2008
Toward the end of the first act of Edward The King, David Brendan Hopes's sly but stiff update of Christopher Marlowe's classic tragedy, Edward assures his wife Isabella: "It doesn't have to end well. It only has to be well for a little while." Hopes seems to use this line as his mantra, crafting a lukewarm romance that alternates between short spurts of witty, biting comedy and longer bouts of distracting camp parody. The cast is game, the production values high, and the talent involved apparent, but ultimately, things just don't heat up enough to fully justify the play's inevitable hot-poker of an ending.
This struggle to find the right tone isn't immediately apparent. Hopes smartly begins the play with three duet scenes depicting the meeting, seduction, and outing of Prince Edward by scrappy street urchin Piers Gaveston. Under Sidney J. Burgoyne's direction, these short scenes simmer with the excitement of new-found love and uninhibited sexuality. The flirty tango of Chad Hoeppner's confused prince and Brian Charles Rooney's sassy hustler is always engaging, if at times a tad cold.
Things start to muddle in the subsequent palace scenes, where Isabella, Edward's seemingly forward-thinking, understanding wife, and Mortimer, a soldier and Isabella's sometime lover, are thrown into the mix. Megan McQuillan, lovely and strong in her first scene, has the unenviable task of creating a character who goes from inhabiting a voice of modern reason in the first act to performing what I can only describe as a complete turn to clear villainy in the play's more pot-boiler second act. Similarly, Patrick Porter's Mortimer is never given a chance to grow into a full-blooded being, despite Porter's delicious line delivery and vulpine stage presence. Both act as foils to our heroes' undying love, but without clear arcs to follow, they appear as mere flaccid evil doers straight out of a Walt Disney animated feature.
Once Edward is crowned king and Gaveston begins to move up in the ranks of his heart and kingdom, the production loses its footing. Hoeppner and Rooney, so convincing in their eager devotion at the start, are left to join McQuillan and Porter in playing out a long checklist of betrayals and seductions. Even the arrival of a conniving Bishop, played with a gleeful sneer by Jo Ann Cunningham, fails to up the stakes to anything above a low boil. Only a short scene between Edward's two lovers, in which Rooney and McQuillan are able to break free of the script's bawdy humor to bleed genuine emotion and rage, gives the proceedings any amount of gravity.
Burgoyne's production team adds the requisite amount of slick, shadowy design elements that do their best to remind us that this is a story that will not end well. Michael Hotopp's economical set and Graham T. Posner's stark lighting are especially effective. But all of these worthy elements are left to drag the story along as the body count rises and our characters limp to a finish that, while intended as a winking toast to the ironic meaninglessness of revenge, comes off as a tacked-on coda with little to do with what's come before.
Somehow, though, with all my caveats, the entire evening is an intermittently enjoyable one, even with its missteps. The production boldly embraces its epic pedigree and attempts something one rarely sees in the theatre or anywhere else these days: a usually bold, often funny, unabashedly romantic tragedy. In the midst of the unfurling madness, Isabella rebuts her husband's whining with a curt "Get used to your hopes being dashed. It's the human condition." At its disappointing conclusion, I might remember Edward The King as an overlong mess of a play with only occasional flashes of greatness, but I must admit that it does do pretty well at being just that.
and this one...
(from http://www.backstage.com/bso/news_reviews/nyc/review_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003804850)
BG--
Edward the King
May 16, 2008
By Jerry Portwood
The notorious life of King Edward II of England has inspired great works of stage (Christopher Marlowe's play) and screen (Derek Jarman's political queer film) due to the 14th-century monarch's reported homosexuality and tales of a torturous murder. Playwright David Brendan Hopes' decision to revisit the relationship between Edward and his male lover should inspire some new conceptual twist; instead the play feels like a dumbed-down version of the story, lacking eroticism and a provocative point of view.
Set in an unknown contemporary time, Edward the King begins with the sound of helicopters as Edward II (Chad Hoeppner) flees down an alley dressed in a white blazer with gold brocade trim, resembling a young lawyer in a pajama costume more than royalty. He encounters Piers Gaveston (a charismatic Brian Charles Rooney), who inexplicably invites Edward back to his hovel (a versatile set piece designed by Michael Hotopp) so that he can hide out. Within minutes the two are wrestling, sniffing one another (literally), disrobing, and kissing. Although the production is part of Gayfest NYC 2008, director Sidney J. Burgoyne plays things extremely safe, with the young men having perfunctory physical contact and never getting fully naked. Although the two have just met, they are quickly professing their love for one another. Is it meant as a comment on superficial lust and mistakes of love? No chance. It's just to speed along the plot.
The subsequent intrigue with Edward's wife, Isabella (Megan McQuillan), and her lover Mortimer (Patrick Porter) feels equally trite. For brief flashes, the playwright seems to want to impart some message about class politics overriding sexuality — the queen is just a whore with a crown — but it falls flat. In the end, Edward the King is a toothless gay history lesson too wary to upset anyone's bourgeois sensibilities or ideas of decorum.
Presented by Bruce Robert Harris and Jack W. Batman in association with Marvin Kahan as part of Gayfest NYC 2008
Post a Comment