You Can’t Take It With You
Posted: October 8, 2014 Filed under: Becca Doodle - Happy, Broadway, Comedy, Play, Revival | Tags: annaleighashford, broadway, comedy, jamesearljones, kaufmanandhart, kristinenielson, mastersofsex, review, rosebyrne, youcanttakeitwithyou 3 Comments
What. A. Ball. I knew I would have a good time at You Can’t Take It With You, but I didn’t know I would have that good a time. And what a great way to be introduced! I had never seen the play, the movie, nor the short-lived 80s sitcom (of which you have to watch the trailer). Who knew such an old-school play could feel so new and contemporary? And I mean, olllld. This play, written by Moss Hart and George S. Kaufman, originally opened on Broadway in 1936 and won the Pulitzer in 1937 (click here for a little more history). It has since had several revivals, and I firmly believe Broadway will welcome back this most recent production with open arms.
I love this kind of screwball comedy. It doesn’t quite fall into the farce category, but it is still a full-fledged comedy packed with slapstick, visual gags, witty humor, and hilarious situations. What I like is that the humor is not relying fully on misunderstandings and mix-ups (except, albeit, for one big one); rather it generates from the quirkiest, happiest family you’ll ever meet.
The Sycamores live together in New York. All of them. Mom, Dad, Grandpa, daughters Alice and Essie, and Essie’s husband Ed. Plus the maid, her boyfriend, the dance teacher who is always there, and the delivery guy who never left. It’s actually a surprise to see such a big cast up on stage, and it’s wonderful, especially with this group of performers, but I’ll come back to that. Let’s return to the plot. Alice has fallen in love with Anthony Kirby, son of Mr. Kirby, president of Kirby and Co. down on Wall Street. The Kirbys are, to put it lightly, a little more straight-laced than the Sycamores, and Alice worries that the two families meeting might ruin any future she could have with Tony. When the Kirbys come over for dinner on the wrong night and the Sycamores are going about their evening in true Sycamore fashion, things go awry very quickly (much to our delight).
It’s hard to describe the Sycamore family in words; so much of what makes them hilarious and “out there” is visual. The walls of their house alone give you an idea of what these people are like. But despite how “crazy” they may or may not be, there is so much love in this family. They are genuinely happy to be together and to be going about their business. And with a cast like this, you’ve never been in better hands.
Now comes the time in my review when I stop everything to talk about Annaleigh Ashford. If she does not get a Tony nomination for her performance, I will picket Broadway. I have loved her since the days of Legally Blonde. From Dogfight to her Tony-nominated performance in Kinky Boots, and now that I’m an avid viewer of “Masters of Sex,” I can’t get enough of her these days. Now she’s playing Essie in a show packed with stars and winning performances all around, and she still practically steals the show. I, for one, in the big group scenes, couldn’t help but watch whatever the heck she was up to. Her grasp of physical comedy is amazing, and her line deliveries are like no other.
Okay, I think I got my gushing out of my system. Other standouts include Will Brill as her husband (just wait until you see his physicality); they make an hysterical pair. Kristine Nielson, as you know, is another favorite of mine (she plays Penny, the mother). Then there’s Reg Rogers as Essie’s Russian dance teacher, who always gets me; Julie Halston who stops the show by walking up the stairs; Rose Byrne making a great debut; and I haven’t even mentioned James Earl Jones or the rest of the brilliant cast.
I’m telling you now, readers: get thee to the Longacre for a joyous couple of hours packed with belly laughs and smiles that leave your face exhausted. Just do yourself a favor, and go spend an evening with the Sycamores. You won’t be sorry.
You Can’t Take It With You
Written by George S. Kaufman and Moss Hart, Directed by Scott Ellis
Longacre Theatre, Closing February 22nd, 2015
Photo Credit: Joan Marcus
Pictured: Annaleigh Ashford and Reg Rogers
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time
Posted: September 30, 2014 Filed under: Broadway, Drama, Play | Tags: alexsharp, broadway, christopherboone, curiousincident, markhaddon, review, thecuriousincidentofthedoginthenighttime, westend Leave a comment
I liked this play a lot. It wasn’t necessarily life-changing, and I wouldn’t necessarily insist that you need to pay full price for a ticket, but I would say that if you have the opportunity to go, take advantage of it for a unique theatrical experience.
For the people out there who have not read the book (or the people who have and simply forgot everything about it like me), The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time came out in 2003, written by British novelist Mark Haddon. It’s about a 15-year-old boy named Christopher Boone. Christopher is extremely gifted in math, logic, and all things science, but he struggles socially. He doesn’t like when people touch him. He is easily overstimulated and screams until he is able to calm down. He has a complicated relationship with his dad and maybe an even more difficult relationship with his mother before she passed away two years earlier. The story begins with a neighbor’s dog being murdered. And à la John Coffey in The Green Mile, Christopher is found cradling the dead dog and is immediately accused. He makes it his mission to find out who did it and starts detective work even though he doesn’t like talking to strangers. But as he starts to dig, other mysteries begin to unravel as well, forever changing his life as he knows it.
The production (a transfer from the National Theatre in London) is very innovative and smart. It’s well-directed, and the design is arguably the best part. The creative team has done an excellent job of making the audience feel – or at the very least, understand – how Christopher feels day-to-day. In one scene, he explains that he “sees everything.” You know how Raymond counts the toothpicks in a split second? Like that, Christopher registers every single thing around him. Therefore, if he’s in a crowded place like a train station, it’s an unreal amount of stimulation that overwhelms and cripples him until he is able to find a rhythm to the madness. This then guides him back to his own personal equilibrium. So, through a slick scenic design, charged music, flashing lights, and incredibly well-used projections, the stage transforms into what’s going on in his brain during these moments. It can be very unnerving at times (in the best way possible). With such an effective design and moving choreography, the creators have set up a great storytelling convention for us to go directly into this kid’s mind. Now that I think about it, even in the calmer sections, the design is still how Christopher sees the world – like a grid, finding whatever sense he can in his surroundings. For example, he builds a train set throughout Act 1, literally taking the different pieces out of the walls around him. Everything is compartmentalized, organized, and clean…until it’s not, and he panics. Christopher is wonderfully played by Alex Sharp, a 25-year-old recent graduate of Juilliard (and by recent, I mean this past May). You’re looking at a future Tony nominee, folks.
Now this isn’t exactly a heads-up per se, but I feel like I should note again that this production came over from the West End, and you can definitely tell. This is British theatre at its core. It’s hard to explain what I mean by that. Basically, the style is different – the way of storytelling, the pacing, etc. Quite often, it can be tricky for plays to make the jump across the pond for these very reasons. Sometimes, American audiences have a difficult time adjusting to the style shift. I’m very curious to see what the critics will think. I personally like that it’s structurally different and that the storytelling makes you work, although the pacing was often a problem. I was bored at times, and it’s a little long. Granted, I saw it in the middle of previews, so this may change (they even had to hold for a few minutes during Act 2 due to technical difficulties. Ohhh previews.).
So my bottom line? It’s a striking design and a very, very technical show, but what’s lovely – and crucial – is that amidst all the flash and spectacle, Curious doesn’t lose its heart.
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time
Written by Simon Stephens, Based on the novel by Mark Haddon, Directed by Marianne Elliott
Barrymore Theatre, Open-ended
Photo Credit: Joan Marcus
Pictured: Alex Sharp
This Is Our Youth
Posted: September 25, 2014 Filed under: Broadway, Play, Revival | Tags: annadshapiro, broadway, georgemichael, hawaii, igbygoesdown, kennethlonergan, kieranculkin, michaelcera, review, thisisouryouth Leave a comment
Long time no chat, Broadway fans! Sorry I disappeared there for a while. I was lucky enough to be in Hawaii a couple of weeks ago (the Big Island – check out the music video!), and I’m only now beginning to resurface and return to the reality of living on this island. So let’s catch up on some theatre, shall we? I saw This Is Our Youth back in August during its second week of previews (broke that damn rule again) and was happy to see that it opened to great reviews while I was busy “sun tanning.” And surprise, surprise – I’m on board with the critics for this one. You may have already heard the buzz: the Kenneth Lonergan revival directed by Anna D. Shapiro (Of Mice and Men, August: Osage County) transferred from Steppenwolf starring Kieran Culkin, Michael Cera, and Tavi Gevinson.
Like the many theatre students before me, This Is Our Youth was required reading in college. I think I bought it from the campus bookstore my sophomore year for Acting I. What I’m sad to admit is I didn’t remember a lick of it. Perhaps if I’d had to do a scene in class, there’d be more pieces of it in my memory. But when I think of that play, all that tends to come to mind is three angsty teens in an apartment…which you could argue is exactly what the play is about. There isn’t much of a plot in the typical sense; it’s definitely more character-driven. I bought tickets for this production well in advance, eager to see one of the first plays of the season, but honestly, I wasn’t that excited for this play in particular. There was no reason for this really. It had plenty going for it, but nonetheless, I went in without any expectations. I’m happy to say that I liked it quite a bit.
The play takes place at Dennis’s apartment in Manhattan. His friend Warren stops by late one night, having just been kicked out of the house by his abusive father, with a bag of stolen money in tow (we come to find out rather quickly that it’s his father’s money). They start to scheme how they can go about taking advantage of the stolen money but also somehow return the full sum the next day (as you might expect, this involves many an illegal activity). The night carries on as these two teens navigate the theft, the piling up dilemmas, and their relationship with one another. It gets even more complicated when Jessica, the outspoken girl Warren has been crushing on for a while, shows up.
I think what surprised me most was Michael Cera’s work. I was very impressed by him. I don’t mean to imply that I expected him to be bad, but Cera, as we all know, has been pigeonholed in film and TV as the awkward never-knows-what-to-say kid, and as a result, we’ve come to expect a certain type of character from him. While Warren is arguably still in that vein, it was nice to see Cera’s additional colors and deeper vulnerability. He is very present in the role. I think this style of theatre and dialogue is a good fit for him – very natural and organic. Cera’s moments alone on stage are great, for example, because nothing actually happens. He’s just there, in a room that he knows he doesn’t belong in, not sure how to be in his own body or the space around him, and Cera is excellent at emanating that feeling without having to work for it. Kieran Culkin is also fantastic. You can see all of Dennis’s layers at work, and his chemistry with Cera is so easy. They’re always on the same page and in tune with each other.
I wish I could say I liked the girl. Gevinson is 18, and from what I’ve been told, a fashion savant blogger turned actor. I think I’ve said this before, but I admit that I’m often more critical of female actresses because I’m looking at the role more closely – not necessarily for myself but because I have friends that I know could knock it out of the park. Her performance felt “put on” to me. The naturalness that was so effortlessly coming out of the boys was not there with her. I wanted the role to be more in her skin. I wouldn’t go so far as to say it was forced, but it wasn’t comfortable. At least for me; the critics loved her.
Regardless, I’m glad I went to see it. Shapiro’s directing is clean and specific. This play so convincingly reminds us of that difficult, awkward time in our late teens when we were figuring out our own opinions, learning who our real friends are, and coming into our own. If we ever truly do.
This Is Our Youth
Written by Kenneth Lonergan, Directed by Anna D. Shapiro
Cort Theatre, Closing January 4, 2015
Photo Credit: Brigitte Lacombe
Pictured: Kieran Culkin and Michael Cera
King Lear
Posted: August 14, 2014 Filed under: Drama, Off-Broadway, Play, Shakespeare | Tags: blowwindsandcrackyourcheeks, delacorte, johnlithgow, kinglear, publictheatre, review, shakespeare, shakespeareinthepark Leave a comment
What a beautiful night in the park I had last week. Thanks to a dear friend who hooked me up with tickets, I took my dad to see his very first Shakespeare in the Park! I tried to see Much Ado About Nothing last month, and the performance was unfortunately canceled due to those insane hurricane rains. Thankfully, we had better luck with King Lear, and the weather could not have been more ideal for an evening of outdoor theatre.
King Lear is a striking production (click here for a montage), although I wasn’t fully engaged the whole time. The reviews have been very mixed, and I can see where they’re coming from. I’m giving the show a solid “good” (I should note – my dad thought it was excellent). While the play wavered and lost my rapt attention in spots, for the most part, I was hooked in with the action, which drove ever forward during the three-hour tragedy. I felt Act II especially found its stride.
The cast is led by the incomparable John Lithgow whose Lear is adamant and stubborn and sad. Witnessing him fall into madness leaves us full of pity despite the arrogance that blinds him in the first scene of the play (Lithgow kept a wonderful blog throughout the rehearsal process for the New York Times. I encourage you to check it out if you’re interested in reading more about the behind-the-scenes work). The Fool, played excellently by Stephen Boyer, brings humor and wit to all of his scenes. Another acting highlight, as always, is Jay O. Sanders as Kent. Sanders is a constant favorite of mine in the park. I have had the opportunity to see him in Hamlet, Twelfth Night, and A Midsummer Night’s Dream. His performances are always vibrant, full, and clear in his choices, no matter the role size. Sheffer Stevens as Edmund is also strong; I very much enjoyed his work in Act I as he connives against Gloucester and Edgar.
A few of the performances fell flat for me, perhaps only compared to the more brazen Lithgow. Annette Bening and Jessica Hecht (as Goneril and Regan, respectively) – and I’m a big fan of both – didn’t stir me as much as I’d hoped. Whether this was a directing or acting choice I don’t know, but their cold and calculating deliveries left me wanting more. What’s bubbling beneath the surface? I wanted more real connection between the characters, no matter the quality of the relationship. Perhaps their distant nature further adds to what pushes Lear over the edge, but I craved something deeper. For example, I found the relationship that developed between Lear and his fool to be very touching. It is clear that despite their jokes, they deeply care for each other, and as Lear veers toward madness, you can see him reaching out to his fool in a desperate hope to stay grounded.
There is an ominous percussion underlying most of the action, which sets the looming mood in addition to creating the booming thunder of that infamous storm. One of the best aspects of the play is how extremely clear the language is. We heard every word thanks to excellent diction and a clear understanding from all of the actors as to what they were saying. So while occasionally stagnant, it’s certainly a worthy production worthy of your time.
King Lear
Written by William Shakespeare, Directed by Daniel Sullivan
Delacorte Theatre, Closing August 17th
Photo Credit: Joan Marcus
Pictured: Steven Boyer, Jay O. Sanders, John Lithgow, and Chukwudi Iwuji
Of Mice and Men
Posted: July 18, 2014 Filed under: Broadway, Drama, Play, Revival | Tags: alexmorf, broadway, chrisodowd, george, jamesfranco, johnsteinbeck, lennie, ofmiceandmen, review 2 Comments
Of Mice and Men is a visually beautiful production. From the opening moments of the sun shining through what appears to be an iron wall split by the horizon, the set is rustic and full of striking metals. Here’s the thing though: the play itself didn’t leave me feeling like I’d been punched in the gut. I talk about this expectation a lot actually, and I suppose it’s odd to say I’m disappointed when I don’t get to feel like that. But that’s what theatre is for sometimes – to feel like your stomach has been turned upside down or your mind has been messed with or your heartstrings tugged. It’s one thing to be emotionally manipulated à la Spielberg’s “ET” with camera close-ups and music swelling at just the right moment, but another thing to be emotionally torn apart by the story alone. It’s why John Steinbeck’s novel is so iconic – the tragedy of Lennie’s and George’s story stays with us, leaving us feeling anywhere from distraught and angry to hollow and sympathetic. This production landed more in neutral territory.
I am going to condense the spoilers as much as I can due to the fact that some people have yet to see the play or read the book or see the movie (seriously though, I would get on that). My roomie had no idea what was going to happen, which made for a fun intermission of predictions. Needless to say, sh*t goes down, and you can tell as early as the looming scenes of Act 1 that things will not be ending super well for these characters.
Chris O’Dowd gives a beautiful, innocent, nuanced performance as Lennie. He’s endearing, touching, and an incredibly sympathetic character. I did not connect with James Franco’s George as much. He has some nice moments, but I think his work may be too subtle for the theatre. I did see him trying, but he lacked life on stage. He’s playing for the camera, and in a big house, his acting gets lost. I imagine audience members in the first few rows have an entirely different experience of his work. I did enjoy the friendship that was developed between Lennie and George, when Franco would let himself go. I could see the humor and love there, particularly in a scene late in Act 1 when they sit at the card table talking about their fantasy of owning their own land someday (pictured above). Franco comes alive and plays beyond a few inches from his face, and that’s when real connection occurs and the sparks start to fly. Leighton Meester was a wash for me. Granted, Curley’s wife is a very hard role, but I don’t know what she was working toward. I didn’t know what she, as the character, wanted. It felt like the same tactic for every moment.
The production (sneak peek here) features a strong ensemble. I particularly enjoyed Jim Parrack as Slim and Jim Norton as Candy. And allow me to name-drop for a moment, because my friend Alex Morf is Curley, and he’s great! It’s his Broadway debut, and he looks so damn good up there playing such an ass.
[SPOILERS IN NEXT PARAGRAPH]
A scene that particularly struck me was Curley’s wife’s death. The moment you see Lennie surrounded by all that hay in the barn, you know it’s time for the iconic turn of events. He sits there with the poor dead puppy in his enormous hands, scolding him for dying. When Curley’s wife joins him on the ground, even people who aren’t familiar with the story know that this can’t end well. I loved the direction of this scene – so simple and understated. These two estranged characters connect without actually connecting at all. They’re both sharing their fears and dreams without actually hearing the other person’s words. When Lennie starts to feel her soft hair, everyone in the house tenses. Her struggle and accidental murder are hard to watch and almost too believable. I wish the last moments of the play had landed similarly with me. I didn’t see George make his final decision to kill Lennie in order to spare him whatever the manhunt would bring. I didn’t see his struggle with the choice, only Lennie’s helplessness. And the last light cue was so blatant that it took me out of it, followed by an abrupt blackout. I wanted another moment with George to see how his actions will affect him and to wonder what’s to come.
Of Mice and Men
Written by John Steinbeck, Directed by Anna D. Shapiro
Longacre Theatre, Closing July 27th
Photo Credit: Sara Krulwich
Pictured: James Franco and Chris O’Dowd
Becca on Broadway 