Categories
Theater Theater Feature

Three-way

A.R. Gurney (Love Letters) is the dramatic voice of the tragically white. With lean prose tossed off as effortlessly as Bing Crosby’s celebrated scat, he speaks both for and to an imagined country-club set for whom a delayed tee-time might generate just enough conflict to fuel a rather laid-back Greek tragedy. Over the years, he has gently teased his well-heeled peer group, but Gurney’s light satire can seldom overcome the accompanying “conservatives are people, too” sentiments that permeate his work. In The Official Preppy Handbook, author Lisa Birnbach described ennui as a sort of affected boredom that makes every activity a person performs seem excruciatingly casual. It was a quality she highly recommended to would-be preps and a quality which Gurney’s characters exhibit in abundance. It is the very same characteristic that makes this white-bread historian’s latest offering, Far East, a bit of a snoozer. The characters come off as emotionally disengaged tourists gliding effortlessly through life. Their problems don’t bother them very much, so why should we care? Fortunately, Theatre Memphis’ production has a top-drawer cast, elegant direction by Jerry Chipman, and an absolutely breathtaking set by Michael Walker to recommend it. Even with all this exquisite baggage it comes off as the unfunny fulfillment of every WASP joke ever written.

Q: What’s an American WASP’s idea of open-mindedness?

A: Dating a Canadian.

Far East, which is set during a lull in the Korean War, begins when junior officer “Sparky” Watts (John Moore) reports for duty. He is an upbeat go-getter who, having been sheltered all his life by a wealthy family, is determined to find “meaningful experiences” overseas. While he pays lip-service to the virtues of being a good soldier, he is given to distraction and intent on preserving a luxurious, carefree lifestyle. He regularly requests leaves, plays lots of tennis, and has his very own convertible shipped over from America. Ironically, his rebellious playboy attitude is tempered by a WASPy urge to couple, and within days of his arrival he settles into a monogamous, loving relationship with a Japanese waitress whom the audience is never really allowed to meet. All of the play’s conflict is rooted around this one underwhelming transgression.

Enter Julia Anderson (Irene Crist Flanagan), the bored “Laura Bush meets Mrs. Robinson” wife of Sparky’s C.O. She is a “Smith girl” of the highest breeding. She knows young Sparky’s family and suspects that they would be devastated if they found out about his amorous adventures with a yellow-skinned heathen. So, of course, she devastates them. Later we discover (gasp!) that her actions are not motivated by breeding but rather a longing to breed with poor Sparky.

Moore, in his most animated role to date, makes Sparky a really likable guy. In fact, he’s so very nice and even-keeled that his excessive yet disarmingly understated affability seems more like some dangerous pathological disorder. The love he professes for his Japanese sweetheart is discussed with roughly the same ardor as his tennis game or his longing to climb Mt. Fuji. With a little more bravado and a little less spit and polish, Moore could have shown us what a greedy, manipulative, and immature opportunist Sparky really is — especially when he turns in his friend for being a homosexual who has swapped top-secret information to the enemy to avoid being outed. It’s a passionless career move and not at all an act of patriotism. As it stands, Moore comes off as a tepid, vaguely tragic romantic lead.

Flanagan’s patrician bearing and preening, motherly concern for Sparky never mask her character’s motives. She drips with sexual innuendo from their first awkward encounter. Her best moments, however, come near the end of the play when Sparky tells her that the simmering attraction she feels is mutual. Like a good little WASP, she takes this affirmation as a sign that this affair was never meant to be, leaving the entire audience with a painful case of theatrical blue balls.

Q: How many WASPs does it take to change a light bulb?

A: Three. Two to mix the martinis and one to call the electrician.

Barclay Roberts (in the role of Captain James Anderson) is virtually incapable of giving a bad performance. He’s always going to play essentially the same character, but not to worry: He’s very good at it. Every choice he makes is simple and every word rings true. And while this is no less the case in Far East, Roberts’ intrinsic warmth and gentleness ultimately undermine his performance and dull his self-absorbed character’s edge. On one hand, the career officer is infuriated by Sparky’s lack of seriousness and patriotism. On the other, he sees the young officer’s roguishness as a reflection of himself in younger, wilder days. Roberts glosses over this dilemma with an adorably gruff “what the hell, I like ya, kid” attitude. He’s so likable in fact that we forget that he virtually ignores his wife. When she eventually leaves him, it seems like an unfair and intentionally hurtful decision on her behalf rather than the result of their mutual unhappiness.

Captain Anderson sees the military as a sort of boy’s club where rank has its privileges. He’s more concerned with getting stationed on an aircraft carrier, improving his golf swing, and getting a little bit of indigenous tail from time to time than he is with salvaging his marriage. But in Roberts’ super-friendly hands, these less-than-sterling qualities become attractive signifiers of the rugged individualist. You just can’t find fault in a man you’d desperately like to sit down and have a drink with.

Q: Why did the WASP cross the street?

A: To get to the middle of the road.

Director Jerry Chipman deserves big props for dishing out the eye candy. The set, a single wooden tower set against a pale blue scrim and a burning orange sun, begs for crisp, uncluttered blocking. That is exactly what Chipman delivers. The entire experience of Far East is so enjoyable on a sheerly visual level it almost makes up for the lackluster script and the less-than-impassioned performances.

Far East at Theatre Memphis through March 25th.

Who Am I?

With the opening of Bizet’s Locket, Playwright’s Forum, a company dedicated solely to the development of original scripts, has launched its finest effort this season. The story follows Annette, a young woman of the ’60s who has returned to France to track down her birth parents. She enlists the aid of Pierre, a dubious war-hero-turned-cop who helped her adoptive parents smuggle her out of Europe during WWII and now seems to go out of his way to throw Annette off the scent.

The subtle, talky script is perhaps a bit too pat. Characters draw conclusions too quickly, and the mystery is not terribly compelling. Still, it is compelling enough, and the question of whether or not Pierre is actually a murderous, in-the-closet Nazi provides plenty of intrigue.

An all-star cast, featuring the talents of Tony Isbell, Michele C. Summers, and Dorothy Blackwood, gives the script the kind of intelligent workout that a new work not only deserves but requires. Leigh Ann Evans’ direction is, for the most part, on the money. Long, tedious, and often unnecessary set-changes, which make Bizet’s Locket move just a little slower than an elderly slug on Quaaludes, should be sped up or eliminated. Either one would be a radical improvement.

Bizet’s Locket at TheatreWorks through March 10th.

Art Attack

The U of M’s entire studio theater space has been converted into a warm, cozy art gallery. Light-pedestals scattered throughout the audience hold objects both mundane and fascinating. Similar pedestals onstage display trophies, kettles, and books. Everything about the environment is inviting and comfortable, until the lights dim, that is, and we meet the characters in Donald Margulies’ Sight Unseen.

Jonathan Waxman is a wildly successful Jewish artist who constantly poor-mouths his achievements and bad-mouths an art world that embraced him and made him a star. He is an insufferable egomaniac who believes in his own myth, if for no other reason because he made it himself — with the help of a publicist, of course. His “bad boy” art, which has undertones of racism, blends religious symbology with scenes of graphic sex and (quite possibly) violence. Like the infamous Piss Christ of yesteryear, it’s the kind of knee-jerk art that gets people’s attention and causes wealthy buyers, desperate to stay ahead of the hip-curve, to line up with their checkbooks. Of course Waxman also takes the lazy and infuriating modernist stance that absolves the artist of any faults he might have and makes viewers almost entirely responsible for what they see in a painting. He is a manipulative jackass and a poseur who cleaves to his heritage only when it suits him politically. He is the artist-turned-ugly-American who has come to the English countryside to claim the one thing his millions of U.S. dollars can’t buy: the forgiveness of Patricia, a college sweetheart he left behind. Then again, maybe he just wants to get himself a little “old-time-sakes.” Hard to say.

Though she still obviously carries a torch for her famous ex, Patricia, now a world-wise archaeologist living with her caustic Brit husband in the north of England, isn’t interested in forgiveness. Her husband, Nick, who feels he’s always lived in Waxman’s shadow, is likewise determined to make the artist as uncomfortable as possible over the course of his visit. What ensues is a fiercely intelligent, surprisingly satisfying two-hour debate about art, history, heritage, family, and relationships. In the end, the work is too academic and desperately in need of a few laughs or at least a horrified gasp or two. It’s all heady wind-up with no pitch. Still, it’s an evening well spent.

As Waxman, Nate Eppler is nearly as aloof and creepy as Christian Bale in American Psycho. It’s impossible to tell whether or not he actually believes anything he says. Bill Lewis is equally convincing as Nick, a good-hearted man consumed by jealousy, resentment, and hatred. Kelly Morton’s performance as the jilted girlfriend become crumbling mountain of self-sufficency is inspired. She radiates strength, smarts, and self-control as she shifts easily back and forth in time from free-spirited, sexually liberated teen to conservative, jaded, and calculating adult.

Sight Unseen at the University of Memphis through March 10th.

Categories
Theater Theater Feature

Modern Love

I want to give Circuit Playhouse’s production of Joe DiPietro and Jimmy Robert’s musical essay on the perils of romance I Love You, You’re Perfect, Now Change a fabulously glowing review. In fact, I want to give it the ravingest rave that ever raved. But I can’t. Not entirely anyway. Don’t get me wrong, I loved it. It’s pretty darn close to being perfect. But in one very subtle, perhaps even nit-picky, way I wish that it could change: the script, that is, not the actual performances, which are all on the money.

Like so many contemporary scripts, I Love You tends to turn subtext into dialogue. In other words, the characters come right out and say the things which the audience should be allowed to discover. The best example of this is in the very first musical number, “Cantata for a First Date,” when the characters all begin singing, “But I’ve got baggage, emotional baggage, a planeload of baggage that causes much saggage.” To some extent, this substitution of subtext for dialogue satirizes the self-help Men are from Mars craze and, as they say in those silly, silly books, that’s okay. But if this was truly the authors’ intent, the insipid language which has grown up around that movement needed to be placed in somewhat larger quotation marks and examined a bit more carefully. As it stands, there are moments during the show when those of us who find such notions of “empowerment” to be the modern-day answer to snake oil will cringe with embarrassment. But those moments are fleeting and more than made up for in the script’s brutal, hilarious, and occasionally even touching honesty about that crazy little thing called modern love.

I Love You, You’re Perfect, Now Change is subtitled “The Hilarious New Musical Revue.” I don’t know why that is, but it is. It’s not a musical revue. It’s sketch comedy with music. It’s vaudeville. Oh sure, in their preface to the script the authors beg the performers to play the scenes for honesty, not laughs, noting that the comedy will be better that way, but this sentiment is true even in the broadest of farces. That they even feel the need to come out and say this is testament to the fact that live theater has lost its way. Fortunately, director Kevin Shaw and his more than capable cast know exactly where they are, what they are doing, and exactly how it should be done. On a stage designed to conjure up images of old-time vaudeville, complete with cutouts of red velvet curtains and illuminated placards announcing the names of the various sketches, Shaw and company have staged the most entertaining show to appear on the Circuit stage since the recently revived Pageant made its local debut.

Allow me to skirt all of the punch lines and give you the setup to a few of the scenes. “Satisfaction Guaranteed” is a commercial for a law firm that will sue your partner if they fail to satisfy you in bed. “A Stud and a Babe” shows us how even wallflowers can get lucky on occasion. “Tear Jerk” will appeal to every man who has ever agreed to take his date to a “chick flick.” “Sex and the Married Couple” explores all the factors that work against a nesting couple’s attempts to keep the flame alive, and “Funerals are for Dating” is about a widow and widower who look for love in unusual places. As you can see, the script’s content ranges from broad (Brecht-lite) satire to utterly mundane scenarios of family life. At the risk of sounding trite, I Love You has a little something for everyone. The songs run the gamut of popular forms and each one in its own way somehow manages to become a show-stopper. This is largely due to the efforts of one of the most capable casts ever assembled. Whether working as an ensemble or flying solo, Kim Justis, Carla McDonald, Guy Olivieri, and Christopher Swan (making a glorious return to the Memphis stage) generate big laughs and make it all look so very effortless.

I’ve always admired Kevin Shaw’s gifts as a choreographer, though I’ve never been all that impressed with his directing skills. I have to admit it: This time I’m impressed all the way around. Still, movement is obviously his forte. In the scene titled “The Family that Drives Together,” Shaw has used rolling office chairs to create one of the most inspired bits of choreography I’ve ever seen.

I Love You, You’re Perfect, Now Change

Through March 18th, Circuit Playhouse

Categories
Theater Theater Feature

Nine Lives Playhouse on the Square gets Seussical.

Viva el gato en sombrero! Apparently, Memphis audiences just can’t
get enough of that Seussical stuff, which is something of a
miracle when you consider that when it debuted in 2000, the ambitious
Dr. Seuss musical nearly transformed the world’s most famous feline
into rank road kill in a red-and-white-striped hippie hat. The original
production was conceived on a massive scale and combined characters,
locations, and plot elements from more than a dozen or so of Theodor
Geisel’s most beloved stories. And it didn’t survive too long on
Broadway, either. Reviewers trashed it and called it a snore; some
viewers thrashed it and thought it a bore. It was badmouthed and
trashmouthed and called consonantal. It couldn’t even be saved by Ms.
Rosie O’Donnell.

The most common diagnosis provided for the show’s critical and
commercial failure was that Seussical, while colorful,
thoughtfully scored, and based on tried-and-true source material, was
also an unfocused mess, crammed with too much Seussishness for anyone’s
comfort. Although his imagination could be baroque, Geisel was
essentially a minimalist. The original Cat in the Hat was
written as an exercise for young readers and only uses 236 mostly
monosyllabic words, so it’s not hard to imagine how Dr. Seuss’ simple,
delightfully strange imagery was swallowed whole by the glitz and
sizzle of a Broadway megamusical.

The show has since been recut, re-arranged, and turned into a
serviceable, not entirely uncharming little one-act focusing almost
entirely on the stories Horton Hears a Who! and Horton
Hatches the Egg, with brief forays into Yertle the
Turtle
, How the Grinch Stole Christmas!, Green Eggs
and Ham, and I Had Trouble Getting to Solla Sollew.

There’s a lot to like about POTS’ Seussical and perhaps even
a lot to love. But there’s plenty to loathe too, especially if you’re a
purist and don’t want anybody messing with the shape of your childhood
memories.

Andrew Moore provides a hangdog take on Horton, the philosophical
pachyderm who can save an entire planet full of microscopic people but
can’t save himself from being conned into hatching an egg for a
brightly painted bird that would rather have fun. Kim Baker is even
more beguiling and tragic as Gertrude McFuzz, a less than fancy bird
who loves Horton but can never seem to catch his eye. As the Sour
Kangaroo who’s out to prove Horton a fool, Jennifer Henry makes the
most of Seussical‘s gospel-tinged score. Courtney Oliver, POTS’
able Jane-of-all-trades, has lovingly remounted director Gary John La
Rosa’s frenetic, whimsically theatrical staging.

On the other hand, it’s more than a little disconcerting that the
Wickersham Brothers are costumed as though they were part of a gay
minstrel show, in broadly stereotypical black leather pants, bar vests,
and motorcycle hats. Just as I started to think I might be a
dirty-minded so-and-so reading more into the costuming than was
actually there, out came the banana-shaped microphones. Adults will
giggle, and the kids will only see it as fun. But c’mon, people. What
happens in Tuna, Texas, really should stay in Tuna, Texas.

On this rare occasion, Rebecca Powell’s costumes are never much to
get excited about. The colors pop out against Bruce Bergner’s
magnificent white-on-white set, but the nonrepresentational outfits are
seldom Seussesque and never quite imaginative enough to spark the
imagination.

Bergner’s icy set reflects every color of the spectrum and is
another matter entirely. Using nothing but a jagged squiggle of a stair
unit, a pair of dangerously angled ladders, and a tree made from an
upside-down ceiling fan, Bergner forces the imaginations wide open with
austere silliness and a dash of horror.

And what of the Cat in the Hat? A manic, rubber-faced Eric Duhon
gets everything just about right. But this isn’t really the Cat’s show.
Even as a narrator he seems superfluous: a dangling, vaguely menacing
trademark bouncing and prancing across the stage.

Through January 11th at Circuit

Playhouse