In Jesse Weaver's lovely 45-minute two-hander, Jen and Liz in Love (nicely directed by Lory Henning), Liz is stuck in a kissing booth while her husband goes to deposit the day's profits. When Jen comes to tell her the fair is closing, Liz asks Jen to stay until her husband returns. As they chat, and argue, we learn about their shared past, their fears, and their desires. The show is funny, economical, and touching. Helene Galek, as Liz, gives a textured and poignant performance with only her lips and occasionally an eye visible. As Jen, Cindy Keiter is wary, subtle, and heart-breaking. (The title is not quite right: it tells too much and seems--to me, anyway--to suggest that the play will be about teens. I wish Weaver had used One Good Thing.)
Cookies
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Fringe: Jen and Liz in Love
In Jesse Weaver's lovely 45-minute two-hander, Jen and Liz in Love (nicely directed by Lory Henning), Liz is stuck in a kissing booth while her husband goes to deposit the day's profits. When Jen comes to tell her the fair is closing, Liz asks Jen to stay until her husband returns. As they chat, and argue, we learn about their shared past, their fears, and their desires. The show is funny, economical, and touching. Helene Galek, as Liz, gives a textured and poignant performance with only her lips and occasionally an eye visible. As Jen, Cindy Keiter is wary, subtle, and heart-breaking. (The title is not quite right: it tells too much and seems--to me, anyway--to suggest that the play will be about teens. I wish Weaver had used One Good Thing.)
Fringe: Dream of the Marionettes
Photo: Leslie WestbrookIt's an interesting concept: abused marionettes (played by humans) rebel against their puppetmaster, making him the marionette and reveling in their newfound freedom. Unfortunately, the execution is by the numbers: between each song, the sex-crazed marionette says something sex-crazed, the mean marionette says something mean, the nervous marionette says something nervous, etc, and then they sing another song. The songs and dances aren't bad, but the whole enterprise just doesn't add up.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Fringe: When Last We Flew
Photo: Karen RuschHarrison David Rivers's amazing When Last We Flew (directed by Colette Robert) weaves a pair of coming-of-age stories into a lyrical, touching, funny, even inspiring 2 hours of wonderful theatre (that's "wonder-ful" as in "exciting feelings of wonder"). Paul (the immensely talented and charming Jon-Michael Reese), an isolated gay teenager in Kansas, spends much of his time locked in the bathroom with a tattered copy of Angels in America, which is his lifeline, his bible, and his erotica. His mother (the lovely, subtle Karen Pittman), desperate to connect with him, tries to entice him out with plates of food, messages of love that Paul simply cannot receive. Natalie (the wry, remarkable Rory Lipede), the only African-American in an exclusive private school, is reaching the limits of her ability to remain well-behaved while being treated as "the black girl." Her mother (the intense yet perfectly restrained Tamela Aldridge) also wants to connect with her child, but more so she wants the intelligent, talented Natalie to have a life full of opportunities, even if she has to smother her along the way. When Last We Flew also features various friends, relatives, and other people, along with, yes, an angel. Particular kudos are owed Justin Gillman, as Paul's friend Ian; Gillman took over the role with less than 48 hours' notice yet performed with wit, deep emotion, and seemingly total ease. When Last We Flew left me with a kaleidoscope of images of despair, love, and glory, beautiful visions of people learning to be themselves and learning to fly.
Fringe: Lost and Found
In John Pollono's Lost and Found, directed by Andrew Block, a character says, "Love is complicated." And love is indeed complicated for the bitter cop with a secret, the angry widow with a secret, the beautiful neighbor with . . . well, guess, and the other characters in this often entertaining, sometimes touching exploration of--as the title says--lost people trying to be found. I'm curious to see the future of this show. On one hand, it's not particularly outstanding or original in terms of themes or execution and it has a large cast (seven people) for the economies of today's theatre. On the other hand, it's a good show, and the Fringe version feels like a try-out for a larger production, with a strong cast including actors from TV shows 24 (the lovely Reiko Aylesworth) and the Sopranos (Geraldine Librandi) and actual production values. Is there room today off or on Broadway for a show such as this one, which is far from ground-breaking but would rate a solid B+?
Fringe: Terms of Dismemberment
Certain basic realities seem to have escaped the people who wrote, directed, and otherwise put together Terms of Dismemberment. (1) Vulgarity is not in itself clever, funny, and/or entertaining--there needs to be some wit, point of view, and/or inspiration behind it. (2) Multiple rhymes are not in themselves clever, funny, and/or entertaining--there needs to be some wit, point of view, and/or inspiration behind them. (3) Self-referential theatre is not in itself clever, funny, and/or entertaining--there needs to be some wit, point of view, and/or inspiration behind it. (4) Abusive parents played for laughs are not in themselves clever, funny, and/or entertaining--there needs to be some wit, point of view, and/or inspiration behind the depiction of them. (5) Men playing women are not in themselves clever, funny, and/or entertaining--there needs to be some wit, point of view, and/or inspiration behind their performance. Well, you get the point.Fringe: Open Hearts
Photo: Andrew AdolphusOpen Heart, written and directed by Joe Salvatore, is an intriguing piece of docu-theatre about gay men living in nonmonogamous relationships. Salvatore interviewed 13 couples and a therapist/researcher, and Open Heart consists of the verbatim words--including "ums," stutters, and pauses--of six of the couples and the therapist. The men are engaging company, and their discussions of the advantages and disadvantages of their lifestyles run the gamut from calm reasoned theory to blunt "hey, this is what I want" type comments. Perhaps the most fascinating moments are those in which the men seem out of touch with their actual feelings and fears. The play is split into sections, like chapters, each of which begins with a brief video introduction of repeated images and words that act as chapter titles. The videos add little, plus they are uncomfortably loud and slow the pacing (the pacing in general drags and is sometimes awkward). The actors, who play three or four roles each, are downright amazing. Each interviewee is presented in compelling, three-dimensional, carefully delineated detail, and when the show is over, it's astonishing that there aren't two or three times as many people taking bows.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)