Posted: 5/21/17 at 12:20am
I saw the recently TONY Nominated play, A Dolls House Part 2 this afternoon and If I'm being honest, I walked away thinking...If this is the state of the American Theater in 2017, then the Broadway Play as we know it is in trouble. It's been happening for some time now, if we look at the past few seasons the Musical has become the epicenter of the commercial and cultural American Theater and the PLAY now relies on the hope that hollywood stars and 16 weeks will save it.
This is an "original" sequel based on the Ibsen classic, A Dolls House that popular playwright of the last two seasons Lucas Hnath (whose much more worthy play, The Christians should have been his Broadway debut) has fan fictionalized...what if Nora came back to the life she abandoned 15 years later. Nothing wrong with this idea, at least it has a real theater lover concept. But there is nothing in the actual writing, directing, design, performance that feels new or innovative or of the moment. In fact, the themes here are so trite, so dusty, I was surprised anytime an audience member actually responded to it.
First there's the terrible title: A DOLLS HOUSE PART 2. For days after the marquee went up I thought maybe Saturday Night Live was filming a sketch out front. It brought back memories of The Producers when all the ridiculous marquee titles Max had produced throughout the years suddenly lit up or cheesy movies from the 1980's...Naked Gun 33 and 1/3. The marketing has you believing it's a bit of a send up, but that is not altogether true.
The style is to be taken seriously, like a classic drama will ensue. Quickly you realize it's both send up and serious sequel. The title was meant to confuse you, to make you think there was a modern/hip quality to it....besides a few F bombs and the characters speaking in mostly present day vernacular, there is nothing modern or hip about it. Neither idea works that well.
The themes all swirl around what happens when a woman abandons her family at that historical time. It's an idea that would be fascinating if this were a historically accurate piece, a piece that also had the appropriate language, the appropriate investigation into the time period and the actions of those people. Without any of that, the themes don't feel dramatic. Watching Kramer vs. Kramer on television would pack more of punch and that film is 30 years old...that's how dusty this subject of how a woman could abandon her husband and children feels in 2017.
Mr. Hnath's dialogue is not witty or historically accurate (of course that's not the idea here, but it actually could have been a more engrossing idea). The cursing is there for cursing sake...these people just aren't the swearing kind. The effect is crass. He never trusts his audience so characters repeat there objectives over and over leaving us wanting semblance of subtext. There is none in this play. It strips all the actual drama out of the circumstances. This people would be all subtext. There are no manners, no social norms in their behavior even though that is at the basis of what the show is about...the social norms of women at that time. The story itself is all negated in the final scene which makes you throw your proverbial hands in the air after 90 mins of wondering what the point of this sequel is....Ibsen clearly wanted people to imagine what happened to Nora afterwards, our imaginations are better than what Hnath has come up with here.
Jane Houdyshell as Anne Marie the Nanny is perfection. Even in the more modern stretches of dialogue she brings out the classic style of Ibesn speech. She bring out the humor effortlessly. Not easy considering the humor is NOT in the writing.
Laurie Metcalf, a legendary talent in the theater throws every comedy trick/action at the material and absolutely succeeds in finding funny where there is none. She is a true craftswoman and that is to be applauded. She brings the character almost no sympathy (that may be planned, the character is supped to be unapologetic) but at key moments where she is supposed to be admitting her faults to her ex husband her performance feels too removed.
Chris Cooper as Torvald is giving the limpest performance I've seen on a Broadway stage in longer than I can remember. He clearly does not understand the difference between the camera and proscenium. He has no charisma or character really. And his chemistry with Laurie is nill, its a shame because she is giving him everyone to play with. He is hitting his mark, that's about all. The second scene in the show which is mainly him, you can feel the energy of the audience change. They are wondering if anything is wrong with him. HIS energy is so low it takes you out of the show completely. I kept thinking
Condola Rashad is effective as the daughter Nora left behind...this is the most interesting concept of the show. Her daughter is her before her enlightenment. Miss Rashad plays her with a strange sense of ignorance.
Director Sam Gold doesn't seem to have been interested in fine tuning the performances, they seem to be on different planes...especially Chris Coopers. His concept is minimalist...it looks cheap instead. lots of the staging feels forced for someone who wasn't too concerned with the aforementioned.
The set is a non sequitur. it doesn't really seem connected to the play. It's so minimalist they might as well have done it with a black stage. Same with the lights and the flimsy projections between scenes with no music...although at preset they made sure to play a punk rock playlist. Whatever they were going for is lost.
This play does not belong on Broadway. In a stronger year I'm not sure a TONY Nomination would have been granted it.
Updated On: 5/21/17 at 12:20 AM
