Behind the Limelight (Charlie Chaplin) - Quick Review, All Reviews Welcome

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 9/20/06 at 11:19am

Caught Behind the Limelight last night. House was so full I'm not sure everyone got a seat. Spoilers ahead.

Good-size band of several pieces including violin and brass. Lots of rehearsal and money put into this one, very nice costuming. One folding set piece of a house/door frame type, unnecessary, stilted, and not up to par with the rest of the production values. One intermission, something I am learning to treasure whenever a show still has one nowadays. Huge cast of seventeen that could be cut perhaps in half.

Begins and ends with a charming film clip of Chaplin as the Tramp. Older Charlie, Robert Langdon Lloyd, essentially plays Man-in-Chair for the show, and while a fine actor, he has so little to do the role could be cut and Creek could play the older version of himself without loss to the play. The music and arrangements were of a higher quality than many a showcase. A few mike problems and even hot mikes when they shouldn't have been, but hey. Child playing little Chaplin, Danny Hallowell, needs his mike working but you could hear everyone else fine with or without their mikes. He and youngster Tommy Hallowell (apparently a real brother) playing Chaplin's young brother Sydney gave commendable performances. The scenes of the mother teaching her young son to observe human behavior and physicality on the street were charming.

We were warned that there had been last minute changes to the script even the day of the show, so it was not surprising that Luther Creek as Charlie had script in hand in three or so places. My guess is last minute changes to lyrics also, though not a one seemed missed, a credit to the actor.

Luther Creek is impressive. The cast did a great job in keeping the flow and coherence of the play rolling, it very much spoke to their professionalism as these shows get like zero tech time in the space.

Basically it's a story of Chaplin's life from childhood into vaudeville and film, then his fall from grace with paternity suit and Communist accusations. The book is weak. The set-up places Hedda Hopper (sans hat?) as out-to-get Chaplin because he declines her an interview and she is all villain. While Andrea McArdle does what she can with this one-dimensional and thankless role, it's not enough to create the sense of raised stakes that the play still needs. What is Chaplin's tragic flaw? That he won't give interviews and states, repeatedly, that he's an artist not a politician? That he's stubborn and sleeps with a lot of women? If he doesn't seem to care about Hopper and just moves back to England, why should we care about her?

Luther Creek transcends the material with some good physical comedy and a falsetto in duet that overcomes the listener's lack of involvement in the stakes of the piece. The book, however, does not yet give the players or audience enough to emotionally involve. One of the more fully developed characters, and well-played, is Chaplin's brother portrayed by Sean Palmer. We know what he wants at gut level and he's always going for it.

As in Warrior, it is hard to take historical figures' lives and create a well-constructed drama from them. Perhaps the best suggestion is don't take the arc of the whole life, take a piece or parts of it that you can play and portray in dramatic form.

© 2006 nomdeplume by pseudonym All rights reserved. Updated On: 9/20/06 at 11:19 AM