I posted a few weeks ago that I had no interest in seeing this based on the Olivier performance, but the SeatGeek discount code, the positive reports about the stage mezzanine seating, and Bebe were enough to tempt me. So there’s my initial bias upfront if anyone wants to dismiss the following, but this review is mostly for anyone else who was skeptical or is open to another opinion.
Am I glad I saw it? Yes. Was it entertaining? For the most part. Was it great, or revelatory? No. This is a case where most of the directing choices add nothing to the piece, and in some cases work against it. But most of the cast is very good, it’s still Cabaret, and the inherent strengths of the work are still there and mostly shine through the gratuitous business piled on top of it. (I also barely remember the Mendes production from when I saw it 25 years ago, so I’m not speaking out of affection for that.)
- For most of the first act, the only moment that really stood out was “Maybe This Time,” which was quiet and subtle (when little else was) and utterly devastating. Otherwise I spent the first act thinking this was a very slick, stylish, and shallow Cabaret. It has a lot of flashy design elements and directing choices that look cool, but don't really feel like they're serving the piece and are keeping it really surface-level. Then the end of Act I came, and I started to cry. That scene and those final moments were very well staged and performed, and actually felt like the choices were serving the piece. That Act I ending and "Maybe This Time" are what I'll carry from this production the most and may have made it worth seeing for those alone. The other time when I felt like one of the flashier directing choices really enhanced and served the story was the end of the final scene between Schneider and Schultz. Otherwise this production has too much pointless gimmickry and flash over substance.
- I thought Rankin was very good, right up until the title number, when she couldn't overcome what she was directed to do. The song does make more sense in context than it did in the Olivier performance, and I didn’t laugh at the number like I did at the video. I also didn’t feel anything and wasn’t moved. I just thought, "She's certainly working very hard.” It’s possible to show emotional devastation without all the stomping and flailing about and frantic mugging, by just...singing the song. It was just too much, a very performative version of "This is what a woman having a complete breakdown looks like" instead of an actual convincing version of a woman having a complete breakdown. I'm sure she'll get kudos for it, since too often the Most acting is considered the Best acting, but it didn't work for me.
- I have no idea what Redmayne was doing. He has an impressive physicality and accent work…but to what end? I didn’t feel like there was any coherent vision for this emcee and what his role was in this piece other than “Eddie Redmayne showing off.” The emcee has these ridiculously elaborate costumes that make no sense (those flashy design elements...). I spent most of the time he was onstage wondering what the point of his choices and his costumes and everything he was doing actually was, since most of them seemed wholly unnecessary.
- The concept behind this production also made no sense to me. The Kit Kat Club is supposedly a third-rate, seedy club in the desperately poor Berlin of the 1930s. The Kit Kat Club the August Wilson has been transformed into is not that. The theater looks absolutely beautiful, and sure, I enjoyed seeing it and being there. But it very much looks and feels like a fully decked-out space where theatergoers can be charged exorbitant amounts for a night out, NOT the Kit Kat Club of Cabaret. So…what’s the dramatic purpose for this luxe setting? Is there one, or is it really just to be able to charge more?
- I thought Neuwirth and Skybell were both great, and I didn’t have any of the issues with Blankson-Wood others have. He was perfectly fine, if not a revelation, as Cliff. I also found Henry Gottfried and Natascia Diaz quite good. Of course most of these actors were largely dealing with the more grounded and human elements of the story, so they didn’t have to fight through all the excess to make an impact.
- I understood the point of the ending, and it should have been chilling. It wasn’t. I felt nothing.
As negative as most of this sounds, I did enjoy it in that very surface-level way (with a few moments when it managed to transcend that). It's certainly not the Best version of Cabaret, but it may be the Most version of Cabaret, and is entertaining in that respect (and I'm not surprised many people love that). I was able to appreciate how strong Cabaret is as a piece of musical theater, even if what was done with it here was less than it can, or should, be.
Updated On: 4/14/24 at 12:20 AM
Even with her 'grotesque performance art', Gert was kind of a sensation in the cabaret and arts communities of 1920s Berlin. She was associated with nearly every avant-garde movement of her day, as well as Dadaism and surrealism. 
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
