Cymbeline first preview thoughts

I was there too and really enjoyed it. Plimpton, Rashad, Cerveris, and Cullum were all excellent. I was familiar with the play since I had read it this week and I loved the staging, the lighting and thought it was extremely well done...save for a few scenes (the ghost scene looked like it came out of Via Galactica).

...and yes, the sauna scene had some very nice eye candy...

Also, Debbie Allen was int he audience supporting her sister, as were a few other of her family members.

Also spotted Cynthia Nixon and her girlfriend there.

I want to have Jonathan Cake for dessert.

I just got back from the first preview as well. Jess Goldstein has created gorgeous costumes. They're not as elaborate as his Tony winning work for THE RIVALS a few years ago, but these fit the period very well. Strong, deep colors. Reds, lots of turquoise. The set is simple, but there is a backlit wall rich with colors that is very beautiful.

This was my first exposure to CYMBELINE.

Martha Plimpton was stunning. What I like about seeing her take on a role is that she makes bold, definitive choices, and she commits to them. Like Michael Cerveris, Plimpton is not one to turn in a generic performance. I couldn't take my eyes off of her when she was on stage.

Michael Cerveris's role had less stage time than Plimpton's, but if any of the men are to be submitted for the Leading Actor category at the Tonys, he would be the one, and I assume he will be. The moments Plimpton and Cerveris share are bleeding with passion. And I'm not even particularly talking about "in love" passion, but the passion of strong acting -- developing a chemistry with one another that works, and that can be transmitted to the audience in an almost electric way.

John Cullum, as the title character, has less to do, and at least tonight, I didn't see that he had put his own "stamp" on the role yet. In URINETOWN and 110 IN THE SHADE, he embodied those characters. I didn't see such levels of development tonight. But of course this is only the first preview.

Between Phylicia Rashad's Tony winning performance in A RAISIN IN THE SUN, to her performance in GEM OF THE OCEAN, BERNARDA ALBA, and now CYMBELINE, she has gone from a distinct performance artist, to playing a rerun, followed by a fuzzier rerun, and into the confines of a cardboard box.

Everything that made her performance in RAISIN IN THE SUN so unique, individual, and award worthy, has unfortunately now turned into a gimmick. She is presenting the exact same characterization in CYMBELINE that she offered in RAISIN, GEM, and BERNARDA. That same voice that she puts on, the same way of walking, moving, and reacting. The same character. I was hoping Rashad would try something new tonight. But all she offered was more of the same, only a lot fuzzier than the original version. Snooze...

Daniel Breaker was pretty funny and sweet in a smaller role, with some brief singing -- beautiful voice -- and some physical comedy. Another standout was Jonathan Cake (mentioned above) as a hot, sexy, sleazy (yes, naked) seducer.

The play is long. It was three hours tonight, with one intermission. The final 40 minutes or so seemed to drag. Hopefully things can be tightened up between now and opening night.

CYMBELINE is worth seeing. For people who aren't familiar with Shakespeare, you may have trouble following the dialogue at times, but a lot of the acting is very physical, and the actors do a great job of keeping the audience engaged for most of the show. Plus, the gorgeous costumes, and the gusto provided by Martha Plimpton and Michael Cerveris make it a production worth checking out.

Note that I'm not particularly enthusiastic about everything I saw tonight, but the chance to see Shakespeare performed by some great talents in one of LCT's great-to-look-at productions on the perfect fit stage at the Vivian Beaumont is rare.

---

2.5-3 hours

---

i was there last night. the costumes and lighting were visual treats and the music was lavish. Grade A and in my opinion the highlight. i wasnt familiar with cymbalene at all and alot of times it was difficult to understand or hear what the actors were saying when their backs were to you. alot was lost for me because of that which made it challenging to follow the story. im not sure if it was an accoustic thing or a delivery thing. in Rashads case i think it was delivery. her projection could have been better and her speech felt strangley affected as well. she was difficult to hear also which made it even worse. over all i wasnt wowed. it was decent and certainly a professional production however. just be prepared to lean in a bit to hear and understand. oh and to see the "goodies" lol.

Updated On: 11/2/07 at 09:45 AM

Oh, gracious. My parents are joining me for this one when they come to visit me for my concert in December. So now I'm subjecting them to full-frontal? Ah, well. They survived "The Wild Party." And I'm rather looking forward to it.

(great to see you back, btw, Matt)

honestly, i have no doubt this production will be wonderful. i almost always love what Lincoln Center does.

I also saw the preview last night. I enjoyed it and want to see it a second time, but the production has its highs and lows. *SPOILERS FOLLOW*

I had read Cymbeline before seeing this production so I had no trouble following the complex plots. It is truly an epic story involving anciet Britons and Romans, and the play is an intriguing mixture of pseudo-history, comedy and tragedy. I actually find it more interesting in performance than any staged version of The Tempest that I have yet seen.

The physical production is effective on the whole. The lighting is atmospheric (although some placement spots weren't hit - it was a first preview - and the stage fogs didn't always roll across the stage very effectively). I thought most of the costumes were bizarre - if what the designer was looking for was exotic fairy tale costumes, they should at least be internally consistent. I was seriously distracted that in the first scene alone, I wasn't sure if we were in Czarist Russia, China, Mongolia, Renaissance Italy, etc. The pseudo-historical settings are Roman Britain after all - which meant only the costumes for Belarius and his sons were anything close to accurate. The Italian scenes (when not involving bath towels in a steam room) were about 800 years in the future! I wouldn't think to mention all of this but it is one of the few productions I have seen where the costumes intruded on my understanding of the production of the play.

There was also a moment of awkwardness in the staging during the second "act" when a group of characters has to step off a moving platform that is moving in the same direction as they are - I am guessing that will be changed, though, as the problem is so easily avoided.

I thought the acting was on a surprisingly high level for first preview. Michael Cerveris dominated (even though his character drops out for much of the middle of the play). As a previous poster noted, his chemistry with Martha Plimpton is electrifying, and he has two monologues that were the highlights of the entire night for me. Having only seen him previously in SWEENEY, it was a delight to see the level of his performance in Shakespeare.
Jonathan Cake (as Iachimo) and Adam Dannheisser (as Cloten) were both larger than life as the villains of the piece. I was sitting on the left side of the orchestra so I was treated only to full dorsal nudity but Jonathan can turn around and look me in the eye any time he wants!
Many of the smaller parts were also impressive for their effectiveness and subtlety including John Pankow as Pisanio and Daniel Breaker as the gentleman with a wicked sense of humor and a lovely singing voice.
I thought the weaknesses at this early juncture were: John Cullum, who does not yet seem to make any of the king's emotions genuine; Phylicia Rashad, who seems to me to be hideously miscast and makes the queen into a pantomime quality evilo step mother only; and Martha Plimpton, whom I worshipped in UTOPIA. My first comment is directed to the makeup staff - Rashad had on too much makeup and Plimpton not enough. I was in Row H of the orchestra, and Plimpton's eyes completely disappeared, making her look old and tired. In the early scenes, before she disguises herself as a boy, she should be beautiful, or at least strking but she seems pale and undistinguished. How about some mascara and a little cheek color? Leave the pale and washed out look for later! I thought Plimpton brought a lot of music and fire to her early scenes and then ran out of steam. The second act seemed almost mechanical.

Updated On: 11/2/07 at 12:42 PM