EQUUS - Entertaining but lacks tension

No doubt I will be in the minority, but I felt a bit disappointed after seeing Equus. It was extremely entertaining and kept my attention during the entire play, but I wanted to be blown away by sheer brilliance and I wasn’t. For me, the main weakness in the play is that there is no tension between Alan and Martin. I attribute this to Richard Griffiths being miscast. Daniel Radcliffe makes a fantastic Broadway debut. His Alan is intense and obsessive, full of nervous energy with battles raging within himself. Griffiths' Martin, on the other hand, comes off as being very easygoing, compassionate and grandfatherly. *SPOILER*

It came as absolutely no surprise to me when Alan guessed that Martin no longer slept with his wife. Griffiths' Martin reminds me of Santa Claus. Can you really imagine Santa Claus having sex with anyone?! I envision that scene in the original production as being much more revelatory of Martin's deep pain and sorrow. Here, it felt so matter-of-fact, it really detracted from the power of the scene.

I enjoyed Griffiths' performance in The History Boys, and I think he is a fine actor, but this role just doesn't seem to fit him. Martin's character needs to display a mixture of compassion, shrewdness and sharp intellect that would allow the audience to believe that he is insightful enough to trick and outsmart Alan into revealing his innermost secrets. I could see Liam Neeson or Patrick Stewart as being a better match for Radcliffe's Alan.

I would love to hear from members who have seen other productions of this play. Are the dynamics between Alan and Martin different?

Well put - "Sucks all the sexual energy out of the play"

It also occurred to me that there might have been an underlying spark between Martin and Hesther Saloman if played by the right actors. The fact that Martin would reveal personal aspects of his marriage to Hesther and discuss with her his envy of Alan's passion makes me think that there might be some unspoken feelings there. I loved Kate Mulgrew's take on Hesther by the way, and have always found her gravelly voice to be quite sexy.

I also thought of Alan Rickman for the role of Martin, but his drollness might make Martin seem insincere. Perhaps I just haven’t seen him play this type of character before.

Gabriel Byrne

Griffiths is a fine actor. He's totally miscast here. And its a real detriment to the production I think.

I saw it last night, and Gigi, I think you nailed exactly the problem I had with the whole production.

I saw it the other night and I agree. I also saw it with Richard Burton playing the role of the Doctor in 1976. Mr. Burton was very good, and he brought more energey to the role than Mr. Griffith. In the current Equus, Daniel Radcliffe's role stands out more, and I found myself more absorbed in his role. It still is an absorbing play, and I would recommend it to anyone who loves the theater.

The more I've thought about it, the more I've decided that there defnitely was something off with the chemistry of the cast in this. And after reading the comments, I'm inclined to agree with you all about Griffiths. He's a wonderful actor, but his scenes- particularly with Mulgrew- seemed to be lacking something. At first I thought it was Mulgrew who seemed so full of life- a marked contrast to Griffiths, but it certainly seems as if it was more a poor choice by Griffiths in constructing the character as too introspective.

We saw this revival in London and came away with the same impression of Richard Griffiths. My husband had seen it with Anthony Perkins on Broadway and felt this revival lacked the tension, torment and sexuality that was so riveting in the original production. I think Griffiths is way too affable , almost like he's just the narrator rather than the central character. I think it's his role that drives the message of the play as he unravels Alan's story and his own inner anguish is revealed, but I wasn't really drawn in by him. And as many of you said, the sexual tension that's meant to be flying all over the place isn't there at all.
We have tickets this again this fall. I thought Daniel Radcliffe was very good, actually, and we enjoyed the play. It's just that it was disappointing in all the ways people have mentioned here.

uncageg- I did feel sorry for his character, but there was just so little passion in his performance that I didn't feel as if the revelations he makes about his life really carried much weight.

I genuinely found Radcliffe and Allen about the same. Radcliffe was a slightly angrier Alan (hurhur, Alan XD), but I didn't think there was much between them, qualitywise.

And just as the West End Dysart wasn't as good as the tour Dysart, the tour Jill was not a PATCH on the West End Jill. I hope your Broadway Jill is less hearty and more impish.

---