Munk's FESTEN review

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 3:57am

Before you start pecking me to death, I only created a new thread because I felt that the other thread on FESTEN was too cluttered with arguments to post a fresh review. So with that said...

I was both intrigued and suspicious of this production going into it. The website treats the play as a bone chilling ghost story, and everything I have heard about the production has been negative. Perhaps this production has been tightened since last week's pans - I suspect that it has - and while I feel that the production I saw tonight has more positives than negatives - it is undeniable that something is just not quite right with the piece.

Eldridge's play is everything and more that you could want in a play. All of the elements are there - an interesting story, a well-written script, and a fantastically intriguing mood, set by both director Rufus Norris and designer Ian MacNeil. It's no news to any of us that this play was supposedly a smash in London - a true knockout from top to bottom.

It has been said before on the boards that the overt "American-ness" seems to get in the way of the play's progression and ultimate effect on the audience. I only half agree with that. I think much of what causes this play to only 3/4 succeed is not the choice to cast American actors, but the choice to cast certain American actors.

Larry Bryggman starts off just fine in the piece, but when his character becomes the target of the evening and the dramatic weight shifts to his shoulders as the play comes to a close, he seems almost unable to tolerate the seriousness of it. I wouldn't say that he is miscast, but I will definitely say that there are many, many other actors out there who could make this role into something truly relevatory.

Michael Hayden is generally fantastic as Christian, the tormented son and brother. I question his tactics and interpretation when he reveals the sad circumstances of his childhood. I wasn't sure whether he was joking, or whether he was serious until a good amount of time after that. That's the only point in the show where I wasn't completely satisfied with his portrayal - for as the play progresses and gets more and more serious (and more and more hectic), his performance grows from good to admirable.

Jeremy Sisto, who, admittedly, I had only known from CLUELESS, really commands the stage the entire time - even, I fear, when that's not really the point. I was completely impressed - through and through - with his performance and I felt it was really the only solid, consistant part of the evening. I don't know if the role was portrayed any differenly overseas - I presume that it was - but I had absolutely no problem with what he was doing on stage. I was, and am, very excited to discover that he has the true acting chops, charisma, and stage presence required to succeed on stage. And that he does. It's not often we see screen actors (regardless of whether or not they started their careers on stage before moving to the big screen) - and regardles of how famous they are - truly prove themselves in front of a live audience. His performance was a true revelation for me - and while others will clearly disagree - I think he is absolutely deserving of a Tony nomination - for which category, I'm still not yet sure of.

Julianna Margulies is not as strong as I was hoping she would be, but she doesn't flounder and suffocate on the stage as I feared she would, either. She's one of the stronger parts of this production and the only awkward moments for me (for her) was early on in the first act - but I think that's due in part to the writing. At that point in the story, when she's running around looking for "arrows" and other signs, the audience doesn't yet know what on earth she's talking about. It crossed my mind that she might be crazy early on in the play - but that also might be a tactic employed by Margulies to keep the audience guessing and intentionally uncomfortable. She has some wonderful shining moments in act two - in fact, she's marvelous during the second act. Other than blatant-Americanness (which is no fault of her own), I think she is an asset to this production and completely proves herself. I don't know whether she will be considered leading of featured, but regardless, I would like to see her (along with Sisto), nominated for a Tony.

And now, we come to Ali MacGraw. To be quite honest, I had no idea MacGraw was in this until I was shocked to see her entrance greeted with applause. After quickly glancing at her bio, I obviously immediately knew who she was. Brilliant, unforgettable, and Oscar nominated for LOVE STORY - I was overjoyed when I discovered who she was. Without much to say early on in the play, I kept waiting and waiting for something to come along for MacGraw to say and do. And when it finally comes along - boy, is it depressing. And I'm not talking about the material. She roams the stage nearly as cluelessly as a decapatated buffalo. Her actions and reactions to what is being said on stage appear overly rehearsed, undoubtedly calculated, and absolutely sophomoric. I hadn't yet written her off as being "bad" after Act One, and I anxiously hoped that she would rise to the occasion in the following act. Unfortunately, as you've heard, it's all downhill from there. Yes, she's truly as bad as other have said on this board. Her big speech at the table (to her three kids) is a very well written monologue, full of juicy enough lines for a role that should be - and is - so detrimental to the play. Her monologue is embarrasing. It came off as overly scripted and just plain God-awful. Unfortunately, she has the final line in the play. A great closing line - a real turning point for the character. A character who, during the course of the play, should have the most dramatic and obvious development. Again, unfortunately, she fails to do anything right in this play and is a massive liability. While she's obviously not the play's only problem, it's a problem that can easily be fixed - I can think of about a dozen actresses who would dazzle and walk away with a Tony in the role. It's sad, really - she was so promising when she was younger.

The rest of the supporting cast that rounds out the ensemble - from the little girl to the servants, including Gbatokai (Helen's boyfriend), are wonderful and are sincere assets to the production.

I think the play succeeds, despite the flaws of some of the cast members, but in a different way than it is expected to. It didn't seem like a Lifetime movie to me - it seemed like an intriguing, fascinating, brutally disturbing and ultimately moving portrait of an unconventionally dysfunctional family. Excellent script, excellent staging, and captivating lighting. While it's certainly not DOUBT or THE PILLOWMAN, it's worth a look. Some complained that the show successfully rells a story, but fails to actually SAY something. Well believe it or not - not every piece of theater has a message to it. While it may not be a blatantly obvious message (a la, acceptance, just be who you are, etc.,) I think there is one, wrapped up in this slightly misguided production. I can't exactly articulate what the message is - I'm not good at that - but I'm certain that I felt something from this production. It is a worthwhile venture that I found brutally moving.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 6:13am

"It's sad, really - she was so promising when she was younger."

Did you every actually SEE Love Story??? Let's just say that her acting hasn't gotten worse; it's just like it has always been. That Oscar nom was just mindboggling.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 6:23am

Yeah, Ms. MacGraw has never really been known for her acting. I'm seeing this on Saturday night and will give a full report.

Excellent review as always, Munk.

[Esparzafan]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 9:48am

Thanks for the review, Munk. Seeing it tonight and I'm more excited after your words!

[buskeat]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 10:04am

I have always been blown away by Ali MacGraw's total inability to read a line of dialogue. Her casting in this play caused me to cross this off my list of things-to-see on my New York trip this spring.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 10:30am

I've always thought McGraw was the single worst professional actress I've ever seen.

Anyone remember "The Winds of War?" Words don't describe just how awful she and Robert Mitchum (who looked stoned) were in that.

Updated On: 3/31/06 at 10:30 AM

[QMAN03]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 10:31am

Great review. I also saw this a few days ago and liked it quite a bit. No, it ain't no Pillowman or Doubt, but I thought it was a very good night at the theatre.

And yes, Ali MacGraw was not good, but I thought she was tolerable. And I didn't think her character was the central character in the piece. I thought she played what her character was: she was just there. She didn't have any say at all in the end, but the children still allowed her to stay.

And I couldn't disagree more with your review of Bryggman. I thought he was perfect for the role because you like him so much at the beginning, it is hard for the audience not to like him at the end, yet you still have to because of what he has done. I think alot of this play's quality comes from bringing up conflicting emotions in the audience. For instance, there are some very funny parts in it after the secret is revealed, but it's very hard to laugh because of the subject matter. And I think that's the plays biggest success; to bring up raw emotions.

[Calvin]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 10:41am

Perhaps Vanna White will be in the touring company?

[QMAN03]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 10:44am

I can't imagine this touring. It just wouldn't have that appeal. Maybe a limited engagement in LA would be possible.

(and if that was a complete joke, than ignore my whole post)

[BwayBaby18]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 11:22am

Was Meridith Lipson in the show last night? I don't know if the little girl was double cast or not.( I ask because i directed her last year.)

[QMAN03]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 11:24am

She is double cast and I think she was in my show (I saw it Wednesday matinee)

[Auggie27]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 11:30am

This recurring criticism that the current production's "American-ness" is hurting the play just seems way off point. British actors portraying Danes are no more "authentic." This is a play about a Danish family, a culture no closer to that of the English than America's. (I always found it funny that Americans had to duplicate the British pronuniciations used in LES MIS. It's a show about French people.) If only "Americana" were the biggest issue here.

To me, the real problem is the degree to which the play's ambitions are not realized. It's a truly stage-worthy and tantalizing subject, and the situation used to dramatize it offers myriad opportunities for digging under the rocks. But most rocks remain unturned, particularly in the attenuated but underwritten 2nd act. The play treads water until it stumbles upon a predictable and to me, wholly unsatisfying conclusion. I cannot defend MacGraw, but that role's lack of flesh and blood -- true cdevelopment - only contributes to the evening's feeling of accute undernourishment. I wanted exploration of the topic -- and characters -- at hand. Lots of shouting, busy "fight direction" (how many people roll under the table?),and a lurid sound effects track that would go with THE INNOCENTS do not a compelling play make.

Updated On: 3/31/06 at 11:30 AM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 12:46pm

Yes, you're right - but I presumed that the British piece was undeniably more European. That's all that I meant.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 12:59pm

"Her actions and reactions to what is being said on stage appear overly rehearsed, undoubtedly calculated, and absolutely sophomoric."

Sounds exactly like her performance in Love Story, which I just watched last week. Not only is her performance awful in Love Story, but it's such a detestable character. I couldn't get why Ryan O'Neal's character just HAD to be with this smarmy smug charmless little bitch. GOD! It took her way too long to die. What did people see in that movie?

[Ryanindc]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 5:30pm

Saw it too, posted my reaction in the other thread. Saw it first in London where it fantastic and last week in New York where it was not.

I agree with you that I think this is definitely material that could succeed in America, but unfortunately, I think they did a terrible job casting it. Every single actor paled in comparison to their British counterpart.

I think what made the West End production so affecting is that it seemed so natural, so real. I just don't think the actors appearing on Broadway have what it takes to make the material seem that organic.

Certainly, one of them does not: Ali MacGraw. You're spot-on Munk when you say another actress (I'd like to see Jane Alexander or Kate Nelligan do it) could take that role and run with that, walk away with the Tony for Featured Actress. It's maybe the juiciest role in the show because of the character's deep-seeded denial. And it's totally lost on the clueless MacGraw.

I'm not kidding, they ought to fire her before it opens and she gets pummeled by the critics.


Updated On: 3/31/06 at 05:30 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 5:33pm

So why is McGraw in this again? Is she related to somebody putting up the money or does the director just have a long standing crush since LOVE STORY? I mean I wish the woman no ill will, but for her own good, they should really replace her before opening night.

[aspiringactress]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 5:41pm

I'm seeing it tonight, and am certainly looking forward to what you mentioned as "decapitated bufffallo". That's just downright funny.

[wherethehorizonlies]

Posted: 3/31/06 at 10:07pm

I'm so sad that ms. mcgraw isn't good - the mother is my favorite part and was played brilliantly in London (that production was hands-down the best piece of theatre I've ever seen)glad to hear that the rest wasn't too bad

great review!

[Effie]

Posted: 4/1/06 at 4:17am

Having seen the play in London, it mystifies me that the director would allow Hayden to play the role in such a way that we don't know if he's joking or serious. In both the movie and the UK version, it's clear from the get go where the character's coming from. That's what makes all the drama (in both senses of the word) so interesting.

[Jerry_Jagodzinski]

Posted: 4/1/06 at 6:17am

And what do you think about David Patrick Kelly's playing?