Priest's Reviews of Spamalot, Doubt, Piazza, Woolf and Dessa Rose

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 3/26/05 at 10:03pm

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf
March 24th Performance

From the time I had first heard that Kathleen Turner and Bill Irwin were to play the irascible couple in Albee's masterpiece, I found it to be slighlt intriguing. I thought that it would either work extremely well or fall flat.

Irwin and Turner both give fresh interpretations of George and Martha, respectively, and bring out certain subtleies to their relationship. But, by and large, I didn't buy them as a couple. Both give good, at times great, performances in their own right, but together they lack a certain something. Something that makes me belive that they have been together for so long, that something that lets me see that deep down under all the malignant attacks, there exists a real bond between the two.

Turner shines in the first two acts. She commands the stage, and the attention of the other three actors, with monumentous force. She is sublimely earthy and brings a tender, motherly ferocious bitterness to the role. Her use of her famous baritone voice brings about a real sense of domination, yet she conveys this domination (over her husband, her guests, and her world) with this undertone of real insecurity. Turner lets you see how others view Martha, but also gives you glimpses to Martha's soul.

But where Turner greatly succeeds in the first two acts, she more or less fails in the third. It is at this point, where George has affirmed his masculinity and will to fight her, that Turner's performance begins to become a ball of confusuion. Almost as if Turner is not sure when to take and when to give. She does fine in the early moments of the act, but what hurts her performance is that she becomes too devastated too soon.

She gives up combating George and loses her will in a way that it takes away the impact of the end. She runs out of steam too soon that makes the "news" not as devastating to her, and to the audience, as it should be. It's heartwrenching, yes, but it is not, as it should be, heartbreaking.

I really wanted to buy Irwin in the role. He finds a lot of humour, unfortuately some of it is at expense of the material. His line delivery was mostly terrific, but it is distracting when he accompanies every line with an over-the-top physical gesture. I kept wanting to see a man who has been shot down his entire life, but all I saw was a fine actor clowning it up.

I hate to compare anything he does to Richard Burton from the film because the interpretations are just so different. But Burton. an actor who could eat up anyone who shares a scene with him, wonderfully underplays George in the first 2/3 of the moive. He doesn't pull focus, but you see how Martha has bullied this man all of his life. It is because of this fabulous underplay Burton does that your heart beats fast just because you KNOW that when he snaps, all hell will break loose.

Irwin just doesn't find much beneath the surface of George, mainly because he is too active so early on. I really, really wanted to buy his performance all night because I so respect this man. But it was at the "Flores para los muertos" line that I just accepted that he was too much of a clown for his own good. A fine performance in many ways, but just too much in some aspects and not enough in others.

But Irwin does do a fine job in his scene with Nick. A VERY fine job. I just wish he would have carried that heartbreaking sublety with him the whole time before he "snaps," then his performance would have been breathtaking.

The true standout of this production was Mireille Enos, who does an outstanding job as Honey. She finds humor and depth that even Sandey Dennis didn't find. I was thrown ajar by her decision to have Honey come in drunk right away, but it was a perfectly legitimate interpretation and I went with it. But she underplays beutifully when needed and really finds a lot of laughs. But, unlike many of Irwin's laughs, hers don't undermine the material. A fine, fine heartbreaking performance that steals every scene that she is in.

I didn't find much to like with David Harbour's performance at the beginning, but he slowly grows into the character. At first he would react before being given anything to react to, which was entirely distracting. and his Nick comes off as too angry a lot of times. but he does give a good performance in his solo moments with George, and then with Martha.

The set is very homely, and the actors use it beautifully. A perfect mix of slovenliness and cleanliness. I loved how the set got a little darker in each subsequent act. And the lighting at the very end was marvelous and depressing.

It seems as if I didn't enjoy this production as much as I did. Overall, the production was highly enjoyable and one of the better things I've seen this season. The first two acts were overall excellent, but the real test is the third act. And this production just didn't pack the emotional wallop it needs. I was devastated, but not nearly as much as I should have been.

I need to eat. I'll write the other reviews in a bit.

Updated On: 3/26/05 at 10:03 PM

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 3/26/05 at 10:12pm

Great review, Priest. If you were in my class, I'd give you a big fat "A" in composition.

[hannahshule]

Posted: 3/26/05 at 10:13pm

Great review! Can't wait to hear about the others!

[TVBoy]

Posted: 3/26/05 at 11:47pm

WONDERFUL review. I couldn't agree with you more.

Who needs Brantley when we have Priest? :) Can't wait to read the others....

[GypsyRoseLee]

Posted: 3/26/05 at 11:48pm

Thanks, Priest! I'm going up to NYC over Memorial day and you've definetly piqued my interest in this production.

[GovernorSlaton]

Posted: 3/26/05 at 11:55pm

I believe that was the only one you didn't tell me what you thought of. Very nice review.

[Plum]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 12:08am

Yay for Priest reviews! Can't wait to hear your views on Spamalot and Dessa Rose, especially.

[LittleFish8386]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 12:10am

Is it just me, or is Priest the smartest, most intelligent and well spoken kid of his age?

God Bless his adorable little heart.

[Jwei123]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 12:15am

Priest~ Thanks for that review. I love Albee, and can't wait to see the new interpretations of such famous characters!

[paradox_error]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 5:09am

I'm waiting in anticipation for your next reviews...

[amasis]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 10:19am

Great review, Priest. Thanks so much for sharing. Looking forward to the others. Updated On: 3/27/05 at 10:19 AM

[ckeaton]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 10:39am

Priest is a broadway stud. I'm waiting for Spamalot!

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 10:43am

How old is priest?

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 10:43am

How old is priest?

[GovernorSlaton]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 11:02am

Well, he's got the mind of a 40 year old college professor. :)

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 11:10am

Wonderful review, Priest.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 11:51am

Great review.
Looking forward to the others...

[eslgr8]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 12:59pm

Priest, you are a much better critic than I. Very perceptive and original, as always. But is MONUMENTOUS a word?

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 1:02pm

It's not, but who cares?!

It was a damn good review!

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 1:11pm

Spamalot
March 22 Performance


First off, now I know what everyone meant by all of the Monty Python groupies coming out in droves. There were hoards of them and they cheered anytime a familiar character came on stage or a familiar line was said. And they sang right along (and loudly) with ‘Always Look On the Bright Side of Life.’ I’d be lying if I didn’t say it was annoying.

First of all, the show is a riot. I didn’t laugh as much as I did at Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, but I laughed a lot. However, other then being very funny, there wasn’t much else there. In fact, I have trouble classifying the show. It’s not so much a linear musical as it is a very funny series of vaguely related sketches with very talented performers. Which is all I really think the creators were setting out to do, so, in that vein, they succeeded.

I feel I am in the minority on this, but I found it boring when they would just have scenes from the movie verbatim. They just rehashed so much of the movie word-for-word. But, then again, these are the lines and characters that got the biggest screams and the biggest laughs, so what do I know?

They mostly succeeded in bringing in new material. The show opens in a very odd way that is just so Monty Pythonish, and very funny. However, I found the First Act rather boring overall, actually. Mainly because there was just SO much of the movie. The only times I really perked up were when there was a new song. The second act picks up, and began to get me laughing, mainly because it departs from the jokes I had already heard a thousand times and really begins to set a new course. But there is something to be said when your favorite part of the show is when Sara Ramirez (Kind of Spoiler) does a Jennifer Holliday impression at the end of ‘Diva’s Lament’ and when Christian Borle sings “Another hundred people just contracted the plague…” Those two small bits absolutely killed me.

The performers are mostly wildly successful. Tim Curry is really given the least to do. He is on stage the most, being Arthur and all, but his part, it seemed to me, was really just there to feed the others and keep the already flimsy plot from falling apart. He is given two songs in the beginning and end respectively, but for the rest of it he’s just kind of there. But he is funny if for no other reason except his trademark Tim Curry expressions. They slayed me. He’s hysterical when he needs to be, but with all these other performers, he is not needed all that much.

David Hyde Pierce is given so little to do in the First Act, but when he really comes into the picture in the second, he shines. He is given the best full-fledged number in the show, “You Won’t Succeed on Broadway,” which is a very clever patter-song number. As he was singing it, I kept thinking Henry Higgins. But he does a tremendous job of singing it, and this number, only his really major contribution to the show as a whole I think, is definitely the big crowd-pleaser and showstopper of the show. And when they (Spoiler?) broke into the Fiddler bottle dance with grail on their head. Please, that’ll make any Broadway fanatic grin ear-to-ear.

I felt sorry for Hank Azaria, and then I realized I really didn’t need to. Out of all the performers, he is given the least amount of new material and is often given characters and scenes straight from the film. But, while these were the characters and scenes that the audience (re: Monty Python groupies) ate up and busted a gut over. They cheered for ten or fifteen seconds anytime The Knight of Ni, or Tim the Enchanter or the French Taunter came on. But I just kept thinking that he was slightly shortsighted because, as a performer, he wasn’t given much to interpret, he was just told to recreate already famous sketches. But he does succeed immensely in doing so. He is given some new material as Lancelot, and his Peter Allen-esque number, ‘His Name is Lancelot,” was a riot.

Chris Sieber was out the night I saw it, and John Bolton was on for him. I was told later that it was Bolton’s first time in the role(s). He was very good, and I had some problems with his performance, but it hardly seems fair to critique him considering it was his first frickin’ time.

Now, two performers stole the show away from every one of the “big names.” Sara Ramirez, and to an even greater extent Christian Borle, gave truly breakout performances in this show.

Ramirez has an amazingly powerful and versatile voice that she uses to great effect. She is hysterical in ‘The Song That Goes Like This,’ immensely entertaining in the whole scat-section of ‘Knights of the Round Table’ and slayed me in her ‘Diva’s Lament.’ There is really nothing more to say other than that.

But Chrisitian Borle was far and away the best thing about this show in regards to the performances. He completely sells the hell out of ‘Not Dead Yet’ and had me in stitches. But his true breakout role is Prince Herbert, where he is just so dead-on funny and steals the show away from the likes of Curry, DHP and Azaria. The running joke that all of his characters were “not quite dead” was truly one of the funniest additions to the show from the movie. There is all this talk about which of the big three will get Tony nods, but I’d give it to Borle before any of them.

The sets were, obviously, absurdly Pthonesque and really brought a lot into the show. Everything about the show in the show just crazily absurd and maniacal. Nichols does a fine job of directing and Nicholaw’s over-the-top choreography suits the feeling score perfectly.

The biggest problem I had with Spamalot was just that I didn’t know what it was. It’s kinda hard to even call it a musical. It has a really funny and musically engrossing score, but the book is just so non-existent (and/or so much like the movie) that it is more like a flimsily related musical revue.

I had a great time, but have to say I left a little underwhelemed and wasn’t sure what to make of it all. The only thing I was sure of was the hilarity and talent of Ramirez and Borle.

Updated On: 3/27/05 at 01:11 PM

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 1:12pm

"But is MONUMENTOUS a word?"

No.
But hey, it was late and I had just gotten home from a long-ass plane ride. Give me some slack.

[leomaxfrank]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 1:23pm

Priest - wonderfully coherent and well-thought reviews! Thank you

[TGIF]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 1:45pm

Love your thoughts on Spamalot and I agree with most of what you say.

Have yet to see Virgina Wolf, so I cannot comment on if I agree or not, but it was wonderfully written!

[MatureDignity]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 1:48pm

Now, two performers stole the show away from every one of the “big names.” Sara Ramirez, and to an even greater extent Christian Borle, gave truly breakout performances in this show.

I wholeheartedly agree. Great reviews!

[apdarcey]

Posted: 3/27/05 at 6:59pm

i'm waiting for the others priest!