THE SCHOOL FOR LIES

[jbm2]

Posted: 4/11/11 at 12:56am

Anyone have any information about The School for Lies? Really curious about it....wondering what the buzz is?
Anyone else looking forward to seeing it?

[lightguy06222]

Posted: 4/11/11 at 1:13pm

big fan of Walter Bobbie's works, and David Ives' writing. Looking forward to seeing Mammie Gummer and Hamish Linklater.

I will be at the invited dress rehearsal tomorrow night at 7 PM, so we'll see how the show is shaping up to be.

I'm sure the cast will be BEAUTIFULLY dressed, with William Ivey Long designing the costumes.

[jbm2]

Posted: 4/11/11 at 2:07pm

dying to know what you think..report back after you see it tomorrow.

[jbm2]

Posted: 4/12/11 at 11:57pm

......was anyone at the dress rehersal tonight? Really want to hear about this show!

[jbm2]

Posted: 4/13/11 at 9:09pm

Updated On: 4/15/11 at 09:09 PM

[jbm2]

Posted: 4/15/11 at 11:56am

Thinking about going tomorrow night..
has anyone seen this? or heard any buzz?

[jbm2]

Posted: 4/16/11 at 12:45am

anyone?

[lightguy06222]

Posted: 4/16/11 at 2:05am

just go see the damn show!


Its fantastic. Great adaptation of The Misanthrope by David Ives. Brilliantly written. Fun, witty, and well adapted for a modern audience, incorporating words and phrases from a modern tongue into the old english rhythmic verse of Moliere.

Great Direction by Walter Bobbie. Very light and speedy show. Simple, comical direction that brought an element of modernity to the piece, and made it very enjoyable myself, and everyone around me.

Constant hysterics.

Fantastic performances, with Hamish Linklater being the standout as the brash, honest, brazen Frank. Mammie Gummer shines as Salome, and her character arc is well played. Alison Fraser is always a pleasure to watch, and delivers her performance with grace. Steven Boyer steals the show as the servant, and the remainder of the cast all pull their weight with their smaller roles. Each is important to the story.

Beautiful simple scenic design by John Lee Beatty, made up of large white fabric tiles that cover the entire floor, upstage wall, and ceiling. With a large gold chandelear, and a secretary desk, the remainder of the playing space remains open, and is well used.

Beautiful, french period costumes by William Ivey Long.

A MUST SEE off-broadway this season! A great evening of theatre, that pokes fun at everything you normally hate about the classic literature performed classically.

Best thing at Classic Stage in the last few years. Two thumbs up.

www.classicstage.org

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 7:36am

The only heartening thought to come out of this woeful farrago is the knowledge that Molière will survive this travesty of his greatest play. It's childish, stupid, labored, crass, and completely unfunny. The author mixes anachronisms, profanity, and enough fancy words to fill several years worth of new word a day calendars. The result is both noxious and obnoxious. The level of the "wit" is to have the character Clitandre called "Clitoris"--- several times. And since the word "scrotum" seems to occasion such hilarity in a critics' darling musical, why not use it here as well? There's a reference to Darien, Connecticut, a character says "my bad," etc., etc..... David Ives: your bad.


What makes matters worse, each line of this doggerel is delivered as heavily as a hammer on an anvil, each one practically screeching self-satisfaction at its own "cleverness."

The direction is as heavy-handed as the writing. Actors who have done good work in the past struggle with the mess here.

Instead of adapting The Misanthrope, why not just do it the way Molière wrote it? I know, i know... what a preposterous notion.

[josiahsjosiah]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 9:10am

I loved it and laughed throughout both acts. A refreshing playful update which is perfect for CSC. Thought the direction was spot-on and all of the actors delightful. And the costumes were delicious!!! Just go and have fun.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 10:43am

I fell somewhere between After Eight and lightguy. I didn't think it was painful, but didn't think it was particularly good either. The script was what it was. I actually didn't mind some of the updating, although I admit I was laughing/cringing at the absurdities, rather than laughing with it.

My biggest problem was with Mamie Gummer. I thought she was excellent in Uncle Vanya there a few seasons ago, but here she didn't seem to fit with the spirit of the text. Her delivery was slow and plodding.

Alison was probably my favorite, even though she felt like she was in a different play as she was so over the top. Maybe Walter Bobbie needs to get in there and even out the performances a bit.

I definitely disagree that this is the best thing at classic stage in years. Did you miss Three Sisters, Venus in Fur and Uncle Vanya?

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 12:56pm

Whizzer:

Funny, I thought Mamie Gummer fared the best among the actors. The author had made such mincemeat of Molière's characters that it was nigh impossible to create consistent characterizations. The cool, ironic detachment that she maintained came the closest to doing so. No, it was not the ideal approach to playing Molière's Célimène, but this was no longer Molière's Célimène, or Molière's anything else, for that matter.

I agree with the other posters that the costumes were quite attractive.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:30pm

After Eight-
Yeah I guess her "cool, ironic detachment," as you so perfectly put it seemed at odds with the crass nature of the adaptation, and more importantly to me with the interpretations of the other actors. I like Gummer in general, and I didn't think she gave an embarrassing performance. It just didn't gel with what everyone else was doing.

William Ivey Long designed marvelous costumes here. I actually found myself admiring them in detail when my mind wasn't wholly focused on the play.

[Tom-497]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 11:42pm

I thought School for Lies was pretty good, and the audience response was fairly enthusiastic the night I attended. As for Gummer, as much as I liked her in Uncle Vanya, her performance style in School for Lies seemed to me like a bit of a wet blanket, keeping some scenes from being as successful as they otherwise might have been.

[georady]

Posted: 4/23/11 at 7:26pm

I am somewhat in the middle of these reviews... that being said, I plan to go back and see the play again!

I was definitely with the audience - that enjoyed the play from beginning to end! I found it a fully realized elaboration on Moliere's work - that actually worked out better in the way the author fleshed out the relationship between Célimène and "Frank" (Moliere just drops us into some relationship and never establishes WHY these two are together???)

And, while I understand the objections to updating Moliere... honestly, I have NEVER seen a Moliere done in English that I liked... while I enjoyed the play done in French (and I don't even speak French!) It's like seeing Shakespeare in German (which I do speak) you get the gist of the story but you miss the poetry... the language that makes Shakespeare "Shakespeare" (and not Ben Jonson) - I feel the same is true for Moliere.

And, while I too did cringe at the scatological references here and there, now and then... I'm a bit of a prude when it comes to language and most people are NOT - so the choice of words was not out of place for a New York audience. What's more important is that the author DID make the commitment to write a two hour play in iambic pentameter with occasional rhymed couplets... BRAVO!!! And the language IS inventive, clever, bold, fresh, funny and occasionally "pretty" (if never "beautiful")

I say this play is a Can't Miss IF you enjoy theater and are not stuck in the "classics" (because, let's be frank, like Frank... Shakespeare and Moliere did a good deal of skullduggery in their works and a LOT of what they wrote is really un-intelligible for a contemporary audience... in fact, being working showman, I would hazard to guess that both great playwrights might well have revised their plays along these lines to make sure their audiences were well entertained for the evening!)

g

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/23/11 at 11:09pm

"I found it a fully realized elaboration on Moliere's work - that actually worked out better in the way the author fleshed out the relationship between Célimène and "Frank" (Moliere just drops us into some relationship and never establishes WHY these two are together???)"

So now, David Ives has actually IMPROVED upon Molière. Well, if that doesn't take the cake!


"And, while I understand the objections to updating Moliere... honestly, I have NEVER seen a Moliere done in English that I liked..."


So you haven't liked Richard Wilbur's translations of Molière, but you do like David Ives's execrable butchering of this play. Now that takes another cake.
If you keep singing the praises of this travesty, there won't be any cakes left.

[lightguy06222]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 3:55am

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
excuse me, Mr. Snarky Pants
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

He was formulating his own opinion. I dont imagine he thinks David Ives is BETTER than Moliere, but he feels that Ives has flushed out Moliere's ideas more, and clearly defined the relationship between Frank and Celimene.

Thus far, only YOU think its a butchering...

Georady, Whizzer, Tom, Josias and I all seemed to quite enjoy it. You seem quite outnumbered, Mr. Theatre God himself.

So thank you for posting your opinion, and i look forward to others posting theirs. But when theirs are different than yours, you should remain in your corner of the sandbox.


"one word to think of colon) turd"

Updated On: 4/24/11 at 03:55 AM

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 8:05am

"excuse me, Mr. Snarky Pants "


You're excused.

"He was formulating his own opinion. I dont imagine he thinks David Ives is BETTER than Moliere, but he feels that Ives has flushed out Moliere's ideas more, and clearly defined the relationship between Frank and Celimene. "



Molière doesn't need "flushing" out. Nor fleshing out.

"Georady, Whizzer, Tom, Josias and I all seemed to quite enjoy it."


I didn't get that impression from Whizzer's post, but he can speak for himself on that score.


"You seem quite outnumbered, Mr. Theatre God himself."


Oh my God! Outnumbered by all these authorities on Molière and The Misanthrope! Then, of course, I have to be wrong!



"So thank you for posting your opinion, and i look forward to others posting theirs. But when theirs are different than yours, you should remain in your corner of the sandbox."



Whatever makes you think I would wish to play in the same sandbox with anyone who could praise this monstrosity? That would be as much torture as sitting through this play.


"one word to think of colon) turd"

Spoken as elegantly and maturely as........

David Ives! LOL!


But I've been hard on you here, and I'm sorry for that. You enjoyed the play, and have every right to. And if you had a good time, that's great, because that's what one is supposed to have when one goes to the theatre. But I was appalled and offended, and I hope you can understand that, and understand why.

[georady]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 8:06am

To wit' I think that Richard Wiblue did the yo-man's job translating French to English and TRYING to keep faithful to the ideas and style of French couplets... problem is that French is a MUCH easier language to rhyme - in - and that puts forth a challenge that takes the writer away from the demands of simply telling the story... how many words in English rhyme with the most required word in English: "love" - uh, dove, glove, thereof???

Face it, even the Restoratioon writers - who were more influenced by Moliere than Shakespeare - chose to drop to iiambie pentameter and rhymed couplets for all but their tragedies (little wonder that only the comedies survive as viable theatrical works.)

So - we are left with a literal translation of French w/o the sound and joy of that language (not to mention long diatribes against religion against a monoarchial threat of censorpship and are inconprehensible to our contemporary secualer society... and often cut) as I saw in a recent production of "Tartuff"

Or, a fully realized ressurection of Moliere's work, taking his key characters and basic premise (the excess of virtue can be as funny as the excess of foppery) and go wild with it! Bottomline, even people with NO background in theatre, let alone "classical" theater found it greatly amusing (judging by their rush to check for iphone messages at the intermission...) while a contingent of French Class students were laughing their collective "asses" off... I had to ask if they thought it was "like" Moliere and they agreed it was a very different play... and they all loved it!

Again, give some props to the great writers who wrote the works these great works of the past...

Did Moliere literarly translate Molina's "Don Juan" into to French? Did Shakespeare merely translate Platus from Latin into "Comedy Errors" (or did the Bard add a couple more twins?)

Kudos to Ives! Great Play! Love the theatre of Language!

g

[indytallguy]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 8:15am

Why do people always seem to paint these discussions into either/or conversations when they can be an AND?

You can respect and love the original Moliere AND think that Ives has created an interesting theatre piece in and of itself. That's what makes theatre exciting: different interpretations, mash-ups, reenactments, revivals, and "inspired by" creations that often divide audiences based on their own needs, preferences, and expectations.

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 8:45am

"You can respect and love the original Moliere AND think that Ives has created an interesting theatre piece in and of itself. "

That is true. The problem here is even if this play were wholly of David Ives's invention, and had no connection to Molière whatsoever, the play, in and of itself, is dreadful.

[georady]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 9:20am

btw - consider that the original Célimène was played by Moliere's coquettish, inappropriately young wife... no need to establish a "relationship" that his audience would altogether be aware of...

No such luck for us non-contemporaries. So why not create a little backstory (and a little more) to better establish WHY would this Virtuously Intolerant Man, set aside all his beliefs for this... one... girl???

I will agree, however, that Moliere's play is a bit more cynical and ends on an uncomprising note. That is probably where the two play diverge most dramatically... therein I might see how some would regard it as the "happy ending" tacked on to Shakespeare's "Romeo & Juliet" and "King Lear" by the Restoration scribes...

But, again, do I feel deprived by the ending that Moliere wrote for "The Misanthrope?" Nope. Not the way the Ives set up his all-stops-out denouement!

Like I say, I'm gonna head back so that I can re-enjoy the performance and see if a different audience reacts... differently???

g

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 10:41am

"No such luck for us non-contemporaries. So why not create a little backstory (and a little more) to better establish WHY would this Virtuously Intolerant Man, set aside all his beliefs for this... one... girl??? "

Have you read Pascal, a contemporary of Molière? He wrote, "the heart has its reasons that reason knows not."

No further explanation is necessary. A 17th-century French audience understood this, and so does a 21st-century American one.

[lightguy06222]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 11:32am

@after8- We get it. You didnt like it. I respect your opinion, and completely understand your issues with the piece, my views aside.

But for everyone else's sake, stop shoving your opinion down our f*cking throats.

you've criticized everyone elses opinion, to a degree that makes me wonder if you are just bitter that Hamish Linklater got the role of Frank over you...

[After Eight]

Posted: 4/24/11 at 12:08pm

"But for everyone else's sake, stop shoving your opinion down our f*cking throats.

you've criticized everyone elses opinion, to a degree that makes me wonder if you are just bitter that Hamish Linklater got the role of Frank over you.."

Hardly. He's a much better actor than I am.

And if you don't want my opinion shoved down your -------- throat, then don't respond to the points I've raised, don't bait me, and don't curse at me. Because one little lesson you should have learned in the sandbox, if you can't take a punch don't throw one.

Now i've said my piece, and if I choose to leave, then it will be by my own volition, not anyone else's, and certainly not yours.