After its ecstatic London reviews and the large commitment of time and money required to see it, Matthew Lopez’s (The Whipping Man, The Legend of Georgia McBride) two-part drama about a circle of contemporary gay men in NYC and their debt to their predecessors arrives on Broadway with a lot to prove. The fact that Lopez has taken inspiration from Howard’s End in creating his characters and themes adds to its interest for E.M. Forster fans. However, Howard’s End is not the only ingredient in Lopez’s recipe. Add large dashes of Angels in America, The Normal Heart and Boys in the Band. Does this recipe work? Mostly yes. The decision to include Morgan (the M. in E.M. Forster) as a character in the play pays off brilliantly, especially since he is played by the excellent Paul Hilton (“A Very English Scandal,” “The Crown”). Hilton also plays Walter, the kindly older man and life partner of Henry Wilcox who befriends and inspires Eric. The other male leads, all carryovers from London, are also very good. As Eric Glass, the play’s core, Kyle Soller (The Government Inspector) radiates goodness. As budding playwright Toby Darling, Eric’s lover of seven years at the play’s opening, Andrew Burnap (This Day Forward) nails his charm, insecurity and self-loathing. Samuel H. Levine (Kill Floor) is superb both as Adam, the actor who captures but does not reciprocate Toby’s interest, and as Leo, the young hustler who reminds Toby of Adam. In one remarkable scene, he plays both simultaneously. As Henry Wilcox, the hard-nosed conservative billionaire who is drawn to Eric, the reliable John Benjamin Hickey (Six Degrees of Separation, Love! Valour! Compassion!) once again proves his worth. The supporting cast playing Eric’s circle of friends make the most of their moments. The only principal role recast for Broadway is that of Margaret, an old woman Eric meets late in Part II. Replacing Vanessa Redgrave with Lois Smith (Marjorie Prime, John) is going from strength to strength. However I did feel that her long, touching soliloquy (and indeed the inclusion of her character) came across as an audience-pleasing interpolation that was not really organic to the plot. What would a New York story be without talk of real estate? Here we have two topics, the legendary $575 three-bedroom rent-controlled apartment on West End Avenue which Eric’s grandmother lived in and which he is struggling to hang onto, as well as Henry's upstate country home which Walter made a refuge for AIDS patients and which he wanted Eric to have. Scenes that advance the story are interpolated by extended discussions, the topics of which include the downside of gay assimilation, Forster’s cowardice in not publishing Maurice during his lifetime, proper attribution of credit for accelerated introduction of AIDS drugs, and the challenges brought on by the 2016 election. Bob Crowley’s (The History Boys, Carousel) minimalist set— a large beige rectangle surrounding a smaller rectangle that raises and lowers and a back wall that opens occasionally to reveal specific settings — serves the production well, as do his costumes. Stephen Daldry’s (Machinal, Billy Elliot) direction is impeccable. How you respond to all this may well depend on your level of interest in the lifestyles of privileged gay men and in the works of Forster. I strongly recommend that you watch the film of Howard’s End before seeing the play so you will appreciate Lopez’s appropriations. If you have time, watch Maurice too. Some of the New York references are so specific that I am surprised London responded with such enthusiasm. You should be cautioned that there are graphic — very graphic — descriptions of gay sex. I wonder who the target audience is. A totally unscientific look at yesterday’s audience suggested that 75% of the orchestra and 95% of the mezzanine were gay men. I would normally suggest that you see both parts on the same day. However, the investment of time and money is so large that you might want to see Part I before deciding whether you want to invest in Part II. I thought Part I was the better half and could stand alone. The end of Part I is definitely the emotional high point of the play. Running times: Part I — three hours 20 minutes including an intermission and a pause; Part II — three hours 15 minutes including an intermission and a pause.
I saw it in London and would give similar grades--maybe even a bit lower to Part II. I think there is really ONE good play in here. And the rent control "joke" was offensive. There is no such thing as a $575 three bedroom rent-controlled apartment on West End Avenue. Even the rent controlled old women in my building in Chelsea who have been here since the 1950s have rents north of $2,000 given the steep increases under the law. Also, the play has a grandson moving into the apartment after grandma dies to "keep it in the family"--which is illegal. (You have to have it as your primary residence for two years to take over the tenancy.) I explained all this to the producers, but Lopez refused to correct it. I'm sick of "liberal" playwrights misrepresenting the rent laws for cheap laughs--especially since they are under threat from a massive landlord lawsuit that they hope to win at the Trump Supreme Court.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your illuminating remarks.
ReplyDelete