Every once in a while, Roundabout Theatre Company surprises me by taking a chance on the revival of a neglected play, e.g. Machinal. To open their current season, they have revived this complex J.B. Priestley (An Inspector Calls) family drama that has not been seen in New York since 1938. Furthermore, they have given it a topnotch production with a superb cast, sensitive direction and a marvelous set design. In it we meet the Conway family — a widowed mother in a provincial British town (a fine Elizabeth McGovern, lately of Downton Abbey) and her six grown children. Hazel (lovely Anna Camp; All New People) is the town beauty. Carol (Anna Baryshnikov) is the youngest and sweetest. Alan (the always excellent Gabriel Ebert; Therese Raquin, Casa Valentina) is the eldest and most likely to be ignored. Madge (a fine Brooke Bloom; Cloud 9) is a budding Socialist. Kay (Charlotte Parry; The Winslow Boy) is a would-be novelist. Robin (Matthew James Thomas; Pippin, Spider-Man), just back from the Air Force, is the apple of his mother’s eye. Among the guests at Kay’s 21st birthday party are Gerald (Alfredo Narciso; Tiny Beautiful Things), a family friend and solicitor; Joan (a radiant Cara Ricketts), a neighbor; and Ernest (Steven Boyer; Hand of God), an awkward businessman newly arrived in town. Don’t be put off by the first act, the weakest of the three, which introduces the characters in the context of an interminable offstage game of charades at Kay’s party. There is general optimism since the Great War has ended and the future looks bright, both for the family as well as the country. In this production, there is no intermission between the first two acts. This is a wise choice as it provides a reason for a breathtaking set change, in which Neil Patel’s classic drawing room is replaced by something more ethereal. In the second act things get much more interesting. We are suddenly in 1937, when we see the many ways that things have not turned out as hoped for almost all of the characters. The disappointments of this rather smug family reflect the disillusionment in the world at large as the promise of peace and prosperity have faded. After intermission, Act III brings us back to Kay’s 21st birthday party in 1919 immediately after the moment we left it. We discover the seeds of many of the developments we witnessed in Act II. It’s an unconventional structure that has an emotional payoff even though it leaves some of our questions unanswered. The play explores the idea that the past, present and future are all taking place simultaneously, but you need not subscribe to that theory to enjoy the play. The cast is uniformly strong, although I do wish Ms. Camp smiled less. I admire Ms. McGovern’s bravery in portraying so unattractive a character. Paloma Young’s costumes are appealing, except for one hideous ball gown. Tony-award winning director Rebecca Taichman (Indecent) negotiates the play’s complexities smoothly. I felt that the production was probably better than the play deserved, that when you strip away the play’s gimmicks, there isn’t enough substance there. Nevertheless, I was grateful for the opportunity to see it in this splendid production. Running time: 2 hours 25 minutes including intermission.
Showing posts with label Charlotte Parry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charlotte Parry. Show all posts
Monday, September 25, 2017
Sunday, September 29, 2013
The Winslow Boy ***
(Please click on the title to see the complete review.)
After the Roundabout's dreary revival of "Man and Boy" two years ago, I was both surprised and dismayed to learn that they were presenting another Rattigan play this season. Fortunately, this time out they got things right. "The Winslow Boy" is a much better play and this is a much better production -- imported from the Old Vic with a new cast. This drawing-room drama with comic overtones is based on an actual case in early 20th-century England in which a 13-year-old cadet was accused of theft and expelled from the Royal Naval College after a dubious investigation. His father believes in his son's innocence and embarks on a two-year search for justice which exacts a steep price on the family, both financially and emotionally. The Winslow paterfamilias is Arthur (Roger Rees), a retired banker with a strong sense of his own correctness. His wife Grace (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio) has her hands full with him. Their eldest child Catherine (Charlotte Parry) is an active suffragette, newly betrothed to officer John Watherstone (Chandler Williams), who is a bit of a prig. Middle child Dickie (Zachary Booth), who is at Oxford, is far more interested in partying than studying. Ronnie (Spencer Davis Milford), the accused thief, is still very much a child. Violet (Henny Russell), the family maid, is a bit rough around the edges, even after 24 years of service. The family solicitor Desmond Curry (Michael Cumpsty), a former cricket star, has long felt the pangs of unrequited love for Catherine. He introduces the family to Sir Robert Morton (Alessandro Nivola), London's leading barrister, who, after an almost brutal interrogation of Ronnie, agrees to take the case. Over the next two years, the case became a cause celebre and fodder for the tabloid press, whom Rattigan mercilessly parodied in the person of young reporter Miss Barnes (Meredith Forlenza). Rattigan wisely concentrates on the family's changing relationships, rather than on the complicated legal details of the case. In a strong cast, Cumpsty, Parry and Nivola stand out. I was slightly disappointed that Rees's performance was not more nuanced. The sets and costumes by Peter McKintosh are outstanding, as is Lindsay Posner's direction. Although the play's pace is leisurely, I was never bored. Running time: 2 hours, 20 minutes including intermission.
NOTE: Reality is often crueler than fiction. George Archer-Shee, the accused thief in the actual case, died at Ypres at the age of 19.
After the Roundabout's dreary revival of "Man and Boy" two years ago, I was both surprised and dismayed to learn that they were presenting another Rattigan play this season. Fortunately, this time out they got things right. "The Winslow Boy" is a much better play and this is a much better production -- imported from the Old Vic with a new cast. This drawing-room drama with comic overtones is based on an actual case in early 20th-century England in which a 13-year-old cadet was accused of theft and expelled from the Royal Naval College after a dubious investigation. His father believes in his son's innocence and embarks on a two-year search for justice which exacts a steep price on the family, both financially and emotionally. The Winslow paterfamilias is Arthur (Roger Rees), a retired banker with a strong sense of his own correctness. His wife Grace (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio) has her hands full with him. Their eldest child Catherine (Charlotte Parry) is an active suffragette, newly betrothed to officer John Watherstone (Chandler Williams), who is a bit of a prig. Middle child Dickie (Zachary Booth), who is at Oxford, is far more interested in partying than studying. Ronnie (Spencer Davis Milford), the accused thief, is still very much a child. Violet (Henny Russell), the family maid, is a bit rough around the edges, even after 24 years of service. The family solicitor Desmond Curry (Michael Cumpsty), a former cricket star, has long felt the pangs of unrequited love for Catherine. He introduces the family to Sir Robert Morton (Alessandro Nivola), London's leading barrister, who, after an almost brutal interrogation of Ronnie, agrees to take the case. Over the next two years, the case became a cause celebre and fodder for the tabloid press, whom Rattigan mercilessly parodied in the person of young reporter Miss Barnes (Meredith Forlenza). Rattigan wisely concentrates on the family's changing relationships, rather than on the complicated legal details of the case. In a strong cast, Cumpsty, Parry and Nivola stand out. I was slightly disappointed that Rees's performance was not more nuanced. The sets and costumes by Peter McKintosh are outstanding, as is Lindsay Posner's direction. Although the play's pace is leisurely, I was never bored. Running time: 2 hours, 20 minutes including intermission.
NOTE: Reality is often crueler than fiction. George Archer-Shee, the accused thief in the actual case, died at Ypres at the age of 19.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Look Back in Anger *
(Please click on the title to see the complete review.)
Roundabout Theatre's current revival of John Osborne's 1956 play is a puzzler. Granted, it's impossible to recreate the shock waves the play set off when it first appeared. But what's the point of reviving it if you strip out almost all the social and political background that makes the play comprehensible? One of the characters has been eliminated too. In the present version you would be hard put to figure out just what Jimmy Porter is so angry about. Matthew Rhys captures Jimmy's anger, but comes up short on the magnetism that would explain what holds people in his thrall. Also, it's a stretch to believe in him as a 25-year-old. Sarah Goldberg, as Jimmy's wife Alison, is fine in the first two acts, but doesn't find the right note for the final act. Adam Driver, as Cliff Lewis, is eminently watchable, but the reasons for his devotion to Jimmy remain a riddle. Charlotte Parry is strong as Helena. The production is very poorly served by Andrew Lieberman's set. A charcoal gray wall without windows or doors covers the entire stage, leaving a strip perhaps four feet deep for the action. This strip is cluttered with decrepit furniture, an iconic ironing board, and piles of trash and rotting food. If this is a metaphor for their circumscribed, squalid lives, it is a heavy-handed one. Mark Barton's lighting is problematic too. The audience is bathed in harsh bright light which gradually fades once the play begins. Sam Gold, in his third New York play this season, directed. Running time: 2 hours, 25 minutes.
Roundabout Theatre's current revival of John Osborne's 1956 play is a puzzler. Granted, it's impossible to recreate the shock waves the play set off when it first appeared. But what's the point of reviving it if you strip out almost all the social and political background that makes the play comprehensible? One of the characters has been eliminated too. In the present version you would be hard put to figure out just what Jimmy Porter is so angry about. Matthew Rhys captures Jimmy's anger, but comes up short on the magnetism that would explain what holds people in his thrall. Also, it's a stretch to believe in him as a 25-year-old. Sarah Goldberg, as Jimmy's wife Alison, is fine in the first two acts, but doesn't find the right note for the final act. Adam Driver, as Cliff Lewis, is eminently watchable, but the reasons for his devotion to Jimmy remain a riddle. Charlotte Parry is strong as Helena. The production is very poorly served by Andrew Lieberman's set. A charcoal gray wall without windows or doors covers the entire stage, leaving a strip perhaps four feet deep for the action. This strip is cluttered with decrepit furniture, an iconic ironing board, and piles of trash and rotting food. If this is a metaphor for their circumscribed, squalid lives, it is a heavy-handed one. Mark Barton's lighting is problematic too. The audience is bathed in harsh bright light which gradually fades once the play begins. Sam Gold, in his third New York play this season, directed. Running time: 2 hours, 25 minutes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)