The Good, the Bad and the Ugly...

[skynyc]

Well, that title isn't completely fair, but I thought it was catchy.

 

I will actually reviews these in the order in which I saw them.

The Road to Qatar is a cute but completely unsubstantial new musical playing at the York. The premise was a lot better than the production. It tells the story of a couple "short, gay, Jewish men" (that's a recurring lyric) who have never worked together, but are hired by the Emir of Qatar to write a musical. A spectacular musical that will play in the enclosed soccer stadium in Dubbai. It will have a cast of 400, not including the 30 camels and 30 horses. It must have acrobats, trapeze artists, and feature ancient Greece, ancient Egypt, Napolean and Muhammad Ali.

This silly little show tells, at a frenetic pace, the story of the two composers being basically sealed in a room for four weeks to create the show, and then enduring two weeks in London for casting and rehearsal and finally the presentation of the show in Dubbai.

Three supporting players played all the other parts...and were much more successful than the two guys playing the leading men, one of whom was particularly bland.

Frenetic became the word of the day...the pacing was fast, the lyrics were fast and the action was almost as it was on fast forward. I wished that the whole thing would be a little more evenly paced to allow the absurdity of the material to sink in. We learn that a song was thrown out because of the lyric Pie a la mode...because it referenced Allah.

The highlight of the evening came as we walked through the lobby on the way out and saw the photographs of the actual production...which included acrobats, ancient Greece, and Muhammad Ali.

 

The new Broadway revival of That Championship Season has recently started previews and this one interested me. I saw it alone, which was a pity. First of all, it seems very dated. It won the Pulitzer (and the Tony) in 1973. And must have been very timely for that period. It was in perfect harmony with All in the Family which started about the same time. And this show features five Archie Bunker's in the room. The bigoted epithets were many, and some of the stories the characters tell were still a little shocking, but the 2011 audience, used to reality TV and Jerry Springer rewarded them with big laughter, and not nervous titters. "That girl we did in your garage? She wasn't epileptic, she was retarded."

I couldn't decide if the audience was laughing at the balls of the playwright to include this in a play in 1972 or if they just thought the delivery was funny.

Another problem for me. The story recounts the 20th anniversary reunion, at the coaches home, of four of the five players who won the State basketball championship. Much is made of the fact that they're 37 and 38 years old. Well, Keifer Sutherland, Jason Patric and Jim Gaffigan are all 45 and Chris Noth is 58. Noth is wildly miscast as the "dago" (as he is affectionately, and then not so affectionately) called who has used his money to buy permits to strip mine the land around the community. It doesn't hurt that the mayor who has been given the permits was also one of the players. Add a bitter Elementary Principal and his alcoholic brother and you have all the makings of a disaster. And then the coach enters and he is the biggest Bunker of them all. Constant adulation of the Kennedys, Joe McCarthy and Teddy Roosevelt...here's a man stuck in his father's time period...constantly reassuring himself that "Nothing Changes". But his twenty minute monologue at the end of the second act worked it's magic on the other characters which I found interesting...it didn't really work on me.

Granted I saw an early preview and have learned that the running time has all ready been trimmed almost fifteen minutes, but I came away wondering if this was going to work for current audiences. A couple postings on theater chat boards have really enjoyed the show, but I am still going to be curious to see what the critics say.

 

If you live in the NY area, get a cheap ticket now for Good People. Really provocative, really powerful, I think this will be another hot ticket. Frances McDormand is terrific as a woman raised in the poor area of Boston, and for whom nothing has gone right. Tate Donovan grew up with her as a Southie, but escaped to U Penn, and then Georgetown for Med School, and now is living in one of Boston's toniest neighborhoods.

A major theme of the show is the difference between what is said and what is heard, but I don't want to give much away about this compelling new work from the playwright of Rabbit Hole...which also debuted at Manhattan Theater Club several years ago. Let me just say that the subtle set-up of the first act is wonderfully unleashed in Act II. McDormand will certainly be in contention for a Tony this year. Especially since Stockard Channing's performance in Other Desert Cities won't make it to Broadway until fall.

Don't see this alone...make sure you take someone with whom you can discuss it afterwards. I couldn't wait to get home tonight to tell folks to get their tickets quick. (It has been on tdf for many performances, but the word of mouth is starting to spread and I suspect it won't be on tdf much anymore.)

 

From the sublime to the ridiculous...tomorrow night I take my sister to Rain: The Beatles Tribute tomorrow. I suspect that it will be a ton of fun.

[Lankypeters]

I share your enthusiasm for "Good Friends," which I saw last night and recommend to everyone this morning. It's ambiguous in a way that's entirely satisfying -- you can think about it and discuss it -- as many did heading up the aisles -- for quite some time.

 

I'd love to get a psychiatrist's diagnosis of McDormand's character. She seems to be paranoid; a sociopath. Yet by the end her motives seem justified and she becomes one of the most sympathetic characters in the play. (The boy who shows up for Bingo is also sympathetic, and cute. I was hoping he'd come out by the final curtain.)

 

Lindsay-Abaire's play probes sociological and psychological issues, but the themes lie "underneath" the text, so that the play never gets into Arthur Miller "thumpings" on the pulpit about "paying attention" and all that stuff, including feeling guilty.

 

There was a lot of overlapping dialogue, the actors, McDormand espcially, cutting in on each other. I'm guessing they's been directed to do that, to convey the tension inherent in their predicaments.

 

Quibble: I thought Estelle Parsons played too broadly, even mugging and perhaps upstaging others at times. She, too, cut in on the other actors' lines, often before they gave her a reason to respond or react. Perhaps her timing, at an early preview, was off.

 

McDormand is compelling from step one. She deserves a Tony this time out.