Search

Open Search
Category

by Kate

7 Awesome and Not-So-Awesome Things about MURDER BALLAD

murder ballad

Murder Ballad, a new rock musical currently enjoying a 2013 run at the Union Square Theatre (after playing with Manhattan Theatre Club last fall), is some good bloody fun. Here is LMezz’s killer rundown of the production:

Awesome: The space.

This was our first time in the Union Square Theatre, which is the perfect location for a rock musical. (Union Square! Hipsters! Street Bong Sellers!) The show is set in the round, with audience seating in all four sides of the theatre, along with additional lounge seating in the playing space. The upstage section is spanned by a bar, the stage-right portion by a pool table, and the stage-left section by the band. Just by entering the theatre, you can sense that some rock musical awesomeness was about to be had.

Awesome: There’s a working bar onstage!

The onstage bar is a working one during the pre-show, and audience members can order drinks. Closer to the start of the show, the actors enter in character and “blend in” with the surroundings. It is an effective way to establish the characters before the beginning of the show.

Not-So-Awesome: There’s a working bar onstage!

This is not a point against Murder Ballad per se, but to what I sense will be (is already?) a trend in shows that allow you to order drinks and drink them on stage. Both the off-Broadway and Broadway incarnations of Once feature the pre-show bar, and I’m sure many other productions will have doe-eyed audience members that are oh-so-surprised as they wander on stage to order the same bottle of beer they could have purchased in the lobby. Or maybe I’m just bitter that we had to wait so long to have an even readier access to booze in the theatre.

Stocked-bar
I could have used one of these for the Broadway production of “Breakfast at Tiffany’s.”

Awesome: Two ladies wrote this!

Julie Jordan came up with the concept and book for Murder Ballad and teamed up with Juliana Nash, who composed the music and co-wrote lyrics. This is the first rock musical (let alone musical) I’ve seen written only by women (If you know any others, leave a comment!), and I hope it’s not the last.

Awesome: The cast.

Most of the cast from MTC’s fall mounting of Murder Ballad have returned this spring. John Ellison Conlee, who reprises his role as Michael, is so believable as a loving husband and father that it’s exciting to see him finally snap. Will Swenson, playing bartender and scorned lover Tom, embodies everything moody and dangerous. After quitting acting this spring, original cast member Karen Olivo has been replaced by Caissie Levy. While I was sad to have missed Olivo last fall, Levy is fantastic in her own right as Sara, the troubled center of the love triangle.

But the definite show-stealer Rebecca Naomi Jones, who is equal parts scary and sexy as the Narrator. She plays the role with great comedic timing and a wicked gleam in her eye, and when she takes the stage, she owns it. By the time the final song has ended, you realize that she has been trolling you all along—and don’t even care.

U mad?

Not-So-Awesome: The Movement

Director Trip Cullman had the task of staging a sung-through rock musical—in the round. This wasn’t an easy one, and he was effective in having the actors playing to all four sides throughout the show.

But this wasn’t to say that there weren’t a few hiccups. Sometimes the choreography seemed unmotivated, with the actors thrashing and jumping about the stage even though their songs were already making their emotions clear. It was as if someone had seen the musical version of American Idiot too many times and said, “Yes! More of that stuff!”

With all the pushing, shaking, pulling, and running that was going on, it made you wonder how the characters had time to have affairs in the first place. Speaking of which…

Not-So-Awesome: Where’s the passion?

Murder Ballad is the story of a “love triangle gone wrong.” One way it goes wrong is in the lack of passion among the characters. All of the characters had chemistry with one another, and it definitely shows, as they make out on the pool table, the bar, and everywhere in between.

But it may be the abundance of physical contact that dampens the passion. David Mamet says that he doesn’t ever write explicit sex scenes because it will take people right out of the story. I’m not sure I totally agree with Mamet, but he has a point. Murder Ballad’s characters make out so much that I marveled on how they were able to sing afterwards instead of marveling about their story.

iqNKzK8oBGew
Another bit of marveling: Do they need understudies? I’m available.

The constant physical contact breaks the sexual—and dramatic—tension. It results in actions that are unearned, relationships that are undeveloped, and emotions that are expressed, but not felt. Which might be what Murder Ballad is about, after all.

0

Things “The Great Gatsby” told me that didn’t require reading the book.

Book to movie adaptations never measure up to their paper-bound counterparts. And nor should they be. Comparing books to their movie forms always boils down to apples and oranges. And the latest film version of The Great Gatsby is one crazy bedazzled-ass orange.

Here’s the stuff I got from this movie that my AP English teacher could never get right:

1. Anachronisms, fuck yeah!

The Great Gatsby takes place in the Roaring Twenties™. Which means that Speakeasy dancers are twerking, flappers are wearing blue nailpolish, and party goers are doing the Charleston to Jay-Z’s greatest hits. The mishmash of then and now is equal parts titillating and nauseating to take in.

2. Sublety is for losers.

F. Scott Fitzgerald’s use of prose in The Great Gatsby was all about subtext. The best person to bring this nuanced tale to life was Baz Luhrmann, of course.

Seriously.

It wasn’t just the cinematography that is heavy handed (more on that later). The film (also co-written by Luhrmann) utilizes a framing device, flashbacks, narration, and text that literally spells things out for you on the screen. The framing device with Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) is the worst offender. Nick sporting a five o’clock shadow and a faux-rumpled suit as he speaks to his therapist about Gatsby is hokey and unnecessary.

No. Just no.

3. Jumpcuts are so in.

In my post about Liz and Dick I talked about the “cinematic whiplash” I could get from short scenes and the haphazard editing that made them. I was wholly unprepared for Baz Luhrmann… well, being Baz Luhrmnan.

Not that there isn’t anything inherently wrong with his style of cinematography. It’s unique and definitely adds a flair to the lavish parties and vibrancy of New York City. What threw me off was its inconsistency. There would be long set-up shots in the Baz Luhrmann style, followed by scenes that appeared “normal.” The back-and-forth of it took me in and out of a story I really wanted to enjoy.

4. The House of Carter ain’t no Simon and Garfunkel.

At first I thought the contemporary music in Gatsby was cool. Like, Marie Antoinette cool.

https://lettersfromthemezzanine.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/6047d-marie-antoinette-original.jpg
What?

Rap music is a great parallel to the jazz music of Gatsby’s time. Jazz was the popular music of that decade, originated by African Americans and co-opted by white people.

240113-macklemore

But as Jay-Z song after Jay-Z song accompanies the party scenes—no, every scene—with little attention to storytelling, it all becomes tiresome.* Not even a nod to Mrs. Carter herself with her cover of “Back to Black” and a cover of her own “Crazy in Love” can save things.

5. Carey Mulligan is a boss.

Daisy is a challenging character to play. In the novel, she is seen through the lens of Nick’s narrative and Gatsby’s desire. As such, she can be viewed as a spoiled brat, a survivor, and everything in between.

Carey Mulligan’s performance does all of that and then some. She’d laugh and joke with a childish voice, and then immediately take command of whatever group she’s in like the lady of the house she’s become. Mulligan’s ability to portray innocence and cynicism, fragility and strength throughout the film is awesome to see.

Bonus points go to Isla Fisher (who should have been used more) as Myrtle, Elizabeth Debicki as Jordan Baker, and Joel Edgerton as a disturbingly good-looking Tom Buchanan. With so many great actors and performances in The Great Gatsby, I’d love to see a cut of this movie that had a more streamlined edit.

*The Music Supervisor of Gatsby did a piece for The Hollywood Reporter about the song selection for the movie. While his reasoning makes sense, the translation to film is still hit-or-miss.
0

Macbeth à la Cumming

Sara and Kate saw Alan Cumming’s Macbeth last year when it played at Lincoln Center. Here was our review!

0

Under the Radar: LIFE AND TIMES

We round off our UTR coverage with the most unique and most ambitious play of the the 2013 lineup: Nature Theater of Oklahoma’s Life and Times Marathon, a ten-hour play comprised of four episodes taken verbatim from one director’s phone call conversation with a cast member to recount her life story. And yes, it starts with day one.

Oh Dear Lord, these tracksuits.

Sara

Life and Times is truly a celebration of the everyday, mundane life. The first energetic, musical episode retracing the subject’s first 6 (ish) years of life, is just simply exuberant. It rejoices in the trivial details and reminiscences of childhood, whether it be the calming energy of a father, the tauntings of a brother, playing hooky from swim lessons, or a mean substitute teacher who causes one to wet one’s pants. What is it about one person’s personal, small experiences, which may seem so unimportant or too subjective to be inconsequential, that makes everyone suddenly moved to connect and remember their own memories, even if they are vastly different from those of the subject? It doesn’t make sense. But it happens in Life and Times. Never do you resentfully wish that someone with a more interesting life was interviewed, some kind of celebrity or something. Interesting is not at stake here. Neither is celebrity. We’re here to see the greatness, the adventure, in the everyday.

When we say verbatim, we mean verbatim. Every “um,” “erm,” “so,” “like,” etc. is reproduced, even emphasized at times. Sometimes an “um” is given its own note, harmony, and crescendo. It’s all part of the poetry of our subject’s (and our own) speech. It’s fantastic. I love my “ums” and “likes” now! In many ways, the marathon is also a case study in theatrical adaptation and conventions. I’d like to hear if some people felt like there were two voices in the piece- that of the woman on the phone generously telling her life story (imagined in our heads from reading the captions) and that of the artists. For me, the woman on the phone speaks quickly, nervously, a distance of years between her and her memories. The artists speak immediately, affectionately, deliberately, and slowly. The difference between the two illuminates what we do when do make a narrative out of someone’s real-life experiences.

I also endorse captioned performances like those in Life and Times for EVERY SHOW EVER becauseimnotagoodlistener

Episodes 1 and 2 are balanced in their joy and sincerity, striking a genuine chord with the audience. Episodes 3 and 4, on the other hand, are much messier (starkly different from the careful musical performances of 1 and 2). It feels a lot less fluid, a lot less reflective, and a lot more tedious. Yes, the “murder mystery” Agatha Christie-style shtick is fun and lends itself well to the subject’s more confessional teenage years. But the same plodding mood, the same melodramatic parodies for 2 and a half hours? Perhaps throw in some more genre-benders for 3 & 4, you know, instead of waiting for 5 and 6? Maybe some farce, some social manners, some Arthur Miller, some Harold Pinter, some Sam Beckett? You’ve got all of theater history to choose from.

Also, I hate to say this, but just because we’re taking the subject’s conversation verbatim doesn’t mean we must include ALL of it, or even do it chronologically. I could not wait to hear our subject’s memories on some more mature experiences-her first heartbreak, her first interview, maybe even her work as an artist. Alas, episode 4 ends at age 18.  Word on the street is that Nature Theater plans to make over a dozen episodes to bring forth all the pieces of their subject’s memories. Because editing is nowhere to be found on their mission statement.

Episodes 3 and 4. Where’s Poirot when you need him?

Kate

So um Life and Times attempts to capture the idiosyncrasies of, like, human speech… and turn oral storytelling into, um, a theatrical event.And it’s brilliant. UTR’s plays experiment with the idea of what theatre is and can be. This production is one of the main events of the Under the Radar Festival, and for good reason. Life and Times is huge both in length and in concept. The four episodes of Life and Times currently span about ten hours as a marathon (with more to come). And it’s mission to relate a telephone conversation to the audience–verbatim–is no easy task. The crafting of dialogue in the theatre is a language of its own. It has to establish the dramatic conflict  and drive the story.

At first, Life and Times doesn’t seem to have any narrative arc, as the novelty of the “real speech” takes time getting used to. The cast doesn’t shy away from the inconsistent vulgarities of human speech–they revel in them. But in those “mistakes” come brilliance. The hesitation before an embarrassing childhood memory. The nervous laughter hiding the fear of an abusive father. The unexpected interruptions where she wonders–and we all wonder–if our stories are actually worth being told.The constant musicality of Episodes 1 and 2 were welcome, as they help give the narrative an emotional life. I was also taken with the “anti-choreography” of awkward limbs and grace-less plies that illustrated everything from solitude to sexual desire. Episodes 3 and 4 can use more development, as the English cozy mystery genre sometimes muted the actors’ performances.

Life and Times was my first experience with marathon theatre, and it was a fun one. The intermissions were accompanied by a dinner and dessert break (featuring awesome salted brownies). It made me think of the possibilities of theatre being an all-day event, where the audience could respond even more to the stories brought to them. I also wondered if the company members could utilize those intermissions in a more creative way, particularly with the ensemble members. Even after almost half-a-day of Life and Times, I still wanted more, and I look forward to future episodes, wacky genres, and “ums.”

To be continued…

1

EVITA on Broadway

We here at LMezz made sure to catch one of last year’s biggest hits at the Marquis before it closes in (gasp) two weeks.  Some thoughts:

Sara

I’ve forgotten how gorgeous Broadway musicals can be. The sets in this production, directed by Brit big shot Michael Grandage, are just breathtaking. I couldn’t stop admiring all their details and realisms. Same goes for the costumes. I was also a big fan of the choreography, by Rob Ashford. I was happy to see that the energy and novelty of dance routine I caught a small glimpse of during their TONY awards presentation was consistent throughout. The performances were also excellent (but why is Michael Cerveris the only one with an accent? hmph) even though we caught Christina DeCiccio, and not Elena Roger, in the title role.

My only quip though is that I couldn’t get much of a storyline out of it. I left the theater feeling like I hadn’t learned much else about Evita than the bare basics I already knew: the she was an actress who married a dictator and then she was a national darling and then she died. If you were to ask me anything more specific– What were her policies? What were her husband’s policies? Why did she die? Did she actually care about the people? Or was it all a shtick?– I would give a gloomy “I don’t know.” And while I appreciate Che’s feeble attempt to expose Evita for who she really was… I still don’t know who she really was.

Maybe a closer listen to the soundtrack will resolve some of these issues. But overall, having just experienced that odd feeling that I just saw a glorious show and I still don’t know what it’s about, my dominant thoughts were, Damn, I have a lot of homework to do.

Kate

Before I start, I do want to confess that I am not the biggest Andrew Lloyd Webber fan and enjoy Love Never Dies expressly to mock it (and ogle Ramin Karimloo).
No, you sing.
Now back to Evita. I was really impressed by the actors’ performances. Michael Cerveris is a reliable Perón, and Ricky Martin shows a lot of voice and charisma as Che. Christina DeCicco as the titular Evita has a spitfire energy and pipes to match, though I wonder if she could have brought more of an emotional stake to “Don’t Cry For Me Argentina.”

One pet peeve of mine involved the accents from the ensemble. When they sang in Spanish, they sounded more like a boys’ choir than anything remotely Argentinian. When Broadway productions go through so many efforts to replicate anything from Australian to German to Irish, it amazes me when that care isn’t equally taken to a language that in this city is easily heard at your local grocery store.

Another cringe-worthy moment was any part of Webber’s score that goes into “rock ‘n’ roll” mode. It might be just the arrangement, but it sounds so dated. I noticed a similar dated sound in last season’s revival of Jesus Christ Superstar.

The biggest question in my mind though was: What is Evita’s purpose?  Grandage’s additions of historical footage and actual portraits of Eva and Juan made it seem like a biography of Eva Perón, which doesn’t quite match the show’s sensibilities. Also, the characters never have a narrative arc or learn anything. Che is still frustrated, and Eva remains insistent that she did right by her country in the song “Lament.” The show has too much rock ‘n’ roll spectacle and not enough dramatic storytelling.

But if your main reason to see the Evita revival was to see Ricky Martin living la vida loca, then you get your money’s worth. Here’s hoping that he’ll appear in something better if he continues to make forays on Broadway.

0

UNDER THE RADAR FESTIVAL: 2 Dimensional Life of Her


Part art installation, part short film, and part one woman show, 2 Dimensional Life of Her is an exciting piece that challenges our concept of theatre. The space itself looks like a paper wonderland: huge pieces of paper line the walls, and a blank canvas is propped up on an easel. A paper cut-out of a woman stands on a chair. Shredded pieces of paper litter the stage floor.

It begins with the image of a woman (Fleur Elise Noble) projected onto the paper cut-out. The first surprise is when the woman begins to move. The next surprise is when the woman leaves the cut-out, her footsteps echoing throughout the theatre. She proceeds to clean the huge pieces of paper, revealing even more surprises and scenes that are scrubbed, torn, or scribbled into existence. Filmed drawings and puppetry give the visual life of the scenes, while clear sound effects make them heard. 2 Dimensional Life of Her follows the woman as she finds her paper cut-out and engages with her artistic creations.

2 Dimensional Life of Her has some of the best multimedia I have ever seen. Noble, who created the concept and design, deftly handles all aspects of the piece, from her rebellious puppets to the interplay of the filmed images and happenings on stage. I especially enjoyed her use of contrast with light and darkness.

But the real magic happens when Noble herself enters the stage and directly addresses her creations—and the audience. This is when theatre happens, as she creates a human connection between herself and her art. Until her entrance, the piece felt more like an art exhibition or a film viewing rather than a theatrical experience. One instance of this ambivalence occurs when a group of puppets “enter” the paper backdrop, armed with a movie camera. They have a conversation illustrated with text bubbles:

“Is this a movie?”

“No, it appears we have an audience!”

“They’re in the way.”

The artwork doesn’t know what it is yet, but I would love to see what happens when the artist comes to a more definitive creation.

Other UTR reviews:  C’est Du Chinois and Hollow Roots.

2

Drood Times Two @ Studio 54

The ladies of LMezz were so intent on solving The Mystery of Edwin Drood they went on two different nights. Here are our reports, including alternate endings, crazy amazing belting, and much much more!

Kate

I saw Drood on a cold Thursday night. While the energy in the cast (and audience) was under the weather (ha!) it was a jolly good show. The audience elected Princess Puffer as the killer and set up Helena Landless with Durdles: their duet was simply hilarious. I absolutely loved the Clue-esque ending, with the murder outcomes illustrated by the shadows of actors behind a scrim. Another delight included the 19th century costumes, designed by William Ivey Long. (Seriously. I’ve never gotten so much shoe/stocking envy until I saw the women ensemble’s color coded boots. So pretty!)

Finally, I am all about the female performances of this cast. I got to see Chita Rivera. Singing. On a Broadway stage. Betsy Wolfe’s performance as Rosa Bud was plucky and such fun. And Drood has made me obsessed with Stephanie J. Block. Obsessed!


Sara

Drood sounds like my kind of show. A Victorian-set comedy with a play-within-a-play structure with enormous amounts of audience participation. Sounds like my theater dream come true. The actual show though is less thrilling. While the performances were great (Who knew Smash’s Will Chase was such a ham?) and the costumes and scenery were extreme eye candy, it never really amounts to much more than cute. There’s a plot and a lot of fun, weird characters, but they remain stock characters without much motivation or dilemma. I actually enjoyed the songs, but they all felt out of place– either much darker or much too complex than their surroundings. The songs would have worked perfectly in a much more nuanced show or under better direction. And I have never seen an audience more mellow during intermission.

When it came time to pick the murderer, my sister (who came with me) and I really couldn’t care less. We picked the parson because we thought he’d have the most complicated motivation in killing Drood. The rest of the audience probably had the same idea because the parson won the vote. Too bad there wasn’t any more motivation than we might have guessed using the scant information we already had on him.

On our way home, my sister asked me, Maybe it would have worked if it wasn’t a play within a play? If they weren’t introducing each actor’s entrance and so on…? I said, But those were the best parts! It was all the murky, mucky stuff in between that bored me!

Maybe Drood’s lack of energy comes from the show trying to be two things at the same time. On the one hand, it’s trying to be self-aware and meta-theatrical. If a show goes that route, it’s entering into an agreement to abandon realism. The comedy of the show also stems from it’s awareness of theatrical conventions. It’s why the comedy in other self-aware shows like Peter and the Starcatcher or The 39 Steps work so spectacularly well. If you’re going to expose the show’s artificiality, you can’t really expect audiences to get swept up in plot and characters so instead, you work with wit, conventions, and perhaps a complexity of ideas.

Drood, however tries to be both this AND realist. It’s play within a play has both a fake play (Drood) and a real one (Music Hall). The cast tries to make its Music Hall Venue as realist as possible, even having the 1895-minded actors mingle with the audience before the show. At the same time, the fake play, Drood, also tries to be too realist, with its hyper-sets and costumes, its misplaced, darkly emotional songs, all of which are supposed to sweep us away into the story. Thing is, we can’t be in the London Music Hall and Cloisterham at the same time. Well, maybe we can, given a funnier, better production?

1

4 Reasons Why Water by the Spoonful is Awesome

waterbythespoonful03.jpg.644x2000_q100

Last night Water by the Spoonful had its New York premiere at the Second Stage Theatre.  Here are some reasons why it’s awesome:

1. It is the first Pulitzer Prize-winning play by a Latina playwright.

And boy does Quiara Alegría Hudes represent. Water by the Spoonful follows ex-Marine Elliot and his return home to Philadelphia. While Elliot’s postwar demons are not new, the perspective of a Latino veteran is. The same could be said for Elliot’s cousin Yaz, who is reevaluating her life after her divorce. Her relationship with her husband was strained in part because it was an interracial one. Odessa, Elliot’s biological mother, has a particularly poignant arc. While her addiction to cocaine would usually be the end of the story, in Spoonful it’s only the beginning as  Odessa uses her experiences to moderate a forum about substance abuse. Add in a group of  diverse well-rounded supporting characters and you have Water by the Spoonful.

2. Internet conversations can still be dramatic ones.

At first, I couldn’t believe that entire scenes were taking place in Odessa’s internet chat room. But this production of Spoonful deftly handled these scenes, in part by displaying the avatars and usernames of the characters on stage. And with so much of our communication now taking place online, it was a bold and timely move to include the online interactions of the characters.

3. Location, location, location.

I mentioned this in my Stephen Adly Guirgis post, but I love plays that take us somewhere beyond the living room. Spoonful travels to a Subway in Philly, a train station in Japan, a rainforest in Puerto Rico, and more. Seeing all of these places on stage was not only exciting but also allowed characters to go on new and unexpected journeys. I especially liked Madeleine’s quest to find herself in Japan, and Elliot and Yaz’s spreading their aunt’s ashes in El Yunque.

4. So. Much. Heart.

A lot of today’s theatre has to do with aloof-ness and disassociation, whether it be through emotion-less line readings or snarky witticisms. But Water by the Spoonful‘s characters aren’t afraid to care. Yaz is passionate about teaching Coltrane to her students and take care of Elliot, Odessa wants the best for all of her forum members, and Madeleine wants to connect to Clayton in a tangible way. Hudes’ honest writing and the ensemble’s sincere performances create a memorable, heartfelt night of theatre.

1

Sara and Kate Guest Blog on Broadway Informer

Check out our joint review of No Escape at the Cherry Lane Theatre for Broadway Informer!

1

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: