Tag: other-theatres

Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, you know I’ve been deeply invested in the pro 99 seat theatre debate (FB). One of the things this movement has emphasized is the importance of supporting LA’s intimate theatres (99 seat and under) by attending shows (preferably with full-price tickets). So, based on this emphasis (as well as a glowing recommendation from Colin at Bitter Lemons, combined with having no theatre scheduled for Pesach weekend), I purchased full-price tickets to Trevor at Circle X Theatre (FB). Although I later saw tickets fly past on Goldstar, they were well worth the full price. This is an excellent show: well-performed, funny yet thought provoking, challenging yet accessible — a great example of what intimate theatre is in Los Angeles.

Before I go into the story of Trevor and my thoughts thereabout, a few words on the type of intimate theatre that Trevor represents. Unlike the monolithic intimate theatre view AEA has, intimate theatre in Southern California is wide and varied along multiple dimensions. We’re all aware of the dimension of budget: some shows are low budget, with only boxes on the stage and the power of actor’s performances to create everything else; others have fully-realized sets, extensive lighting, and production values. Another independent dimension is that of story: some theatres program existant accessible works, designed to draw in the community with only the occasional challenging property (REP East (FB) fits this model; their challenging work was the recent Doubt); others focus on new and emerging work (such as Circle X Theatre (FB)). There’s also the independent dimension of the type of actor: this is a continuum from community theatre actor (such as those drawn from Canyon Theatre Guild) to non-AEA actor to SAG/AFTRA actor to AEA actor; it is also a continuum from “fresh-out” to highly experienced (we’ve seen them all — REP is a mixture of community, non-union, and the occasional union; Blank is often unknowns but highly talented AEA; and Circle X was a number of highly experienced stage and screen actors clearly doing this for the material and exercise, not the job). Lastly, and also independent, is the dimension of financial success: some shows (while excellent) struggle to find the audience (alas, Doubt at REP was this way with few sold-out shows), whereas other shows pack the house (such as Avenue Q at REP or Trevor) — and even packed houses do not guarantee financial success, when the number of seats is limited any many seats are discount or comped. All these dimensions combine to form Los Angeles’ intimate theatre scene, and they are why a blanket fiat approach (such as proposed by AEA) simply does not work in this market. I won’t get on the soapbox now; rather, the distinction of these dimensions hit me as I watched Trevor and contrasted it to REP and other intimate theatre we have seen recently, from the decidedly low budget Pulp Shakespeare or ZJU’s shows, to the highly talented Redhead at Theatre West or Loch Ness at Chance to productions like Trevor. They all combine to make a special and valuable theatre ecosystem that we must protect; it is Los Angeles’ Amazon rain forest.

In any case, back to Trevor (which was written by Nick Jones). If you have read any of the reviews, you know the basics of the story: it is about a former TV chimpanzee named Trevor and his owner, Sandra in the decline of his career. Trevor simply wants the life that he had: to work and actor and be with people like Morgan Fairchild, and achieve success like his mentor, Oliver. Sandra simply wants a home with Trevor and a life that she knows. When a new neighbor with an infant child moves in and is threatened by the risk to safety that Trevor creates, the motivating factors of the story are set up. The Sheriff is called in; he brings in an Animal Control Officer to assess the situation. When the assessment occurs, the situation rapidly goes south — and I won’t say more.

As I said, I knew this setup. What I didn’t expect was the execution. I was thinking that we might see an actor made up to look chimpanzee-ish; perhaps even a monkey suit. But the only monkey-suit is the tuxedo on Oliver. Trevor is played by a man dressed like a man; the illusion of the chimpanzee (which does become real) is achieved solely by movement and behavior. This is the type of acting that one rarely sees and is to be treasured: the creation of illusion from the talent of the actor. It creates a level of investment in the story — letting this portrayal wash over you lets your mind go past the realism into the realm of metaphor, and thinking about what this story is really saying.

The message of Trevor, I believe, is multilevel. While watching it, my mind kept drawing parallels to the situation of my senior mother-in-law who is dealing with dementia. She’s in her own world, interpreting actions in relation to her world-view, and having dialogues that no one else is hearing. She’s Trevor, and those of us in the “real world” are the Sandras. We’re attempting to cope with a real-world situation that is rapidly deteriorating around us and spiraling out of control (while our Trevors remain oblivious). Seeing Trevor in this view reflects the power of the directoral choice to make Trevor human and not a man in a chimp costume; the costume would have destroyed that connection and meaning.

But is that the intent of Trevor. Many have complained about the last scene and have viewed it as unnecessary. Perhaps it is, if you focus only on the linear story of Trevor and his fate. But there is something telegraphed in that last scene that changes the interpretation of Trevor yet again. Jim, the Sheriff, who has been ogling the neighbor Ashley for a long time, has a line about how he saw himself like Trevor. This simple line layered yet another meaning on top of Trevor: are we all just animals under the surface. With the right pressure and situation, we’ll start flinging our poo everywhere, going out of control and endangering others. We may be creating the superficial impression that we can co-exist in proper society — driving cars, holding down jobs, being part of a family — while inside there is a monster who hasn’t been released. Again, a very thought provoking notion — one that comes precisely from the epilogue.

The epilogue also raises a third issue of Trevor: the extent to which we anthropomorphize animals and view them as human. We take both wild and domestic animals and ascribe to them human motivations and behaviors. Sandra did this to Trevor, but we’re all guilty of doing this to our dogs and cats and other pets we keep. Trevor points out the folly and risk of doing this: just because we have this belief they will behave as we will, they are animals underneath. Trevor points out that our anthropomorphism is a bad thing.

This, friends, is the power of theatre. One can view Trevor as the basic surface story: a tragi-comedy (dramedy?) about a woman and her chimp — and enjoy it on that level. One can see the parallels in Trevor to deeper commentary on the human condition — and enjoy that level as well. The presentation in an intimate forum (as opposed to the distance of a larger theatre like the Taper or even the Colony) serves to amplify the message. Trevor could be that man or woman sitting next to you; Trevor is right in front of you.

This is why this production of Trevor is so special; this is why you must go see this if you can find a seat. Just like all the multiple dimensions that create intimate theatre in Los Angeles, the multiple dimensions of the story and performances in Trevor combine to make something truly special — yet another diamond in the mix of gems and cubic zirconia and glass that make up LA theatre.

A large part of the success of Trevor is its execution, and a fair amount of credit should go to the director, Stella Powell-Jones (FB) (who is no relation to the playwright, but who is the granddaughter of Harold Pinter) [assisted by Joseph Patrick O’Malley (FB)). Her decision to play both Trevor and Oliver as humans with non-stereotypical chimpanzee mannerisms (e.g., basic movement, not the oooh-oooh grunt grunt) is what moves the story from surface comedy to deeper metaphor. This decision, combined with the human acting talent and experience, elevated this production.

As for that acting talent and experience — wow! (hmmm, quoting Steve Stanley now 🙂 ). In the lead positions were Laurie Metcalf (FB) as Sandra Morris and Jimmi Simpson (FB) as Trevor. Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know Metcalf from her TV work — but her real heart is theatre from her days with Steppenwolf in Chicago, and it is clear that Trevor is an exercise of love of the craft. This shows in her performance, which is powerful and touching and frantic and moving… portraying the wild swings of a woman in Sandra’s position dealing with all the poo that life has flung (not even thrown) at her. Matching her beat for beat is Simpson’s Trevor. Never at all the stereotypical chimp (except when necessary to ape another actor’s stereotype  — get it, “ape” 🙂 ), Simpson becomes Trevor primarily though physical movement and mannerisms — a walk that isn’t quite right, a quizzical nature that is disconnected and separate, but seemingly wise. These two leads work well together and are believable, and they make the story just fly through their performances.

The supporting roles are harder to tier and categorize. Let’s start with the clearly real people. As Ashley, the neighbor who raises the concern and fear about Trevor, Mary Elizabeth Ellis (FB) captures the youth and fear of a woman in her situation quite well. Her role is more a reflection of the audience — she’s the outside observer of the situation, attempting to bring rationality to a clearly insane situation (and she does that well). Assisting her in doing this is Jim Ortlieb (FB) as the Sheriff, Jim, and Malcolm Barrett (FB) as the Animal Control Officer, Jerry (as well as the P.A. in some scenes).  Ortlieb’s Jim captures the no-nonsense Sheriff quite well, and provides a wonderful undertone of … something else. This is subtle in the first act, with the odd mentions of Trevor officiating at Jim’s daughter’s baptism; it becomes even stranger in the epilogue with Jim’s ogling of Ashley and his comment about being more like Trevor than people realized. Ortlieb captures this subtext quite well. Barrett’s Jerry is wonderful in Act II, especially in how he relates to Trevor both before and after things go south. Quite believable.

Lastly, we have the two characters that are only Trevor’s fantasies. First, there is Brenda Strong (FB) as Morgan Fairchild. I was familiar with Strong from Dallas, but would not have recognized her in this role save for the program — again, the measure of a good actor, disappearing into the role. Sexy and very Morgan Fairchildish,  she perfectly captures the object of Trevor’s adoration. Then there is Bob Clendenin (FB) as Oliver, another acting chimpanzee who is seemingly Trevor’s mental mentor and model. Again, I was familiar with Clendenin from Cougar Town. Here, Clendenin was the personification of the song from Dirty Rotten Scoundels — he was that chimp in a suit, dressed up in Armani but still a chimp underneath. As with Trevor, the decision was not to play him overly chimp-like, which creates confusion when he talks about his human wife, half-human children, and three-quarter human grandchildren… but it all works out. His scenes were few but great.

Circle X also cast a full slate of understudies who we didn’t see, but some of whom I’ve had interactions with on the pro99 group: Tasha Ames (FB) (Ashley U/S); Jeff Galfer (FB) (Trevor U/S); Jamie Morgan (FB) (Morgan Fairchild U/S); William Salyers (FB) (Jim U/S); Kiff Scholl (FB) (Oliver U/S); Leslie Stevens (FB) (Sandra U/S); and Randolph Thompson (FB) (Jerry U/S).

Turning to the technical side of the equation: The scenic design by Stephanie Kerley Schwartz was just remarkable. Remember how earlier I noted that intimate theatre sets range from simple boxes to full realizations. This was clearly in the latter camp, with loads of household stuff and household details that didn’t need to be there, but served to create a perfect atmosphere — from piles of clutter to hidden safes to downspouts to boxes of toys to … it was just a full realization that clearly took a lot of cost and effort that will never be recouped from ticket sales. The set was a labor of love. Supporting the set were the costumes of Elizabeth A. Cox (who also did the costumes for the recent Drowsy Chaperone at CSUN), assisted by Soo Jin Jeong/FB. This team didn’t take the easy way out — stock chimp suits. Trevor was dressed as a normal human, with the one affectation being suspenders. The costume made no chimp distinctions. The human costumes were … completely normal. The people looked as one would expect people in those roles to look. This is a good thing. The sound design by Jeff Gardner (FB) was primarily sound effects, but these worked quite well and were wonderfully directional (creating that wonderful sense of being behind and around, not a stage solely in front). The lighting design by Jeremy Pivnick (FB), assisted by Christina Schwinn (FB), served to illuminate the situation well. There were a few clever things I noted about the lighting design — the use of LED lighting when Oliver was first introduced; the use of some movers during some craziness; and the background lights as headlights in the closing scene. All little well done touches. An unusual credit was for Ned Mochel for Violence Design — presumably, this was to capture the violent behavior of Trevor — and it worked very well. Remaining credits of significance include: Shaunessy Quinn (FB) (Production Stage Manager); Lauren Sego (Master Electrician); Stuart Taylor/FB (Assistant Stage Manager); Bethany Tucker (Props Design). I’m not going to list all the Circle X credits (as they are online), but note that they have two of the oddest credits I’ve seen: Dustin Hughes as “Metrosexual in Residence” and Casey Smith as “Associate Artistic Director of Original Programming for Projects Related to Himself”, which I’m guessing is related to his current project in the other Circle X theatre.

Trevor, at  Circle X Theatre (FB) in Atwater Village, has been extended to April 19. I’ve heard that the remainder of the run is sold-out, but tickets, if available, are online here. They did appear to have a waiting list for each show, so you might get in by cancellations. Goldstar (linked earlier) as sold out.

Another Pro99 Observation. As I was waiting to get into Trevor, the constitution of the audience struck me. Unlike most theatre where I’m one of the youngest there (I’m 55) — yes, I’m looking at you, The Colony Theatre (FB) — the audience for Trevor was significantly younger. Intimate theatre has this power — to introduce the joy of live theatre to the younger audience. Further, it has the power to show that theatre is much more than the touring musicals of Broadway that one sees at the Pantages; it appeals to the young mind that wants to think and be challenged. Intimate theatre in Los Angeles is how we grow the next generation of theatre audience. If Equity wants that well-heeled audience that will pay significant ticket prices so that actors may be paid what they are worth, and will donate significant amounts to keep theatre afloat when it is in danger of sinking, it must be prepared to carefully nurture and grow that audience, not shut it out. A wide and vibrant intimate theatre ecosystem — covering all dimensions — is necessary to do this. Actors should be paid and protected, but this should be with a tiered system that reflects all the dimensions of the equation, not an insensitive fiat (excuse me, promulgated) approach that bludgeons and destroys the ecosystem. Further, all actors are worthy of protection and payment — the rules and protections should not be different depending on the piece of cardboard or plastic in your pocket. Payment may vary based on skill and experience, but the union should not be a thug but a professional society that works to better the profession of live theatre for all, and provides additional long-term benefit (health care, pensions, investments) to protect the well-being of its collective members. AEA’s proposal does not do this: If you are an AEA actor in Los Angeles, vote no. We — and by we I mean not only the AEA actors and stage managers in Los Angeles but the non-unon actors, producers, dramatists, playwrights, other creatives, and the members of Actors, Fans, and Others (the Professional Audience Union), as well as unprofessional audience members 🙂 — want change, but not this change. Learn about the proposal and what you can do at www.ilove99.org.

Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.

Upcoming Shows: The rest of April is taken up with either non-formal theatre or non-local theatre. Next weekend takes us back to Olde Englande with the Renaissance Faire on April 11 (just wait until AEA tries to unionize that — the Queen will be livid!). The following weekend brings two concerts:  Noel Paul Stookey at McCabes Guitar Shop (FB) on Saturday, and the Rick Recht and Sheldon Low concert as part of the Songleaders Bootcamp at Temple Ahavat Shalom on Sunday. After that we’re in Vegas for a week — I haven’t yet determined the shows yet, but Menopause the Musical looks quite likely, possibly Don Rickles at the Orleans, and Penn & Teller are on Goldstar. Los Angeles theatre resumes in May with “Loopholes: The Musical” at the Hudson Main Stage (FB) on May 2. This is followed by “Words By Ira Gershwin – A Musical Play” at The Colony Theatre (FB) on May 9 (and quite likely a visit to Alice – The Musical at Nobel Middle School).  The weekend of May 16 brings “Dinner with Friends” at REP East (FB). The weekend of May 23 brings Confirmation services at TAS, a visit to the Hollywood Bowl, and also has a hold for “Love Again“, a new musical by Doug Haverty and Adryan Russ, at the Lonny Chapman Group Rep (FB).  The last weekend of May currently has a hold for “Fancy Nancy” at the Chance Theatre (FB), “Waterfall“, the new Maltby/Shire musical at the Pasadena Playhouse (FB), and “Murder for Two” at the Geffen Playhouse (FB).  June is equally crazy, as we’ve got the Hollywood Fringe Festival (which should include a production of “Marry Me a Little” by Good People Theatre (FB)), a matinee of the movie Grease at The Colony Theatre (FB), a trip out to see the Lancaster Jethawks,  our annual drum corps show, and hopefully “Matilda” at the Ahmanson Theatre (FB). As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

Many (many) years ago, songs used to regularly move from the stage to the popular charts (unlike today’s trend of taking songs on the popular charts and assembling them into a show). This movement was such that many people didn’t know the stage origins of the songs. Some examples are songs like “Hey, Look Me Over” (which came from Wildcat), “The Ballad of the Shape of Things” (which came from The Littlest Revue), or “Hey Jimmie Joe John Jim Jack” (from Let It Ride). Two great examples of this are the songs “Mack The Knife” (made very popular by Bobby Darin and Louis Armstrong) and “Pirate Jenny” (also known as “The Black Freighter”) (made popular by artists such as Judy Collins and Steeleye Span). Both of these songs actually came from a popular 1929 music by Bertolt Brecht and Kurt Weill called “The Threepenny Opera“. Although it was a popular musical in its day, you don’t see productions of it all that often these days. So when I learned that Pasadena’s A Noise Within (FB) was doing the show in repertory with Figaro and Julius Caesar I blocked a date and started looking for tickets. Previews of the show started yesterday, and we were there for the first preview.

The Threepenny Opera is an interesting show. It started out as a German adaptation of John Gay’s The Beggars Opera. Although called an opera, it really isn’t; nor is it a traditional musical. It is really a play with musical interludes. Today, however, people think of it as a musical (but then again, people’s knowledge of the story comes from the Moritat, “Mack the Knife”). It is a very dark show, commenting on the underbelly of society — beggars, prostitutes, thiefs, whores, and the corrupt police. In many ways, it reminded me of Gilbert and Sullivan in that it seemed intent on skewering and commenting on the structure of society — nowhere is this better seen by the end of the show, where Macheath is saved from the gallows and elevated to be a hereditory peer. I also have recollections (although I can’t confirm them online) that the show was intended not for the upper class opera crowd, but for the everyday public who couldn’t afford shows. Whether that recollection is true, the show is often staged as if it was — fancy productions are eschewed for rougher productions. In fact, many shows open with the reminder: An opera for beggars. Conceived with magnificence such as only beggars could imagine, and an economy such as only beggars could afford…The Threepenny Opera!”

The story of The Threepenny Opera revolves around two principle characters: Macheath (“Mack the Knife”) and Polly Peachum. Mac makes his living through theft, murder, and other crimes. Peachum income — actually, her parent’s income — comes from the beggars of London, whom Mr. Peachum has organized, outfitted to best appeal and allocated throughout the city (skimming a hefty percentage from the top). Other principle characters include Tiger Brown, an Army buddy of Macheath now a police officer in London who watches out for his friend (and gets kickbacks); Brown’s daughter Lucy, who is seemingly pregnant by Macheath; and Jenny Diver, a prostitute who used to be Mac’s girlfriend. A Noise Within describes the story as follows (edited a little):

The story begins in the shop of Jonathan Jeremiah Peachum, who controls London’s beggars, equipping and training them in return for a cut of their earnings. He enlists a new beggar with the help of his wife, after which time they notice that their grown daughter Polly did not come home the previous night. The scene shifts to an empty stable where Macheath is about to marry Polly as soon as his gang has stolen and brought all the necessary food and furnishings. No vows are exchanged, but Polly is satisfied, and everyone sits down to a banquet. Since none of the gang members can provide fitting entertainment, Polly does it herself. The gang gets nervous when Chief of Police Tiger Brown arrives, but Brown turns out to be an old army buddy of Mack’s who has prevented him from being arrested all these years. Everyone else exits and Mack and Polly celebrate their love. Polly returns home and defiantly announces her marriage, as her parents urge her to get a divorce and Mrs. Peachum resolves to bribe Mack’s favorite prostitutes. Polly reveals Mack’s ties to Brown, which gives Mr. and Mrs. Peachum an idea about how to snare Mack, and the trio meditates on the world’s corruption. // Polly tells Mack that her father will have him arrested. He makes arrangements to leave London, explaining his bandit “business” to Polly so she can manage it in his absence, and departs. Polly takes over the gang decisively as Mrs. Peachum bribes Jenny, Mack’s old lover, to turn him in. On the way out of London, Mack stops at his favorite brothel to visit Jenny. Smith arrives and apologetically arrests Mack, who goes to jail. He bribes the guard to remove his handcuffs; then his wife, Lucy—Brown’s daughter—arrives and declares her love. Polly arrives, and she and Lucy quarrel. After Polly leaves, Lucy engineers Mack’s escape. When Mr. Peachum finds out, he threatens Brown and forces him to send the police after Mack, which engenders another mediation on the unpleasant human condition. // Jenny comes to the Peachums’ shop to demand her bribe money, which Mrs. Peachum refuses to pay. Jenny reveals that Mack is at Suky Tawdry’s house. When Brown arrives, determined to arrest Peachum and the beggars, he is horrified to learn that the beggars are already in position and only Mr. Peachum can stop them. To placate Peachum, Brown’s only option is to arrest Mack and have him executed. Jenny mourns Mack’s plight. In the next scene, Mack is back in jail. He begs the gang to raise a sufficient bribe, but they cannot. A parade of visitors—Brown, Jenny, Peachum, and Polly—enters as Mack prepares to die. Then a sudden reversal: A messenger on horseback arrives to announce that Macheath has been pardoned by the Queen and granted a castle and pension.

Note that the story is in some sense fluid. The original was in German, and there have been numerous translations. I was most familiar with the Marc Blitzstein translation from 1954 (as that was the recorded version I have) — this has the best known lyrics for Mack the Knife and Pirate Jenny, and allocates Pirate Jenny to Jenny in Act I. ANW’s used the Michael Feingold version developed for Broadway in 1989 (with Sting as Macheath). This version returned Pirate Jenny to its original performer and place (sung by Polly Peachum to entertain at the “wedding” in Act I), and made some lyrical changes that made some songs a bit jarring (in particular, Pirate Jenny doesn’t refer to “The Black Freighter” but a Galleon). However, that is not the fault of this particular production; productions often use the most recent translation.

ANW’s production, which was directed by Julia Rodriguez-Elliott and Geoff Elliott, made a number of production decisions that, in my opinion, hurt the production. Before I go into them, I must note that what I saw was a preview (in fact, the first preview), so there is a good chance that these may be corrected by the official opening. I hope they are.

As ANW’s production opened, the cast members were strewn around the auditorium saying random things in character. The point of this was unclear. Was it to establish character? We had no idea who these overly costumed folks were. Create ambiance? Unclear. The show then started with the lights dimming, the overture starting, the characters assembling in chairs onstage, and launching into The Ballad of Mack the Knife. There was not a balladeer, nor was there an announcement made to remind the audience (which, being a Sunday matinee, was loaded with senior citizens) to turn off their cell phones.  I think this was a poor decision for the opening. These days we need “the announcement” (as we were reminded when someone’s cell phone went off loudly about 20 minutes in); I also think the balladeer is a better way to present the Moritat than a group choral number with alternating parts.

There were other jarring technical aspects as well, which I’ll get out of the way before we launch into the good.  As this was a preview, all of these may be corrected by the official opening. The lighting design by Ken Booth was, in short, distracting. There were moving lights moving for no purpose other than to distract, and lekos going off and on in the back — again, seemingly only to distract. The overall lighting was dark — not only in mood (which was understandable) but in intensity. This often left the performers in shadow, which isn’t good. The costume design (by Angela Balogh Calin (FB)) and hair, wig, and makeup design (by Gieselle Blair (FB)) also had an occasional jarring aspects. In particular, the eyebrows on many of the actors were overdone, which served to distract rather than to illuminate. I also found Polly Peachum’s outfit distracting — in particular, the hose, as there were dark splotches that made me constantly wonder if it was a hosiery effect or if the hose was hiding tattoos. All of these were unnecessary distractions — and luckily, I believe all of them are easily correctable (and, hopefully, will be corrected during the preview process). They are also non-fatal.

Luckily, the performances themselves were quite good (modulo the common problem with shows set in England of American performers doing English accents so heavy that they are hard to understand). All of the leads had wonderful voices and performed their characters well. There were some slight elements of overplay, but that’s a suspension-of-concern as I believe that is the nature of this show. There wasn’t quite the joy in the characters I like to see, but that could be reflective of (a) this being an early preview, before the actors have gotten to know the characters well, and (b) this being a repertory production where the actors are regularly swapping their characters for others in Figaro or Caesar. It could also just be the fact that this is a dark show: there’s no joy of the actors in their characters because there is little joy in the characters themselves.

In the leading tier of performers were Andrew Ableson (FB) as Macheath and Marisa Duchowny (FB) as Polly Peachum.   We’ve seen Ableson before in both Ionescapde and The Beastly Bombing. Both had lovely voices and handled their numbers well. I particularly liked Duchowny’s “Pirate Jenny”, and all of Ableson’s numbers. Immediately supporting them were Geoff Elliott as Jonathan Jeremiah Peachum and Deborah Strang (FB) as Mrs. Peachum. Elliott’s Mr. Peachum had the appropriate gravitas and stench of corruption for the character; Strang’s Mrs. Peachum blended a bit more in the background, but came out strong in her interactions with Jenny Diver (especially in the middle of Act II). Both sang their numbers well, and moved quite well when they climbed the scaffolding.

In the next tier are probably the last well known characters: Jeremy Rabb (FB) as Tiger Brown; Stasha Surdyke (FB) as Jenny Diver, Maegan McConnell as Lucy Brown.  We’ve seen Ms. McConnell before, back in the East-West production of Pippin.  I recall liking McConnell’s take on Catherine there, and she did a lovely take on Lucy Brown here (both in singing and performance). Surdyke’s Jenny was also strong, especially in the opening number for Act II and the number with the ropes. Rabb was also good as Tiger Brown — he was notable not only in his number with Macheath, but his number and performance in the closing where he essentially explained why the large painting of the horse we see at the beginning of Act I looks so odd.

Rounding out the characters in the show are the crew supporting Macheath, the beggars supporting the Peachums, and the various prostitutes supporting Jenny. Although some of these characters have names, the story is such that you never get a sense of them as characters. All performed well. This tier consisted of: E. K. Dagenfield (FB) (Filch/Weeping Willow Walt), Henry Noble (Matt the Mint), Abubakr Ali (FB) (Crook-Fingered Jack), Matthew Ian Welch (FB) (Sawtooth Bob), Jack Elliott (Jimmy), Fionn James (Ned), Alison Elliott (FB) (Dolly), and the ensemble members: Laura Lee Caudill (FB), Shea Donovan (FB), Aly Easton (FB), Zachary Kahn (FB), Carly Pandža (FB), Toby Dalton Riggle, and Nichole Trugler (FB).

In terms of music and movement, the production was reasonable. There were no choreography credits, so presumably much of the movement came from the directoral team. Sergio Leal and Isabella Grosso from Latin Dance Pro were consultants for the tango. The music was under the direction of DeReau K. Farrar (FB), who also served as conductor of the 7 member band: Melissa Sky-Eagle on keyboards, Scott Roewe and Wes Smith on woodwinds, Angela Romero on trumpet, Adam Liebreich-Johnson on tenor and bass trombone, Robert Oriol (FB) on guitar, banjo, and bass, and Tim Curle on percussion. In general, the orchestra provided a good sound. There was the occasional dissonance — I’m not sure if it was a flat, a minor note, or intentional — but it seemed to fit with the nature of the beggar’s production, so I’m going with intentional. Only occasionally did the music overpower the singers.

Turning to the technical side now. The scenic design by Frederica Nascimento was on the order of… what scenic design. I don’t necessarily mean this in a bad way. The scenic design was simple — lots of visible scaffolding, hand painted signage, hand labeled boxes, and little things to suggest location. It worked well for a repertory production, but it definitely wasn’t elaborate. It gave off the sense of this being an itinerant theatre troupe giving a cheap touring production — which I guess was the intent. It was supported by the props from Marissa Bergman (FB) which worked well.  I’ve commented on Ken Booth‘s lighting before: there were lots of lights in the back blinking on and off for no apparent reason, and there were times the lighting bridge was lowered — again, for no clear reason. Lighting should be invisible and subtly create the mood; this wasn’t. The sound design under sound consultant Robert Oriol (FB) was reasonable, although the leads could have done with stronger amplification to make theme clearer. For the most part (i.e., modulo the minor problem in Polly’s costume) the costumes of Angela Balogh Calin (FB) worked well. Similarly, modulo the occasional distracting eyebrow, Gieselle Blair makeup worked well. It was a little overdone, but that’s the style of this form of show — it’s not as naturalistic as Saturday’s production of Loch Ness was. Remaining technical credits were: Aaron Michaud/FB (Audio Engineer), Juliana McBride (FB) (Stage Manager), Nike Doukas (Dialect Coach), Marc Chernoff/FB (Technical Director), Maria Uribe/FB (Costume Shop Coordinator), Orlando de La Paz (Scenic Painter), and Samantha Sintef (Assistant Stage Manager).

I’ll also note that I found ANW’s program to be one of the more confusing programs out there: a thick booklet consisting of a few pages on each show, followed by an alphabetical listing of all the actors in all the shows combined. Although this does make sense for a repertory company, it makes it hard for an audience to read about the actors in their particular performance. I was pleasantly surprised at the large number of actors in this show that had their own webpages (good). As I tend to add Facebook links, I’ll also note that I had a large number of people that had learned to limit the visibility of their friendslist (a good thing, security-wise), and there was a larger proportion of people without Facebook links. Is this an indication of the decline of Facebook? I remember when I used to always include MySpace links until no one maintained them anymore. But I digress.

The Threepenny Opera continues in repertory with Figaro and Julius Caesar through  May 9 (Threepenny runs Feb 15 through May 9; Figaro runs March 1 through May 10; Caesar runs March 22 through May 8). The official opening night is February 21. Tickets are available through the ANW Box Office, and on Goldstar. Even with the technical distractions (which will hopefully be corrected) this is a production worth seeing: Threepenny is rarely done in Southern California, and this one is done reasonably well.

Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.

Upcoming Shows: February concludes with a lot of theatre in Burbank. The weekend of February 21 sees us in Burbank for Inside Out at the Grove Theatre Center (FB). February closes with two more Burbank performances: the Good People Theatre Co (FB)’s production of Maltby/Shire’s Closer Than Ever at Hollywood Piano in the afternoon, and “The Road to Appomattox” at The Colony Theatre (FB) on February 28. March is equally busy, with the MRJ Man of the Year dinner on March 7 (and a Purim Carnival at TAS the next day), “Carrie: The Musical” at La Mirada Theatre for the Performing Arts (FB) on March 14, a “Drowsy Chaperone” at CSUN on Friday March 20, “Doubt” at REP East (FB) on Saturday March 21, “Newsies” at the Pantages (FB) on March 28, followed by Pesach and the Renaissance Faire on April 11. Other than the Faire, April is pretty much open (as is May), but I expect that to start changing soon (for example, I just booked “Loopholes” for the first weekend in May). As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

 

Why do I always do things backwards?

I saw Silence: The Musical, a musical parody of “Silence of the Lambs“. I’ve never seen the movie.

I saw Evil Dead: The Musical, a musical parody of “Evil Dead“… and its sequels. I’ve never seen the movie.

I saw Triassic Parq: The Musical, a musical parody of “Jurassic Park“.  I’ve never seen the movie.

I saw “A Very Brady Musical“. I’ve never seen…. oh, it’s worse. I have seen “The Brady Bunch”

My point is: I’ve seen numerous movies in stage form long before I’ve ever seen the celluloid original. So, of course, it should be no surprise that I went to go see Pulp Shakespeare (or Bard Fiction) (FB)† at Theatre Asylum (FB) without having ever seen the original movie, “Pulp Fiction“. In fact, I’ve only seen two Quentin Tarantino movies, “Django Unchained” and “Inglourious Basterds“, and both of those were on Showtime, not in the theater, and were originally seen in a disconnected, scenes out of order fashion.  But the tagline for the production: “Ever wonder what Quentin Tarantino’s masterpiece PULP FICTION would be like reimagined by the immortal William Shakespeare?” just drew me in. So, the first thing I did when I got home from the show was to open up Wikipedia and read the synopsis of “Pulp Fiction”.  Accordingly, let’s look at the story through two sets of eyes: the first those of a newbie unfamiliar with Pulp Fiction, and passingly familiar with Shakespeare; the second through the same eyes after reading the plot of “Pulp Fiction”.

I’m pleased to say that the story (credited to Ben Tallen (FB), Aaron Greer (FB), and Brian Watson-Jones (FB), who compiled it and edited it for performance from material developed by the Pulp Bard Wiki based on a concept originated by Kevin Pease — and they do credit all the contributors in the program)… anyway, I’m pleased to say that the story seems to fit in the Shakespeare realm quite well (I can just imagine this being done at a Ren Faire!), and was in iambic pentameter. This was initially hard to get used to (but, then again, so is the opening scene and flashback), but then became normal. I’ve had this happen with other Shakespeare plays.

For someone unfamiliar with Pulp Fiction, I found it surprisingly easy to pick up the storyline, although the non-linear nature eluded me until I got to the last scene. The lead characters were well played, and one could easily see how they had taken modern stereotypes and translated them back to Elizabethan days. Even the Tarantino cartoon violence that I appreciated so well in Django was present in Pulp Shakespeare with the easy and rapid dispatch of characters. I could even see the archtype of the actors that were being parodied without even knowing who the original actors were. The dialogue was funny even without the original film context. The scenes played out well, and some were particularly hilarious (I’m thinking the “Vincenzio de la Vegal and Lady Mia Wallace” sequence, as well as “The Gold Portable Timekeeper”. In short, even though I didn’t know the film, I found the play quite enjoyable (although a little confusing at the start).

As I noted, when I got home, I read the synopsis on Wikipedia. Suddenly, all the scenes made full sense, and I could understand why much of the audience was laughing even more than I was. Based on this, I believe that if you are familiar with the underlying film, you’ll find this show to be hilarious. One of these days I should probably see the movie, and then find another production of this (alas, my theatre schedule is too booked, as you’ll see below, to do that before this run ends). Every scene discussed in the synopsis seems to be in this play, with the exception of the second half of “The Bonnie Situation”. It captured all the dialogue quirks, all the iconic scenes, all the iconic characters (and based on what I read, their mannerisms). Even the odder sequences were present, translated back to Shakespearean times — such as the Prelude to the Gold Watch (where Captain Koons is transformed into Sir “Butch” Coolidge’s father), or the entire dialogue in the Preluce to the Vincent and Marcellus’ Wife sequence (where Vincenzio de la Vega and Julius Winfield argue about whether massaging the feet is the same level of intimacy as kissing a lady’s nether lips). They even capture the equivalent of Fox Force Five, Jack Rabbit Slims, the sequence regarding “What?”, and the French McDonalds discussion.  In short, it made me wish I had seen the movie so that I could have appreciated the parody even more. I guess that’s what a good parody is supposed to do; especially a parody of an iconic film.

As for the Shakespearean nature of the performance: I must admit I’m not a Shakespeare expert. The only Shakespearean plays that I have seen (that were as Shakespeare, so The Lion King and Kiss Me Kate don’t count) are The Taming of the Shrew at Theatricum Botanicum and Santa Clarita Shakespeare, and Two Gentlemen of Verona at the Old Globe. To me, the director Amanda McRaven (FB) (assisted by Emily L. Gibson (FB)) did a good job of keeping the tone and rhythm Shakespearean, which isn’t a surprise as both have experience at the American Shakespeare Center. But the two also appeared to allow the actors to have fun with the roles and bring in their own little touches, which is something I like to see.

In what appeared to be the lead positions were Aaron Lyons (FB) as Vincenzio de la Vega and Dan White (FB) as Julius Winfield. I base this primarily on the fact that they were the connecting glue in all the scenes. The two actors had a great chemistry together; having not seen the original movie, I cannot say whether the chemistry was the same as what existed between John Travolta and Samuel L Jackson. Lyons did, however, appear to project Travolta’s easygoing nature (and dance moves). Lyons also had great chemistry with Lady Mia, Brittanus, and Marcellus. White had an equivalent easy-going nature, but projected more of an “in the hood” vibe (which is appropriate, as he was paralleling Samuel Jackson). In general, the two were fun to watch.

As for the remaining characters, it is better to discuss them on a scene-basis, as opposed to lead-tiers. Let’s start with the “Vincent Vega and Marsellus Wallace’s Wife” parallel scenes, as these capture many of the major characters. As Lady Mia Wallace, Victoria Hogan (FB) was a delight. She had a wonderful energy in her scene with Lyons’ Vincenzio, providing both playfulness and a simple joy with her character. In short, she seemed to be having a blast playing Mia, and that fun came across to the audience. Again, having not seen her film parallel (Uma Thurman), I cannot assess how well she parodies any of Thurman’s particular film mannerisms. As her husband, Lord Marcellus Wallace, Gary Poux (FB) was also fun. He was appropriately menacing, but suitably loose and playful with the character. I could easily seem him channeling Ving Rhames in look and style (Rhames being the movie parallel); again, I don’t know if he captured the movie mannerisms. In any case, both Hogan and Poux were just great to watch. As for the supporting characters in this scene, Marcelo Olivas (FB) [who we saw in Taming of the Shrew] is wonderful as the drug dealer Lancelot (movie parallel: Lance), channeling Eric Stoltz quite well. I particularly enjoyed his performance in the scene where Mia must be saved after her overdose. Olivas is also credited as playing Claudio, who must be a minor character in other scenes. Lancelot’s wife Juno (Jody in the movie) was played by Dylan Jones (FB) (who also played Meadsweet and Player). She was supposedly channeling Rosanna Arquette, and was hilarious in the scene where she explained all of her piercings. I have no idea if that was in the movie, but it was quite funny.

Next are the characters related to the “The Gold Watch” sequences. The main character here is Christian Levatino (FB), who channeled Sir “Butch” Coolidge, the boxer (Bruce Willis in the movie). Levatino didn’t come across as a Willis-parallel either in look or style, but was great fun to watch as the boxer — especially in the interactions with the Marcellus early on, with ghost prior to the fight, and mostly in the interactions with his girlfriend, Fabiana. Fabiana was portrayed by Julia Aks (FB) (who also played the Tavern Wench and Anne) — umm, no that’s not right, as Aks’ FB page indicates she was not in the show this weekend (tsk, tsk to the producers for not telling the audience this). Let’s try this again: Fabiana was portrayed by Brooke Van Grinsven (FB) (who also played the Tavern Wench and Anne), who was fun to watch as the ravenous French girlfriend when Butch returns after the fight (and also fun in her response to garçon line that was in the movie).  I have no idea how well she paralled Maria de Medeiros. The remaining major character in this scene was Matt Hudacs (FB) as the ghost (as well as Brittanus, Waiter 2, and Zed). Hudacs did the ghost character well, although he didn’t come off as particularly Christopher Walken-like to me (but then again, Walken is burned into my brain in a way no brain bleach can erase as the befuddled Captain Hook in the recent Peter Pan Live). Hudacs, however, was wonderful as the Waiter in the Jack Rabbit Slim’s parallel, as Brittanus in the Vincent Vega prelude and Bonnie Situation scenes, and as Zed in the rape scene.

That leaves us with the main characters in the opening and closing diner scenes: Drew Derek (FB) as Pumpkin Pie (as well as Roger, Norman, and Maynard), and the aforementioned Dylan Jones (FB) (“Meadsweet” being the parallel for “Hunny Bunny”). Both were good, although when you first see them you are just getting used to the iambic pentameter, and in the end, they are mostly just repeating silently what they did in the opening. However, they do both work well in the Mexican standoff at the end. Derek was also good as Maynard, especially in his interactions with Hudacs’ Zed).

Rounding out the players was Ian Verdun (FB) as Scottish Dave / Marvin / Sprint, Julius Understudy. I recall the Marvin character from the scene’s at Brett’s (where he is mostly silent), but I can’t place the other character. My guess is that Scottish Dave is a parallel to English Bob, but that’s all I’ve got.

Turning to the technical side of things: In addition to playing Vincenzio, Aaron Lyons (FB) also did the set and the lighting design. The set was relatively simple — boxes and tables and benches, but it worked well enough to establish the place. Lighting also worked well — especially the red lighting during the very bloody scenes — a very Tarantino touch. No credit was provided for sound design, but Jeff Cardoni (FB) was credited for music composition. Having not seen the movie, I cannot assess how well the music Jeff provided paralleled the music chosen by Tarantino for the movie. The costumes by Paula Higgins (FB) seemed suitably period — at least they looked like they might fit in at a RenFaire. I’m also going to highlight the scenic painter, Caitlín McCarthy (FB). I’ve lately been growing more and more impressed by the power of paint in scenic design, creating all sorts of illusions of other surfaces. That was apparent in this show, with the “wood” floor and the “wood” beams on the wall. Notice the power of paint next time you go to a show. Emily L. Gibson (FB) was the stage manager. Pulp Shakespeare (or Bard Fiction) was produced by Aaron Lyons (FB) (adding another hat), Bertha Rodriguez/FB was the associate producer, and Matthew Quinn (FB) was the executive producer.

Pulp Shakespeare (or Bard Fiction) (FB) continues at Theatre Asylum (FB) (which is in the same theatre complex as Elephant Stages and The Lillian) until March 8. Tickets are available through the Asylum online box office; discount tickets are available through Goldstar and LA Stage Tix. The show is worth seeing, especially if you are fans of the original movie, “Pulp Fiction”.‡

[†: Note: The Pulp Shakespeare (or Bard Fiction) FB page that comes up when using the @-tagging is the page for the original production by Jordan Monsall, not this effort.  This production was executive produced by Matthew Quinn, who has indicated that none of the original direction, writing, artwork or music, was used in this production. Mr. Monsall did drop me a FB message about his lack of credit. I will let others determine if there is anything of concern — I’m just a cybersecurity specialist, highway hobbyist, and theatre audience member. I’m just including this footnote to highlight that the likely tag on Facebook is not the correct production, and those interested should use the correct FB reference.]

[‡: ETA – If you are a fan of “Pulp Fiction”, then you’ll be interested to learn that Spring 2015 will see the release of a supposedly-excellent parody film, “Underbelly Blues”, that is, yes, a Tarantino production. That’s Tarantino, as in Tony Tarantino, Quentin’s father.]

Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.

Upcoming Shows: This evening provides me the opportunity to finally meet Colin from Bitter Lemons, as I attend the ZJU 50 Hour Drive-By Show at Zombie Joes Underground (FB).  The last weekend of January concludes with the Cantors Concert on Sat January 31 at Temple Ahavat Shalom, followed by a concert performance of the musical Redhead at Theatre West (FB).  February and March pick up even more. We have a Bat Mitzvah on Saturday, February 7, so there may not be theatre that weekend (but who knows). The next week brings two shows: “Loch Ness” at the Chance Theatre (FB) on February 14 and “The Threepenny Opera” at A Noise Within (FB) on February 15. The weekend of February 21 is open; I’m hoping to find discount tickets for Saturday for Chavez Ravine at the Kirk Douglas. February closes with “The Road to Appomattox” at The Colony Theatre (FB) on February 28. March is equally busy, with the MRJ Man of the Year dinner on March 7, “Carrie: The Musical” at La Mirada Theatre for the Performing Arts (FB) on March 14, a hold for “Drowsy Chaperone” at CSUN on Friday March 20, “Doubt” at REP East (FB) on Saturday March 21, “Newsies” at the Pantages (FB) on March 28, followed by Pesach and the Renaissance Faire on April 11. Other than the Faire, April is pretty much open. Additionally, there’s a Marcy and Zina concert at Pepperdine on Tuesday, February 3; alas, as it is a weeknight, I probably won’t make it. As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

 

Back when I was in High School, the Marx Brothers were hot. No, I didn’t go to high school when their films were first released (I only look that old). I’m referring instead to the mid-to-late 1970s, when some contractual dispute was resolved and one of the early Marx Brothers movies, “Animal Crackers“, could be shown again (the situation just before that release was recently described by Mark Evanier on his blog, to give you an idea). This resulted in a resergence of the popularity of the brothers in high schools and college campuses: their posters were everywhere, the Richard J. Anobile book “Why a Duck?” came out, and everyone was rewatching their movies. Me included. I’m still a big Marx Brothers fan (I like “Duck Soup” quite a bit). Alas, I think today’s kids don’t know the classic ’30s comedians — the Marxes, Abbott and Costello, Laurel and Hardy, W.C. Fields. It’s a loss.

Why am I mentioning all of this? As you know, I regularly read Mark Evanier’s blog. For years, Mark has been touting the praises of Frank Ferrante (FB) performance as Groucho Marx in “An Evening with Groucho”.  So, when I received the Fall Amercian Jewish University catalog and discovered that they were offering a performance of “An Evening With Groucho”, I was there. Full price even. So guess where I was this afternoon? That’s right, say the secret word and win $200.

Normally, this is where I would give you a synopsis of the story. I can’t. For one thing, there is no book writer credited. Perhaps there was one at one point; I don’t know. Although during the show, Ferrante summarizes Groucho’s life, I get the feeling that because he has been doing this show and inhabiting this character for so long, the stories and incidents have become a part of his life as well. In other words, there is no book writer needed because essentially Ferrante becomes Groucho. As Ferrante relates, he has known Groucho and the Marx family since his late teens; he originated the title role in the off-broadway “Groucho: A Life in Revue” that was written by Groucho’s son, Arthur; and he has been doing this solo show for 25 years. In short, there is a reason the New York Times referred to him as “the greatest living interpreter of Groucho Marx’s material.”

However, it is not the story of Groucho that makes this show. You want the story of Groucho, you can read Wikipedia or find numerous versions out there. It is the fact that this show is perhaps only 40-45% the story of Groucho. The remainder of the show is the embodiment of Groucho. Through his interaction with his painist, Eric Ebbenga, and continuous interaction with the audience, you learn what the character of Groucho was like. Ferrante does a masterful job of channeling Groucho’s quick wit and repartee to make a thoroughly entertaining show that just flies by.  He was constantly interacting with the front row, with kids in the audience, and even came across our row (yes, he worked his way all across row “G”). Another “In Short”: You truly feel that Ferrante becomes Groucho, and it is Groucho, not Ferrante, on stage. That’s a high compliment.

[Edited to Add: A good example of this was how he reacted to unexpected things from the audience. At one point, he was interacting with a fellow in the front row who was drowsing out. He asked an usher to get him some coffee. When she came back a few minutes later, he was surprised but recovered well and made an even bigger joke of it. Similarly, he had a wonderful interaction with a 9 year old boy who insisted his favorite Marx brother was Harpo — even after going up on stage. The ability to recover from the unexpected in audience interaction while staying perfectly in character is a hallmark of someone who has melded with the character — and it is also what I surmise makes this show different in every performance.]

Thus, yet again I find myself agreeing with Mark: If you can catch Ferrante as Groucho, do so. You can find his touring schedule here.

One disappointment, however: The show was supposedly sold out. Yet there were four seats in front of us open. Folks: if you buy tickets for a show, please go. The actors on stage aren’t performing for the money the show brings in; they are performing for the audience in the seats. Additionally, I also noted that seats emptied out after the intermission. I could understand that for a stinker of a show (cough, “I Caligula, An Insanity Musical”, cough), but this was good. Tacky, tacky, tacky.

Turning to the technical, well, AJU provided no technical credits in the program. So thank you to the unnamed set designer, sound engineer, and lighting designer (especially the poor spot operator who had to keep up with Ferrante’s continual movement into the audience).

By the way, you’re probably asking yourself why AJU — American Jewish University (the merger of the University of Judaism and Brandais Barden) presented this. The answer is that their community adult education program wants to highlight those significant places where Judaism influenced cultural change. The Marx Brothers, who were Jewish, clearly did that.

An additional “only in Los Angeles” moment: This was the second show in an row where there has been someone famous in the audience sitting not that far from me. Friday night, at “Serial Killer Barbie”, we had Mary Jo Catlett (of “Different Strokes” and Spongebob Squarepants fame) sitting two seats away from us.  At today’s show, we had someone even more famous — someone who Ferrante singled out as one of his inspirations for doing this show: Hal Holbrook, who has been doing a one-man Mark Twain show since 1954. As I said, “only in Los Angeles”. Here’s a hint folks: Famous actors, out of context, look just like you and me and everyone else.

Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.

Upcoming Shows: Next weekend starts the Rep season with their production of “Avenue Q” at REP East (FB) on Sat January 17. The fourth weekend of January brings an interesting mashup: Pulp Shakespeare (or Bard Fiction) at Theatre Asylum (FB) — this show is described as  “Ever wonder what Quentin Tarantino’s masterpiece PULP FICTION would be like reimagined by the immortal William Shakespeare?”. The last weekend of January concludes with the Cantors Concert on Sat January 31 at Temple Ahavat Shalom, and I’m potentially looking for another show for Sunday. February and March pick up even more, with “The Threepenny Opera” at A Noise Within (FB) on February 15, a hold for “Loch Ness” at the Chance Theatre (FB)  on February 21, “The Road to Appomattox” at The Colony Theatre (FB) on February 28, the MRJ Man of the Year dinner on March 7, “Carrie: The Musical” at La Mirada Theatre for the Performing Arts (FB) on March 14, a hold for “Drowsy Chaperone” at CSUN on Friday March 20, “Doubt” at REP East (FB) on Saturday March 21, “Newsies” at the Pantages (FB) on March 28, followed by Pesach and the Renaissance Faire on April 11. Additionally, there’s a Marcy and Zina concert at Pepperdine on Tuesday, February 3; alas, as it is a weeknight, I may not make it. As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

Back in 2012, I went to the West Coast Jewish Theatre (FB)’s production of “New Jerusalem: The Interrogation of Baruch Spinoza“. At that time, I learned that their next production was to be the musical version of Mark Harelick (FB)’s play “The Immigrant“. I obtained a copy of the CD, and started to try to fit it into my theatre schedule — but, alas, I couldn’t. This year, when planning my trip to the Bay Area to visit my daughter (who is in her third year at UC Berkeley, and her second year of Yiddish studies), I discovered that Tabard Theatre Company (FB) was doing the original play during my visit. I quickly made arrangements to attend — which we did yesterday, seeing the penultimate performance of the play. I am extremely glad that we did — this was a very very moving play; I play I want to see again when it revisits Southern California. I’d recommend you go see it, but it closed last night.

One thing common to all Americans is the immigrant experience. For some, it is so far back there is no memory (native Americans). Others try to forgot those times (“I came over on the Mayflower”). In the Jewish community, most know their immigration story. For example, I know how my grandfather came to American from Vitebsk, entering at the Port of San Francisco and going to New York. I know that other branches of my family came from Germany to New York, and then to Nashville. These are experiences that shape a family.

“The Immigrant” tells one such story — and one that is true. It tells the story of the Harelick family (yes, the author of the play), whose patriarch (Haskell Garelick, changed to Haskell Harelick) immigrated from Russia in the early 1900s to Galveston TX, and thence to a small community on the Texas plains called Harrison. Starting life with a pushcart selling bananas, he befriends the town banker (Milton Perry) and his Southern Baptist wife (Ima Perry), coming to live with them. Perry helps Harelick move from a pushcart selling bananas to a horse-drawn cart selling fruits and vegetables to a dry-good store. Harelick saves money to bring his wife (Leah in the play; Marleh in real life) over from Russia. The family thrives and grows with the addition of three sons. A friendship grows between Leah and Ima, and Haskell and Milton become estranged. Near the end of Milton’s life, they reconcile. The family goes through WWII, with Milton eventually dieing in 1987 at the age of 100.

This is the story of the play. The first act is centered in 1909 and 1910, and focuses primarily on Haskell’s arrival, his befriending of Milton, and the initial growth of the business and the bringing over of his wife. At least 60% of the first act is in Yiddish. The second act provides the rest of the story very fast in little vignettes: the budding friendship between Leah and Ima, the birth of each child, a Sabbath dinner, the reconciliation, and a epilogue that finishes the story. All the while, projected around the actors between scenes, are pictures of the real Harelik family that correspond to the times being presented.

The overall picture presented is a very touching one — and a very American one — that shows the impact of the immigrant on a community, and the values that an immigrant can bring to a community. It shows how a community can fear the outsider. It also highlights (in the WWII scenes) how America’s attitude has changed — the country used to welcome the immigrant; now it fears the immigrant (witness the recent situation in Washington DC).

This play also brought to mind two other plays that I have seen recently. The first (and most recent) was “Handle with Care” at the Colony. That play was also a fish out of water situation. In the play, Ayelet can speak very little English, and is speaking rapid fire Hebrew to the audience. The audience (well, most of the audience) likely cannot understand the words, yet quickly understands the meaning. Similarly, in The Immigrant, the audience (well, most of the audience) does not understand the Yiddish that Haskell is speaking, but they get what he is saying. The other play this evoked was “Bat Boy: The Musical“. That play also explores how strangers are received, but with a much more tragic end. All of these plays make us realize that we can see the stranger in our community with fear, or we can get to know them and learn that they are good people.

A final observation on the story itself: As I said at the beginning, I was more familiar with the musical. As I watched the play, I could easily see the places where they musicalized the story, and why the story cried out for the musicalization. I look forward to the day when I can see the musical version.

I really only had one minor quibble with the story: In the Sabbath scene, after Leah lights the candles alone and they do the blessing over the children, they indicate they are doing the blessing over the wine… and then proceed to recite the blessing over the candles (which should be said as you light them). They then do the (short) blessing over the wine. This is probably something only I would catch.

Let’s now look at the performance in this piece, which was under the direction of Karen Altree Piemme (FB), who clearly worked closely with these actors to draw out extremely moving performances.

The Harelick family was portrayed by Steve Shapiro (FB) as Haskell, and Erin Ashe (FB) as Leah. Shapiro was remarkable in the role, handling the language and dialect with aplumb (at least to my untrained ear, and I didn’t hear any complaints from my daughter). Shapiro just seemed to become Harelick, inhabiting the character and bringing him to life seamlessly. Ashe’s Leah had a touching vulnerability about her throughout the story; you could see it slowly turning to strength as she lived longer in America. Together, the two had a great chemistry and were a believable couple.

The Perry family was portrayed by Donald W. Sturch (FB) as Milton and Diane Milo as Ima [note that Denee Lewis/FB was Ima for all but our performance day]. Sturch was very good as Milton, portraying both a gruff and a tender side. He was particularly good near the end of the play as the aged, and obviously overcome by stroke, Milton. Milo was also very good as Ima (especially considering that this was her only performance day), showing a character that was initially unsure about the stranger but clearly warming up to the family… especially seeing them more as kindred souls than her husband did.

Overall, the four performances combined with the story to create a truly moving portray. Just excellent. I’ll note you you can find the full program, with all actor credits, here.

Turning to the technical and physical side. First I should note that the Tabard facility is a beautiful one — comfortable chairs and a few tables wrapping around a thrust stage, with a full bar in the back. The scenic artist (Migi Oey (FB)) turned this stage, with just a few props (a door here, a table there, some steps over there) into distinct scenic locales; this combined with Ruth E. Stein (FB)’s very realistic properties very well (they must go through a lot of fruit and veggies each show). Also supporting the overall scenic design were the costumes of Marilyn Watts. The sound design by Robert Lewis had some microphone problems in the beginning, but in general worked well. This was similarly true for the lighting design of Rover Spotts (what a name for a lighting designer): the use of LED lighting and Leikos combined well to evoke mood, although the sudden shift to red in the one fight scene was a bit heavy handed. Technical direction (and presumably, the projections) was by Joe Cassetta, assisted by John Palmer. These worked extremely well to establish the mood and provide the historical context. Kiana Jackson was the stage manager. “The Immigrant” was produced by Cathy Spielberger Cassetta (who I believe was the one that was so kind to let me take a program home; normally, they leave them for the next performance and email the link to the program to the attendees).

Alas, “The Immigrant” at Tabard is no more. The final performance was last night. That’s too bad. However, if that show is indicative of this theatre’s work, I encourage those in the area to see their future shows. I know that if I lived in the area, I would be particularly interested in the musical “Violet“, running April 10 through May 3. Alas, whereas I’ll drive from Northridge to the Anaheim Hills for “She Loves Me” (about 67 miles); driving from Northridge to San Jose (326 miles) is a bit much. Then again, it might be an excuse to spend time with my daughter :-).

[Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.]

Theatre continues today with the Dickens Fair (FB) in Daly City. After I return, it is “Kinky Boots” at the Pantages (FB) on Sat 11/29. As for December, I just ticketed “She Loves Me” at Chance Theatre (FB) in Anaheim on 12/20, and we’ll probably go see “Joseph and His Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat” at Nobel Middle School just before ACSAC. Right now, there is only one show booked for January 2015 – “An Evening with Groucho” at AJU with Frank Ferrente; additionally we’ll likely have the first show of the REP East (FB) season: “Avenue Q“.  As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

Here’s an adage to live your life by:

“In this world, you must be oh so smart, or oh so pleasant.” Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant.

If you’re my age, there’s a good chance you may recognize that quote and its source. If you’re younger — well, you need to watch more Jimmy Stewart movies — in particular, a 1950 movie about Stewart and a 6′ 1½” white rabbit, or should I say pooka. That movie, in turn, was an adaptation of a Pulitzer Prize-winning stage play from 1944 by Mary Chase (yes, there was a day when stories moved from the stage to the screen, not vice-versa) called “Harvey“. “Harvey” is one of my absolute favorite movies, so when I found out that the Palo Alto Players (FB) were producing the stage version when I was going to be in the area, I started jonesing for tickets. Luckily, I was able to combine seeing the show with having dinner with a high school friend of mine, making it a even more perfect evening.

For those of you hiding under a rock, here’s the story. The Dowd’s are an old-money family. The matriarch of the family has died, leaving the house and all the money to her son, Elwood, who stayed home and took care of her as she died. Elwood shares the house with his (presumably widowed) older sister, Vita Louise Simmons, and her younger (and still single) daughter, Myrtle Mae Simmons. Both Vita and Myrtle Mae would like to see Myrtle Mae married off. Vita has one problem standing in the way of this: Elwood. For some time, Elwood has had a problematic friend: Harvey, a 6′ 1½” white rabbit that only Elwood can see. Elwood, a very pleasant young man, loves to introduce people to Harvey, invite them home, and give them money. To solve her problem, Vita works with the family attorney, Judge Gaffney, to have Elwood committed to a psychiatric home. She takes him to Chumley’s Rest, an institution for such individuals. As she is getting Elwood admitted, she admits that even she has occasionally seen Harvey. Dr. Sanderson and Nurse Kelley (who have already had the orderly Wilson take Elwood upstairs) realize that it is really Vita that should be committed, and they take her upstairs and release Elwood. But then Chumley arrives with Mrs. Chumley, and after Mrs. Chumley relates her interaction with Elwood, they realize that they had it right the first time. The comedy takes off from there.

The story of Harvey works on many levels, primarily because of changes it brings to many of the original characters. Elwood moves from being someone whom you believe to be crazy, who sees imaginary characters due to drink… to someone who you realize has intentionally made a decision to live life in a certain positive way, and who actually sees as mythological creature. Vita moves the other direction — from a normal society woman to someone whom you realize is delusional and dealing with depression — and not due to her seeing Harvey occasionally. Myrtle Mae moves from someone who wants the best marriage and the entrance to society to someone who wants any man… and finds him in Wilson. Dr. Sanderson and Nurse Kelley move from estranged work colleagues to being a couple. And Dr. Chumley, perhaps, finds the peace he is seeking. Such is the power of the pooka.

For those only familiar with the movie, there are some differences in the original play. The play is much more limited in locale — whereas the movie moved out to Charlie’s Bar and the gate at the Sanitarium, the play restricts itself to the Dowd house and Chumley’s rest. The ending is a bit different as well, for there is no intimation that Harvey went off to Akron with Dr. Chumley before returning to Dowd.

But those are unnecessary elements. The essential story is on stage, and it is wonderful. The Palo Alto Player’s production of it, directed by Jeanie K. Smith (FB), is also very good — especially when you consider that it is at the community theatre level with an entire non-equity, and in many cases, a non-theatrical-career, cast. I have a few quibbles with characterizations and performances, but for the most part the production works well. Note that, for the most part, you do need to set aside the images of the characters from the film, as the actors on stage look nothing like the actors on film.

In the lead, playing Elwood Dowd, is Evan Michael Schumacher (FB). Schumacher is the minor casting problem I alluded to earlier — he appears to be too young for the role. Dowd is, according to the script, 37 (which is old for the time period of the story). Schumacher appeared to be pushing his mid-20s. But that aside, Schumacher gave an absolutely spot on performance. He captured Dowd’s pleasantness perfectly, and had these wonderful silent mannerisms and looks that made him believable as the character. He made you believe that he actually saw, and more importantly, believed in, Harvey. They were good friends, and they were in on the joke in a little way. This show is worth seeing for Schumacher’s performance alone.

Supporting Dowd are Mary Price Moore (FB) as Veta Louise Simmons and Alison Koch (FB) as Myrtle Mae Simmons. These are the first two characters we see, and these are the performance problems I alluded to earlier. Both come off as a little too, umm, theatrical and broad. I don’t know if that has how the characters are written, but they clearly aren’t as naturalistic as we’ve come to expect on stage. Again, setting that aside, the two are clearly having fun with the characters and, over the course of the show, the performances tend to grow on you. In particular, I really like’s Koch’s interactions with Wilson — these were totally cute and a hoot to watch. Moore was at her best as the crazy Veta.

Turning to the secondary characters… Nicole Martin/FB worked well as Nurse Ruth Kelley — you could see both her dedication and her love for Dr. Sanderson come through. As Dr. Sanderson, Scott Solomon didn’t quite fit the character. He was too old for someone just out of medical school, and didn’t quite have the chemistry with Nurse Kelley. Other than that, his performance was good. Lastly, as Duane Wilson (the orderly), Drew Reitz (FB) was great. He brought such glee to Wilson — this was a man that truly enjoyed putting people in the looney bin. Such dedication is rare these days :-). He also had a wonderful unspoken chemistry with Koch’s Myrtle Mae that made them believable as a couple.

Rounding out the cast were Roberta Morris/FB as Mrs. Ethel Chauvenet, John Musgrave (FB) as Dr.William R. Chumley, Celia Maurice (FB) as Betty Chumley, Tom Farley/FB as Judge Omar Gaffney, and Scott Stanley/FB as E. J. Lofgren. Of these, I’d like to highlight the performances of the two Chumleys. Musgrave’s Dr. Chumley was very strong — he was believable as the head of the institution, and yet had the vulnerability that made him also believable as someone who needed Harvey in his life. Maurice’s Mrs. Chumley, although a one-scene role, worked quite well — I would have loved to see her attacking the role of Veta Louise.

Turning to the technical side. The sound design of Gordon Smith was only noticeable in the interstitial music, which had to be longer due to the time it took to change the sets from one locale to another. Similarly, the lighting design of Selina G. Young was completely unnoticeable — which is a good thing, as it meant that the lighting seemed natural and not forced. The scenic design of Ron Gasparinetti consisted primarily of very large flats that were rolled in or lowered. They worked well to establish place, although the time to change from one local to another was longer as a result. The properties, designed by Pat Tyler, worked well — particularly Harvey’s hat and the painting of Harvey and Elwood (I appreciated the touch of having the painting be of the actor in the role — does he get to take it home at the end as a door prize?). The costumes of Cynthia Preciado, combined with the hair and makeup design of  Shibourne Thill (who also served as stage manager)  didn’t scream out as being outlandishly non-period, and the only problem I saw were the problematic hair extensions for Veta Louise after she returns from the sanitarium.

The Palo Alto Players production of “Harvey” continues at the Lucie Stern Theatre in Palo Alto through tomorrow, 11/23/14. Tickets are available through the Palo Alto Players website; the 2pm Sunday performance still has tickets on Goldstar. The performance we were at was decidedly not sold out.

[Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.]

Theatre continues this weekend with “The Immigrant“ at Tabard Theatre (FB) in San Jose, and the Dickens Fair (FB) on Sunday in Daly City. After I return, it is “Kinky Boots” at the Pantages (FB) on Sat 11/29. As for December, I just ticketed “She Loves Me” at Chance Theatre (FB) in Anaheim on 12/20, and we’ll probably go see “Joseph and His Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat” at Nobel Middle School just before ACSAC. Right now, there is only one show booked for January 2015 – “An Evening with Groucho” at AJU with Frank Ferrente; additionally we’ll likely have the first show of the REP East (FB) season: “Avenue Q“.  As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.