title

title
Photo by Don Kellogg
Showing posts with label Ned Eisenberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ned Eisenberg. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Six Degrees of Separation

I just had to see the first preview of John Guare's theatrical classic, Six Degrees of Separation on Broadway. After all, I never saw the movie and knew almost nothing about it except the vague notion we all know about everyone being connected and somehow that connection being approx 6 people.

Aside from the few very minor late entrances and missed queues which are inevitable at a first preview, this unexpectedly large cast performed like a well oiled machine.  The modern set (kudos Mark Wendland) was intriguing especially when i sat off to the side at the end.  The two sided Kandinsky painting was a magical centerpiece, rotating high above.

Allison Janey (Ouisa) mastered the script with aplomb and seemed to be the perfect fit for the intelligent, slightly overbearing, and confidently funny and sarcastic wife.  John Benjamin Hickey (Flan) seemed to exude art-dealer and all the eccentricities that go along with that job. Corey Hawkins (Paul) seemed to be born to play the role of con-man - devilishly handsome and debonair, intelligent, well spoken, and slick as all heck.  What I didn't really expect were the neighbors, the neighbors children and a few others like a doorman, and a police officer to fill the cast to such a degree.  For a 3 person play, the cast of 18 filled the stage occasionally.

Trip Cullman's direction seemed to embrace the large stage and use it effectively - keeping the back area a bit fuzzy and unclear which fit the mood perfectly.  Deconstructed in a large Broadway house but not too deconstructed as to be barren.

So what did I think?  It was a bit confusing to follow at times - dialogue is snappy and crisp and if the actors speak over a laugh you might miss a few lines.  This will resolve over time for sure. The full frontal nudity may turn a few people off (certainly not me in any way) - I don't know what the script requires vs what the director interprets.  I was mostly surprised that I really wasn't going to experience a direct "Six Degrees of Separation" - like a trail of person 1 connected to person 2 connected to person 3 etc.... but more the general concept about strangers and how they can be inter-twined in our lives and connected to our friends and we don't even know it- or them - sometimes until it's too late - or sometimes we never really know what happens at all.  I was struck that the central lines of the play fit the concept but not exactly what was happening on the stage.  I guess I am a very linear thinker.

"I read somewhere that everybody on this planet is separated by only six other people. Six degrees of separation. Between us and everybody else on this planet. The president of the United States. A gondolier in Venice. fill in the names. I find that A) tremendously comforting that we're so close and B) like Chinese water torture that we're so close. Because you have to find the right six people to make the connection. It's not just big names. It's anyone. A native in a rain forest. A Tierra del Fuegan. An Eskimo. I am bound to everyone on this planet by a trail of six people. It's a profound thought. How Paul found us. How to find the man whose son he pretends to be. Or perhaps is his son, although I doubt it. How every person is a new door, opening up into other worlds. Six degrees of separation between me and everyone else on this planet. But to find the right six people...

Wednesday, April 5, 2006

Awake and Sing!

You may find yourself wishing you were able to do either of the two key title words during the show! Seems strangely appropriate that this would be a Lincoln Center Theater production. Not sure if this one would be able to stand on its own as an independent production.

Unfortunately the cast was a dichotomy - either very talented - Zoe Wanamaker (the mother) or a series of "Broadway debuts". And believe me, you could see the difference. While it was nice to see Lauren Ambrose (Six Feet Under) on stage I didn't get that same "she's deep" feeling as I get when seeing her on "screen". The brother (Pablo Schreiber) seemed slightly over-acted (perhaps that had something to do with the dated and stale plot). It was a treat to see Ben Gazzara - but I was not sure if his speech impediment was acting or the result of a recent stroke. Sad, but true.

Act I seemed to crawl. Act II picked up a bit - and I must say that I truly loved the use of the disappearing walls in the apartment to symbolize the "freeing" of the characters from their "emotional prisons" as time passed in the play. I think that WAS the best element of the show for me. The show progresses to the "obvious" end (most seemed to know where Grandpa was going and what he was going to do). I just didn't think the play had the necessary ingredients to keep an audience interested over 2 hours and 30 minutes.

One other note - it seems that production had to have a special white sheet of paper inserted into the Playbill (like those "Is your Cell Phone off?" pages) to tell you that there would be an additional 2 minute pause between two scenes (in addition to the TWO intermissions!). Apparently, people have been getting up and leaving thinking the show was over at the wrong time. I wonder why?!

Or perhaps they simply took the opportunity to flee under cover of darkness!