Posts
"Oh, my God, it's magic!"
Those were the words of Kay Cole's (the original Maggie) then roommate, upon seeing "A Chorus Line" for the first time, at the Public, back in 1975. Speaking for myself, who has sat through now 37 performances of this show, I can attest to that statement.
I did not see it at the Public. I clocked my viewings at the Shubert, the Plymouth (now named something else) for the 2006 revival, the Paper Mill Playhouse, in Milburn, New Jersey, and now the Heights Players, on Willow Place, in Brooklyn. I have, over the years, seen several shows in the Newman, at the Public Theater, and, each time, I would gaze at the bare stage, and think, "Wow! This is where 'A Chorus Line' was first performed! Wonder what that must have been like?"
In a way, the Heights Players' presentation affords one a glimpse of that. Within a 140 seat space (crammed with waiting listers, who were frantically trying to get in, and did, permitting me to wonder about the possibility of a fire hazard!!!!!!!), a flat stage that puts the show closer to the audience, as did the Newman, this was the most intimate, and approximate experience to the Public that one might get.
The magic of the show, especially for those who had never seen it, had snot seen it in decades, or just did not know the show, was not lost on them. But for seasoned "Chorus Line" mavens, like myself, there were challenges and problems.
Before the show went up, there was drama of another kind--getting audience members seated and comfortable. This was due, as stated, to trying to cram too many people into one space, and the fact that the largely subscriber audience was composed of elders, who would take long to seat, anyway. The woman sitting next to me, who knew Karen Mascolo, who plays Maggie, says the Friday night performance, scheduled to go up at 8PM, did not start till 8:30.
We got a break; this performance went up at 2:15! Only a fifteen minute delay!
As a maven of this show, I was curious seeing it in a "non-professional" venue; I wanted to see how it would be handled. While there were many things one had to make allowances for--and I understand that--let me first enumerate the INEXCUSABLE!!!!!!!!!!!
1. This "A Chorus Line" is done with an INTERMISSION! Now, I
understand the largely senior audience needed a break, but you do
not violate the artistry of this piece with an Intermission. Know how
they do it? When the dancers go off, for their "break", Zach is supposed
to say, "Cassie--stay onstage please!" Here, he says "Cassie--I want
to see you onstage, after the break." She goes off, and the house
lights come up! WHAT???????????????????????????
2. Several characters have been changed. Larry, the Clive Clerk role,
now becomes Laurie. Richie Walters now becomes a woman--
Ricki!!!!!!!!! Connie Wong now becomes Connie Mackenzie!
Huh? This is "A Chorus Line," not "Peyton Place!" I later
found this was done more to gratify the egos of certain Heights
Players performers, though I cannot believe, in THIS town,
darlings, you could not find a young Black actor/dancer, or
a female Asian one, eager to do Richie and Connie! Not
to mention this "Chorus Line" has the heftiest looking
Maggie, Don, Bobby, and Gregg I have ever seen! And
Michael Kidney should NOT have been allowed to perform
Bobby with that Bernadette Peters hairstyle!!!!!!!!!!!
3. I missed the diagonal of Sheila, Bebe, and Maggie during "At The
Ballet." As well as the V pattern surrounding Richie during the
"Gimme The Ball" segment of 'Hello Twelve, Hello Thirteen'.
Instead, a circle is formed around Ricki, and one of the
eliminated dancers walks out and places a black box for her
to stand on. And the dance movements are simpler! Aha!
4. Once again, and Paper Mill was guilty of this, too--when
she comes back on to work with the chorus on "One,"
Cassie is supposed to remove her skirt, Here she does
not. And, unlike, Jessica Lee Goldyn, at Paper Mill, whose
chunkiness made it understandable, Desiree Justin, the one
real dancer in the bunch, is tailor made for Cassie!!!!!!!!!!
5. Oh, and this is UNFORGIVABLE! During certain of the
dancers' stories, the eliminated dancers are used to act
out portions of them. For example, when Diana sings
"Nothing," we see her acting class, and a church
congregation. When Don talks about Lola La Tours, and
the neighbors hanging out their windows, these minor
performers act it out! I OBJECT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
6. The ending was rushed. And the eliminations were mixed
up; Sheila is the last one here. It is Maggie in the script,
darlings!!!! And enough time is not given for Sheila (very
well played by Kristin Robles) to do her "Fuck you!" exit
from the stage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK, these things were inexcusable. One thing I have not mentioned, and credit must be given to all here, is that this was not a proscenium "Chorus Line," because the theater was a three sided stage. That meant they had to make use of space, and move characters, at times, to places where
audiences in the side seats could see them. It works, though this was one of the reasons the diagonal
in "At The Ballet" was eliminated.
The most interesting thing was how the show opened. With this venue, there was
no way the dancers could walk onto the darkened stage in formation. Instead, they come in from the doorway, stage right, :"Laurie" with a clip board, welcomes them, etc. and then they prepare--do warm ups,
greet others, glare at some, establishing character relationships. This, I have to say was interesting, and
the one new thing I think even Michael Bemnett would have approved of!!!!!! Once Zach comes on,
the dancers fall into place, we hear that familiar vamp, and off we go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This production is, for the most part, wonderfully sung and acted, But, as my Domestic Partner, Monsieur, said, (he's Domestic; I am imported!!!!! Like caviar, darlings!!!!!!!) he has never seen a production of this show where the emphasis is not on dance!!!!!!!! Everyone moves well, has a gracefulness, and then there are the limitations of the stage, so, at least, no one bumps into each other, but
the show is not given its dancing due, especially in the first part. I was impressed with how well "One" and the "Finale" were handled. So, why not the rest???????????????
For the most part, as stated the acting and singing are fine! Almost every performer conveys the passion of the peace, and everyone seems emotionally committed and connected to it. Except Andrea
Bernardo, as Connie. I don't know if it was insecurity, nervousness over playing a character supposed to
be Asian, but her performance and attitude on stage came across as either a deer in the headlights, or
the idea she would rather be anyplace else, but here. Contrast this with Karen Mascolo, who, while a
hefty Maggie, has passion commitment, and, most importantly, does Maggie's crescendo in 'Ballet'
beautifully!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was astonished to learn this theater had done this show before--in 1991-92!!!!!!!!! You would think, with the staging problems, they would hesitate. But, hey, not everyone
seeing this can dissect the show like I can, or has my personal history with it. And, I have to say, in spite
of everything, the material still came through, and spoke to me!!!!!!!!!!! Then, there was the audience, clamoring to get in as frantically as those 1975 viewers did at the Public!!!!!!!!!!! It still draws!!!!!!!!!!!!
But, Donna, Baayork---HELLLLLLLLLLLLLPPPPPP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment