28 April 2006

my mom was very impressed

caine mutiny court-martial a few nights ago. i do love that mouthful of a title. but after that, well... it wasn't as bad as i'd expected. (free tickets again, and totally worth the price.) david schwimmer was, predictably, awful. a little worse than i would've thought, actually. i've never been a big fan of "friends," but i guess he's a natural mumbler... which he's modified for the stage into a hugely uncomfortable overenunciation. and some head jerking. he also stands with his feet very weirdly very far apart. but even aside from the weirdnesses, not very good acting. he's just terribly miscast - i can't tell how vicious of a lawyer the character's supposed to be, but whatever it's meant to be, this wasn't it. my mom, though was very impressed when i called her at intermission.

"hey mom. i can't really talk because i'm at intermission for a show. an usher's probably gonna come over in a second to yell at me--"
"ooh, what show?"
"the caine mutiny court-martial?"
"david scwhimmer's in it."
"ooh! how is he?"
"not very good."

makes me very glad that this made him unavailable for some girl(s). but the rest of the cast, the non-stunt-casting cast, was wonderful. shout-outs to gagelle brian reddy, and always-awesome tom nellis, who, after three shows (this, the seven, and the disastrous-except-for-him-and-rebecca-wisocky hot n throbbing*) gets a spot on the faves list. not quite yet the i'll-see-a-show-just-for-him list,* but that's very exclusive company. and then, there's zeljko.** wow. worth the price of admission alone, so to speak. what in act one seems like a perfectly good performance turns out, in the second act, to be a piece of absolute mastery. a. mazing.

afterwards, michael and i were talking about the very old-fashionedness of it, the tv-movie-ness. he proposed an idea that sounds awful and backwards, but isn't really. namely, that there should be room for things like this on broadway. we all know there isn't - with the cost of things, and the sheer scarcity of theatres, relatively speaking, to spend so much time and money (22 actors!!) on something so boring and old-feeling, is a waste, when there's so much new, good, interesting, artful work out there. but back when theatre cost $10 and there was no tv, to spend an evening having your attention rather held by a safe, in-the-box drama, was perfectly fine. i don't watch memento every night i'm home. sometimes i watch "law & order". (okay, i don't, but plenty of people do.)

the real question, though, is whether this is any better than mamma mia! which would i rather people see?

*which is not to be interpreted, by theose two or three of you who read this and don't personally know me, as any sort of not-love for paula vogel. it was a completely misguided, misunderstanding production of a fabulous play that deserved much better treatment.

**off the top of my head: paul sparks, jason butler harner, austin lysy, maria dizzia, t. ryder smith, sherie renee scott, norbert...

***who is also on the super special list.

1 comment:

anna said...

saw h&t at yale summer cabaret. i was sitting on stage, as one often is in that space. i'm still traumatized.