"Love's Labour's Lost" at the Delacorte Theater
In the mock-solemn
opening scene of Alex Timbers and Michael Friedman’s new musical, “Love’s
Labour’s Lost” (which plays at the Public’s Delacorte Theater in Central Park
through August 18th), the King (Daniel Breaker) and his three lordly
companions swear off women and the outside world, vowing to spend the next
three years studying great literature, including “Elizabethan plays in their
original form without the addition of completely unnecessary songs.” It is a pity for Mr. Timbers (who adapted the
book and directed) and Mr. Friedman (who wrote the songs) that this bit of barely
funny self-reference (of which there are many more to follow) turns out to be
so accurate—“Unnecessary” is the perfect word for what they have done to the
work of the Bard.
In this
case, of course, “King” is not actually a noble title. This version of “Lost” is set in the present
day, and the “King of Navarre” is actually the president of the Secret Society
of Navarre on the grounds of an unnamed New England
university, and his “lords” are the former members. The four have returned for their five-year
college reunion, and evidently intend to live in their old clubhouse for the
next three years. (Someone should remind
the King to check state zoning laws to confirm that this is actually
legal.) But their plans are interrupted
when the “Princess” of France (Patti Murin) and her ladies-in-waiting—in this
case, former college flings of the four gentlemen of Navarre , presumably also attending
the reunion—arrive to dispute a loan from their King un-repaid by the King of
Navarre. (And no, I’m not sure what this
is supposed to equate to in present-day New England .)
Suffice it
to say that the premise, though magnificently brought to life by scenic
designer John Lee Beatty (who has designed a literally perfect set for which he
should win some sort of lifetime achievement award) is lacking. The transference of this 17th-century play to modern, slick surroundings brings to mind Joss Whedon's masterful film version of "Much Ado About Nothing," but for the fact that "Much Ado" seemed steady on its feet in the twenty-first century, and "Lost" seems, well... Lost. Only the fact that William Shakespeare’s
densely intricate prose has been left (mostly) intact saves this version from being
utterly confusing. Mr. Friedman’s 22
songs, which appear to have been crammed into the 1 hour 40 minute running time
with a crowbar, rarely help matters. They’re
loud and occasionally fun, but the lyrics are almost brutally bad, zipping
along with such thoughtless speed that it seems they frequently forget to
rhyme. Further, they often seem to have
very little to say. Mr. Friedman’s
proletariat, 99-percenter fight song, “Rich People,” has no bite or sting like
Cole Porter’s attempt at the genre, “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire,” or Yip
Harburg’s, “When the Idle Poor Become the Idle Rich.” At its worst, the score is insipid and irritating; at its best, an interlude between bouts of Shakespearean wit that surpass it entirely. Only
one of Mr. Friedman's songs, a surprising ode to cats by the humble servant Moth (Justin Levine, also the bandleader--he plays a killer keytar), comes
close to being funny. And even that seems
to come out of nowhere, having no place in the story but to distract from the
fact that this adaptation doesn’t make much sense.
But
luckily, William Shakespeare, who is a far superior lyricist, also contributed
to this production, and the numbers wherein Shakespeare’s rhyming prose is
substituted for lyrics are absolutely fantastic. The most triumphant sequence in the show, in
which the four men overhear each other declaring their love for their
respective ladies, is staged with just the right amount of panache, giving
Shakespeare’s pentameter room to shine.
This sequence, too, is the collision point for the greatest strengths of
all of the contributors. Here, Mr.
Friedman’s score seems perfectly at home, Mr. Timbers’ staging is pulled off to
a T, choreographer Danny Mefford presents four unique numbers with aplomb, and
that rarest of occurrences takes place before our eyes—an early Shakespeare
comedy, with little or no modern identifiableness, is gloriously funny.
It’s a pity
there aren’t more of these moments, not just for our sake, but for that of the
cast, which is truly this show’s high
point . The
18-person company is flawlessly cast and enormously talented. The members of the Secret Society are
standouts—Mr. Breaker is funny as always and rocks out successfully to the
better parts of Mr. Friedman’s score; Colin Donnell belts excellently as
Berowne, even if he is given a bit too much room to pout as if starring in an
Abercrombie commercial; and Bryce Pinkham and Lucas Near-Verburugghe are so
good as Longaville and Dumaine that I was almost shocked their roles were so
reduced by Mr. Timbers.
Good female roles are tough to come
by in this production (they’re all two-dimensional, catty airheads)—a missed
opportunity, since the production has gotten hold of Ms. Murin to play the
Princess (she’s a true talent, and does the best she can with what she’s got)
and Maria Thayer to play Rosaline. As
anyone who’s seen “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” can testify, Ms. Thayer is a terrific
comic actress who is, regretfully, under-utilized here. The creative team claims they’ve tried to
expand the female roles from Shakespeare’s original text, but in fact they seem
smaller in this adapted version, their motivation less comprehensible,
especially when we are forced to assume facts about their respective
relationships with the Navarreans of which we are never adequately made aware.
Meanwhile, shoring up the show’s comedic
center are the great SNL alum Rachel Dratch and the character actor Jeff Hiller
as resident pseudo-intellectuals Holofernes and Nathaniel, who in this version
are professors at the unnamed school. Their
back-and-forth is a rare treat unchanged by the edits of Timbers and
Friedman. Not as funny but putting a lot
of effort into it is Caesar Samayoa as the Spaniard Armado, who would be much
funnier if most of his lovesick rants had not been replaced by unfunny and—you guessed
it—unnecessary songs.
Yes, these actors are held back by
edits too numerous to name. One that’s
not easy to ignore is the elimination of the very funny Nine Worthies scene
that ends the fifth act, replaced by a brash, badly written number that
involves an entire marching band stomping onto the stage. But the most nonsensical is a moment late in
the show, after the four male leads have dressed up as East German performance
artists as a joke on their loves. (In
the original, they dressed as Russians, which would have been much funnier.) As the Princess and her ladies make for the
exit, disgusted by the escapades of the men, Berowne calls for them to
stop. And then—and I’m not kidding here—the
four literally sing the 1991 Mr. Big song “To Be With You” to get them to
stay. Don’t ask me how they got the
rights. Don’t ask me why this surreal
moment was included at all. But the
seductive, ridiculous dances of the four men during the song got me thinking
about a metaphor that represents this show perfectly.
“Love’s Labour’s Lost: The Musical”
is like a boy band. Most of the time, it’s
annoying and, yes, unnecessary, clogging up the musical landscape with drivel
you never wanted to hear in the first place.
If it ever comes out with a good song, it’s purely by accident. Some of the band's members may be talented, but it’s
difficult to tell through the cloud of fakery and the various tank tops they
change into over the course of a performance.
The question is, do you want them to be talented, to justify the fact
that they became popular in the first place?
Or would you prefer that they just go away? Sometimes the music is better if the band
breaks up and the bandmates go solo.
No comments:
Post a Comment