‘KING KONG’: King Kong & Christiani Pitts. Photo: Joan Marcus

KING KONG
Written by Jack Thorne
Score comped & produced by Marius de Vries
Songs by Eddie Perfect
Directed & choreographed by Drew McOnie
Broadway Theatre
1681 Broadway at 53rd Street
(212-239-6200), https://kingkongbroadway.com/

By David NouNou

Can’t act, can’t sing, and can’t dance—and this statement applies to the live people and not the animatronic gorilla on stage. Not because they don’t have the capabilities; they just don’t have the material.

Throughout the evening while watching this $35 million “disastravaganza” import from Australia, one keeps wondering if this was an intentional musical or something concocted as an Australian version of Max Bialystock and Leo Bloom (lead producers of Mel Brooks’ The Producers) to create one of the worst musicals ever conceived and bilk old lady investors of millions of dollars?

Anyone who has seen the original 1933 movie with Fay Wray, the 1976 version with Jessica Lange or the 2005 Peter Jackson version with Naomi Watts or even last year’s Kong: Skull Island would have the intelligence to know there is no way to adapt this genre into a musical format for the stage. Not even if you were on the most powerful hallucinogenic drug conceived “ever” can one visualize this even as a camp piece.

In a nutshell, this version has a poor girl from the South, Ann Darrow (Christiani Pitts), coming to Broadway to become a star in 1931. All reject her. One starving, cold night in a hash house, smarmy film director Carl Denham (Eric William Morris) “discovers” her. He convinces her to sign up with him and he’ll make her a star. And off they go by steamship to Skull Island and you know the rest.

What you don’t know is all the hubris that went into this musical. The book is hackneyed, the score is bland and unmemorable, the acting—let’s just skip that one—the choreography is 2018 supposedly set in 1931 and in every scene, it is basically the same steps in different tempo. However, the worst crime is yet to come. Act II has the gang back in New York along with Kong and the director, Carl Denham recreates their entire journey as a musical set to the stage. Even Max Bialystock and Leo Bloom couldn’t have created such a mess as hard as they would have tried. Where is “Springtime for Hitler and Germany” when you need it?

I give the show one star not because anything in it merited that high a score but for those soulful eyes of Kong himself. He is amazingly constructed and the best thing about the show, and he understands his part and displays more heart, soul and character than anyone else on that stage. He has suffered enough; this show is his ultimate humiliation.

Edited by Scott Harrah
Published November 14, 2018
Reviewed at November 13, 2018 press performance.

‘KING KONG’: King Kong terrorizing the stage. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘KING KONG’: The beast. Photo: Matthew Murphy

‘KING KONG’: Christiani Pitts (center) & company. Photo: Matthew Murphy

‘KING KONG”: Christiani Pitts & Kong. Photo: Matthew Murphy

‘KING KONG’: Christiani Pitts & Eric William Morris. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘KING KONG’: Christiani Pitts with Kong. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘KING KONG’: Christiani Pitts & Kong. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘KING KONG’: Christiani Pitts. Photo: Matthew Murphy

‘KING KONG’: Eric William Morris. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘KING KONG’: Christiani Pitts & Erik Lochtefeld. Photo: Matthew Murphy

‘KING KONG’: The company. Photo: Matthew Murphy

‘KING KONG’: Christiani Pitts & Kong. Photo: Joan Marcus

The post ‘King Kong’: Stage adaptation goes ape appeared first on StageZine.

‘THE PRESENT”: (Left to right) Richard Roxburgh, Cate Blanchett, Chris Ryan & Susan Prior. Photo: Joan Marcus

THE PRESENT
By Andrew Upton
After Anton Chekhov’s Platonov
Directed by John Crowley
Through March 19, 2017
Ethel Barrymore Theatre
243 West 47th Street
(212-239-6200),www.ThePresentBroadway.com

By David NouNou

At best Chekhov is tedious. At worst is the lugubrious The Present, presented by the Sydney Theatre Company in what can only be described as the whining babblethon of this or any other year. It was Chekhov’s first play written when he was 18 and was untitled and went unpublished. There was good reason for that; it was originally five hours of text whittled down to three by Andrew Upton (Cate Blanchett’s husband). It could have been whittled down a lot more.

Had it been presented in its original setting, Russia of 1887, it would still have been rambling but at least it would have made sense. Now it is set in Russia of the 1980s with New Wave rock music (the Clash and the Talking Heads) and thrown in is Haddaway’s club classic “What is Love?” from 1993, and a reference to Martin Scorcese, (the American director). At this point you give up and pray that Act II will be shorter and less absurd. Well, you’d be wrong; the storyline becomes a ridiculous soap opera and everyone’s acting really goes off the deep end. The ham here is served in abundance. Also to add to the ambiguity is the title The Present. Does it mean a gift or the present day? Trust me, don’t waste too much time trying to figure it out, because in the end it won’t make any difference.

As in any of Chekhov’s plays, all the characters are miserable for one reason or another but here they are not pining to be in Moscow. In this case, it is Anna’s (Cate Blanchett) 40^th birthday and all her friends/guests/suitors have come down for “a weekend in the country,” not the Sondheim song but at an old country estate that belonged to the old General, Anna’s much older dead husband. Among the suitors is the “bad boy” of the lot and also a college professor, Mikhail (Richard Roxburgh). The suitors have also brought their spouses/girlfriends. Needless to say, all the women have the hots for Mikhail and they all leave their spouses but his one true love is Anna. The rest of the characters are all negligible babbling fools, some talking endlessly about youth, and others about their miserable lives, and misspent youth.

Cate Blanchett is giving another one of her ball-busting, manipulating, frozen-queen performances, not much different from her 2012 role as Yelena in Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya at City Center. Richard Roxburgh as the married but still womanizing bad boy Mikhail—who incidentally played in Vanya with Ms. Blanchett—is too much in control, conniving and vain to be believable as the wastrel who has given up on life and is just in it for the hunt.

If you plan to see The Present, I recommend you bring three things with you: a Ritalin to keep you awake; a seat belt to strap yourself in, not for a bumpy ride but from fleeing the theater after Act I; and a flask of vodka (which the ad on TV purports that there will be plenty of drinking being done) to stay with the theme of the play or on the same wavelength as the characters or another beverage of your choice to alleviate the tedium.

Edited by Scott Harrah
Published January 11, 2017
Reviewed at press performance on January 10, 2017

‘THE PRESENT”: Richard Roxburgh & Cate Blanchett. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: (Left to right) Brandon McClelland, Richard Roxburgh, David Downer & Cate Blanchett. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: Cate Blanchett & Richard Roxburgh. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: Richard Roxburgh, Jacqueline Mackenzie, Chris Ryan & Eamon Farren. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: Richard Roxburgh & Cate Blanchett. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT: Richard Roxburgh & Chris Ryan. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: Richard Roxburgh & (foreground) Brandon McLellan. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: Eamon Farren & Martin Jacobs. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: Jacqueline McKenzie & Chris Ryan. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: (Left to right) Toby Schmitz, Richard Roxburgh & Chris Ryan. Photo: Joan Marcus

‘THE PRESENT’: The cast. Photo: Joan Marcus

The post ‘The Present’: Lost Chekhov play is no gift appeared first on StageZine.