November 7, 2013
THEATRE REVIEW
The Simpleton Sociopath
By JEFFREY MEEHAN
Conditioned under the pretense that goodness will always prevail, there’s something so eerily taboo about rooting for the bad guy. Medea, Holden Caulfield, Tony Soprano — some of the greatest characters of fiction have left us reveling in their very “badness.” Like a teenage school girl dating her school’s motorcycle driving super senior, we’re thrilled just to be taken along for the ride. Inevitably, however, a villain must fall and faith must be restored in the good of humanity. So was the case in Tim Carroll’s production of “Richard III” where Mark Rylance portrays the title role in an endearing yet chilling fashion that leaves the audience of the Belasco Theatre entranced by his daft narcissism.
Fresh off his role in his pet project “Nice Fish,” Rylance, the former Artistic Director of Shakespeare’s Globe, returns to his Elizabethan element as Richard, Duke of Gloucester. His simple and stuttering depiction of the nefarious king greets the audience with a likable humor that radically defies the classic Laurence Olivier acute and concentrated portrayal of the same character. Where Olivier and contemporaries such as Ian McKellen approach the figure as actively focused in his pursuits of wickedness, Rylance appears bumbling, humble, and, at times, apologetic. It is in these moments, just as the audience finds themselves outwardly hoping for Richard’s diabolical success that the supporting cast reminds us of the sociopathic and downright evil “plans that [he] has laid.” Thus, Richard’s sympathetic appeal is less Forrest Gump and more comparable to Sloth from The Goonies.
Mr. Rylance’s true skill is exhibited in confronting the obstacle that Richard himself is, to a degree, playing the role of Richard as well. As he seduces Lady Anne, played expertly by Joseph Timms who delivers a complex and heart wrenching performance, she strikes him with spit, in which Richard replies “Why dost thou spit at me?” with a genuine affliction and misunderstanding that leaves the audience truly empathizing with the deformed figure and rationalizing his schemes. As Lady Anne exits, however, Richard’s downright exuberance of his successful manipulation leaves the audience reeling in laughter, leaving them conflicted as to whether or not they should continue to cheer for this mad narcissist. By the second half of the play however as the tide turns against Richard’s favor, his true character is revealed like rounds unleashed from a machine gun, tearing through his enemies with mechanized efficiency and lightning quick intensity. These revelations take the viewer aback with its contrast to the playful manipulator of the first act as if Mr. Rogers himself was throwing punches in a bar fight. It is these exhibition of fervent hate that eventually leave one understanding the near universal disdain for the Duke of Gloucester.
The rest of the cast delivers Mr. Shakespeare’s poetic Elizabethan dialogue with fluidity and talent however, beyond that, contributes little else to the overall muster of the characters. Exceptions include Kurt Egyiawan who delivers the lines of both the Duchess of York and Richmond with a fervid intensity and controlled strain that elucidates the urgency of Richard’s enemies as well as Samuel Barnett who characterizes Queen Elizabeth with a maternal aptitude that’s surprising from a male actor. Besides these standouts, the action and conversation appeared bland with the absence of Richard only to be rejuvenated when Mr. Rylance returned to the stage.
Arthur Gaffin’s ornate yet simple set illuminated almost entirely by candlelight elucidates the the tragic atmosphere wonderfully and removes the distractions of fanciful props and backdrops.
Tim Carroll’s efforts towards mimicking the original practices of Shakespeare’s play are also well received with the poignant inclusion of period Elizabethan instruments, garb, and a delightful closing dance that successfully leaves the audience feeling as if they’re sitting in the original Globe Theatre. Critics have argued however that conforming to these original practices does not procure the need to include an all male cast for, instead of grown men, adolescent boys played female roles. While the men of the cast who played the roles of women each performed splendidly, one is hard pressed to argue that, since adolescent boys were not cast and therefore skewed from traditional Shakespearean practices, an actual woman would not have been a better fit for the roles.
Tim Carroll’s direction soars in the final scenes in which Richard and Richmond are confronted by the ghosts of Richard’s victims in their dreams as well as during his eventual death on the battlefield. While the confrontations are simple, the victims’ presence leaves a visibly profound effect on Richard that poses the question of potentially sincere regret of his actions. This question, left unanswered, leaves the audience wondering — is the narcissistic notoriety that Richard III has garnered warranted or was he simply a understandably merciless king in contention for the throne like so many before and after him?
Richard III
By William Shakespeare; directed by Tim Carroll; sets by Arthur Gaffin; costumes by Jenny Tiramani; lighting by Stan Pressner; music and sound by Claire van Kampen; choreography by Sian Williams; fight direction by Jonathan Waller; hair by Wanda Gregory; make-up by Christina Grant; company manager Lizbeth Cone; Hudson Theatrical Associates Presented by Neil Mazzella, Sam Ellis, Aaron Dayton, Irene Wang. At the Belasco Theatre, 111 W 44th St., Manhattan; (212) 239-6200, ticketmaster.com, Running time: 2 hours, 30 minutes.
THEATRE REVIEW
The Simpleton Sociopath
By JEFFREY MEEHAN
Conditioned under the pretense that goodness will always prevail, there’s something so eerily taboo about rooting for the bad guy. Medea, Holden Caulfield, Tony Soprano — some of the greatest characters of fiction have left us reveling in their very “badness.” Like a teenage school girl dating her school’s motorcycle driving super senior, we’re thrilled just to be taken along for the ride. Inevitably, however, a villain must fall and faith must be restored in the good of humanity. So was the case in Tim Carroll’s production of “Richard III” where Mark Rylance portrays the title role in an endearing yet chilling fashion that leaves the audience of the Belasco Theatre entranced by his daft narcissism.
Fresh off his role in his pet project “Nice Fish,” Rylance, the former Artistic Director of Shakespeare’s Globe, returns to his Elizabethan element as Richard, Duke of Gloucester. His simple and stuttering depiction of the nefarious king greets the audience with a likable humor that radically defies the classic Laurence Olivier acute and concentrated portrayal of the same character. Where Olivier and contemporaries such as Ian McKellen approach the figure as actively focused in his pursuits of wickedness, Rylance appears bumbling, humble, and, at times, apologetic. It is in these moments, just as the audience finds themselves outwardly hoping for Richard’s diabolical success that the supporting cast reminds us of the sociopathic and downright evil “plans that [he] has laid.” Thus, Richard’s sympathetic appeal is less Forrest Gump and more comparable to Sloth from The Goonies.
Mr. Rylance’s true skill is exhibited in confronting the obstacle that Richard himself is, to a degree, playing the role of Richard as well. As he seduces Lady Anne, played expertly by Joseph Timms who delivers a complex and heart wrenching performance, she strikes him with spit, in which Richard replies “Why dost thou spit at me?” with a genuine affliction and misunderstanding that leaves the audience truly empathizing with the deformed figure and rationalizing his schemes. As Lady Anne exits, however, Richard’s downright exuberance of his successful manipulation leaves the audience reeling in laughter, leaving them conflicted as to whether or not they should continue to cheer for this mad narcissist. By the second half of the play however as the tide turns against Richard’s favor, his true character is revealed like rounds unleashed from a machine gun, tearing through his enemies with mechanized efficiency and lightning quick intensity. These revelations take the viewer aback with its contrast to the playful manipulator of the first act as if Mr. Rogers himself was throwing punches in a bar fight. It is these exhibition of fervent hate that eventually leave one understanding the near universal disdain for the Duke of Gloucester.
The rest of the cast delivers Mr. Shakespeare’s poetic Elizabethan dialogue with fluidity and talent however, beyond that, contributes little else to the overall muster of the characters. Exceptions include Kurt Egyiawan who delivers the lines of both the Duchess of York and Richmond with a fervid intensity and controlled strain that elucidates the urgency of Richard’s enemies as well as Samuel Barnett who characterizes Queen Elizabeth with a maternal aptitude that’s surprising from a male actor. Besides these standouts, the action and conversation appeared bland with the absence of Richard only to be rejuvenated when Mr. Rylance returned to the stage.
Arthur Gaffin’s ornate yet simple set illuminated almost entirely by candlelight elucidates the the tragic atmosphere wonderfully and removes the distractions of fanciful props and backdrops.
Tim Carroll’s efforts towards mimicking the original practices of Shakespeare’s play are also well received with the poignant inclusion of period Elizabethan instruments, garb, and a delightful closing dance that successfully leaves the audience feeling as if they’re sitting in the original Globe Theatre. Critics have argued however that conforming to these original practices does not procure the need to include an all male cast for, instead of grown men, adolescent boys played female roles. While the men of the cast who played the roles of women each performed splendidly, one is hard pressed to argue that, since adolescent boys were not cast and therefore skewed from traditional Shakespearean practices, an actual woman would not have been a better fit for the roles.
Tim Carroll’s direction soars in the final scenes in which Richard and Richmond are confronted by the ghosts of Richard’s victims in their dreams as well as during his eventual death on the battlefield. While the confrontations are simple, the victims’ presence leaves a visibly profound effect on Richard that poses the question of potentially sincere regret of his actions. This question, left unanswered, leaves the audience wondering — is the narcissistic notoriety that Richard III has garnered warranted or was he simply a understandably merciless king in contention for the throne like so many before and after him?
Richard III
By William Shakespeare; directed by Tim Carroll; sets by Arthur Gaffin; costumes by Jenny Tiramani; lighting by Stan Pressner; music and sound by Claire van Kampen; choreography by Sian Williams; fight direction by Jonathan Waller; hair by Wanda Gregory; make-up by Christina Grant; company manager Lizbeth Cone; Hudson Theatrical Associates Presented by Neil Mazzella, Sam Ellis, Aaron Dayton, Irene Wang. At the Belasco Theatre, 111 W 44th St., Manhattan; (212) 239-6200, ticketmaster.com, Running time: 2 hours, 30 minutes.
