Shakespeare and the Pink Panther

My nine year old daughter has recently taken to watching old cartoons. I think she prefers them to the contemporary stuff (well, except for The Mighty B which is about an adorable nine year old blonde girl who is funny, imaginative and a slight misfit- so she's pretty much watching a cartoon about herself). So, one of the shows she's been enjoying is The Pink Panther (which also shows The Ant and The Aardvark featuring John Byner doing impressions of Jackie Mason and Dean Martin as the two main characters). I loved The Pink Panther cartoons as a kid. I'm still facinated by them. For those of you who don't know them or don't remember- they're cartoons that are completely without dialogue.

Anyway, it got me to thinking about directing Shakespeare. I think I like to approach a production of Shakespeare like it's a Pink Panter cartoon. That doesn't seem to make any sense, does it? I mean, here is the most verbal word-lovin' playwright in the history of the English language. But, I like to try and tell the same story that's being told with language- and tell it visually simultaneously. It's like they say about political debates on TV- if you watch them with the sound turned off, you have the same reaction as the people who have the sound on- you know who "wins."

That's what I like to do- stage a production that you could watch without the sound on and still follow the story, follow the mood and know what's going on. As my friend Tami Moon pointed out- you can have a very strong emotional reaction to opera without understanding a word of Italian (or German). I think that in theater, you can parallel that visually- you can have the same reaction to the plays if the visuals are strong enough- and I'm not talking about striking visuals. I mean, you can put a pyramid on stage or fireworks or a giant llama, but that might not do anything to further the story.

You know, I'll confess, it's what I don't like about The Lion King (the play, not the movie)- the visuals are incredibly striking- I mean, wow! But, they seem to function independently from the emotion of the play.

I'm really speaking in a narrative sense even more than in a thematic sense. That's why I can't stand when I see a play where people are just standing (or sitting) in one spot on stage for a long period of time. What does that do except place the play (visually) in a standstill? It just seems like a waste of the resources of theater. It's like having a giant 30 foot platform on stage and never using it.

Also, I heard my daughter say "oi" yesterday. That cracked me up.

Maccers

We remounted our production of Macbeth. Originally this production was built to concentrate on the intimate relationships between the very human beings in the play- it was built to fit a small black box theater. Last year, we also adopted it to play very large theaters for three performances and then we, well, improvised our way through a “lights on” performance in a big caverny gymnasium at a maximum security prison.

This year, we performed the play environmentally/progressively at the “haunted” ruins of the PFI. Later we performed it at a 1,000 seat auditorium. I was satisfied in a lot of ways about these two latest incarnations, but this particular production is starting to show its wear.

When moving the production outside, we tried to recreate the production as a mood piece with a smattering of fun interactive moments. I think the interactivity allowed the play to retain its intimacy, but it really became another piece - sometimes I thought successfully, other times it was…well… sloppy. Then, by the time we brought the production back to a large indoor theater, the piece was starting to look like a stretched out suit.

Actors don’t always recognize this kind of wear and tear on a production. Often they may play rhythmically with their performances – making it feel pretty good for the actor, but not conducive to a tight performance. Also, I find that (like in long runs) actors often revert to the original approaches they had to the roles. The stuff that appeared at read-through and early rehearsals that the director/actor team works so hard to change reappears. Add to the fact that we moved this piece around for different audiences, different experiences and even with different results in mind, it's no wonder this thing started getting a little stretched out of proportion.

Also, I think shows ought to be built for where they are being performed OR they ought to built to tour- so there’s a flexibility in the direction of the production itself. I loved working on this Macbeth. I thought it was very satisfying and I enjoyed working with the artists associated with it, but, by the end, I really felt that it needed to go back into the shop for a couple of weeks.

There may be some pressure to take this thing out, dust it off and put it up again someday. You know the Macbeth is popular! I hope that, if that’s the case, I remember that it needs some refurbishing.