Saturday, May 10, 2008

Theater Review: Gaslight

By Mark-Brian Sonna of MBS Productions

Gaslight by Patrick Hamilton was written in 1938 and played on Broadway under the title Angel Street from December 1941 through the end of 1944. A three year run for a play was rare. It also starred Vincent Price in the role of Mr. Manningham, the devious husband who attempts to drive his wife insane. It twice became a film: in 1940 in England and in 1944 in the United States. The American version went on to receive 7 Academy Award nominations including nominations for Charles Boyer for Mr. Price’s role, Ingrid Bergman as his wife, and Angela Lansbury as the young maid. Hamilton’s other play, Rope, was also turned into a film directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Gaslight has gone on to be regarded as a masterpiece of mid-century theatre. Its many plot devices, and they may seem familiar, have influenced countless other films and plays since. Even the shocking Extremities from the 1980’s is an offshoot from a scene in this play.

The beauty of Mr. Hamilton’s script is that it holds up to modern sensibilities. The play delves into the dark psyche of the mind. The story is a good yarn that will have you on the edge of your seat. It’s too good a story to spill the beans but suffice to say the fact that the young Mrs. Manningham is being driven insane intentionally by her husband is the least of her worries once the audience learns from Sergeant Rough what really is going on. Rounding out the quintet is Elizabeth, the more empathetic maid, and Nancy, a second maid with a secret agenda. The whole point of the play is that nothing is what it seems. What makes the play work so triumphantly is that for the audience the tension is built up in the play two-fold: we are allowed to stay one step ahead of the characters so that we revel and are shocked in the discovery and we wait in anticipation to see when and if the characters figure it out.

So how good is Richardson Theatre Centre’s production? It is good. I would recommend this play. Is it a great presentation? At times. Does it have flaws? Yes. Seeing that this play isn’t performed that often, I would highly encourage you to catch it.

I’ll start with what doesn’t work:

• The accents. The action takes place in England. Outside of a small handful of references this play could have happened in New York. They chose to keep the locale on the other side of the pond. Unfortunately, not all the actors could pull off convincing British accents. They slipped at times to Mid-Atlantic to Irish, Scottish and at one point a southern drawl came out. I would have no problem with all the actors doing it in American accents, even if we kept the play in England, or change a few references and place it in New York. The problem was exacerbated by the fact that Elaine Erback had a flawless working class London accent. All the other actors either couldn’t nail an English accent consistently, or if they remained British, their accents morphed from upper class, to London commoner, to northern England. I’m a firm believer that if you can’t pull off the accents, then don’t do them. It becomes distracting.

• The portrayal of Mr. Manningham. Andrew Kasten is a very talented actor. I’ve hired him before and directed him. I also know he is relatively new to the stage. This is in no way a comment on his talent. But….Mr. Manningham is a brilliant creation for he is manic, driven, deceitful, charming, seductive, alluring, dishonest, manipulative, intelligent, and most importantly frightening. He is a true sociopath. He manipulates people without them realizing it. Mr. Kasten is able to convey some of these qualities but not all. Mr. Manningham is a split personality and must in an instant go from being a playboy to murderer, from being calm and cool to being in a fit of rage, from being sadistic to being tender. He must keep the audience on edge with these transitions. They also must happen in a flash. Mr. Kasten is playing him too calculating: it takes the edge off. Trying to pull off calculating is hard: the audience is to know this about your character but the others on stage can’t. I found myself thinking: “He’s so obviously a creep the characters must see it.” But of course they can’t or the play would fall apart. A disconnect happens. Mr. Kasten is over thinking his role and it shows. He needs to act with his gut and not second guess. My advice: LET LOOSE! You don’t have to act manipulative and calculating; we know it just by your actions. He does this a bit more by the end of the play and his performance took on an edge, and gave the play its strong finish, he just needs to do it throughout. Mr. Kasten can do it.
• Mrs. Mannigham’s wig. It’s a good wig but it still looks like a wig. No one else had wigs on stage so it really stood out. If her hair was too short and a wig was required, perhaps finding one that looked a little bit more natural would have worked better, or be consistent and have the rest of the cast wear wigs too.
• No second intermission. The play is written in three acts. Currently, it is custom to not give the audience a break between Act 2 and 3 because act 3 is usually so short it can be meshed. Every now and then the pacing of the script calls for it. Yes, the play is long as it is, but one need not give the audience two full 15 minute second intermissions, a pair of shorter 7 to 10 minute intermissions would have worked and kept the plays run time the same. Part of the delight in plays such as this, is the anticipation of what is to come. Each act ends on such a tense high note, that we are supposed to revel in it till the next act comes. It’s a thriller of a play, and I wanted to stay thrilled longer!

What worked? Everything else. This list would be too long to mention all the technical stuff so here is a sampling:

Rachael Lindley’s direction. Well, not just her direction, but her sound design, her costumes, her set decoration. She has a singular vision and it served the play gloriously. This was some of the most exciting staging I’ve seen. The way the characters moved through the space, the timing, the nuances of gestures that were given to the actors, the physical interplay between objects and the characters all worked marvelously. A snapshot could have been taken at any point in the play and one would be able to tell exactly what was happening in the story. The direction is so strong that had the play been performed without dialogue, just the movement alone would have told the story. Not a weak moment. This play is supposed to be a thriller and she made it thrilling!

Terry D. Abshire’s portrayal of Sergeant Rough. He did a very different take on this character and it worked. He was completely charming yet gave him an ominous quality that all of a sudden I began to worry for Mrs. Manningham: did she just jump out of the frying pan into the fire? He was too nice, and he set us all on edge. For such a relaxed and happy man, he too was calculating and we as an audience reacted nervously to him.

Morgan Spollin as the horny maid Nancy. She has quite a stage presence. Her piercing eyes spoke volumes. Elaine Erback as the maid Elizabeth was amazingly multi-dimensional given the limited time she has on stage.

Kudos to Amy Knoles as Mrs. Manningham: It’s hard to be hysterical for 2 ½ hours and not wear on an audience. She found levels of humor, sweetness, genteelness, and grace. She also upped the fright aspect of the play. Her ending scene gave me the chills and made me squirm in my seat. Even though the play’s main plot had resolved itself, she scared me during her last confrontation with her husband. Everyone around in the audience squirmed in their seats; and I did too.

So this is the partial list of what I liked and disliked. As a critic I’m required to point out things and to give you a biased opinion. As a critic I’m also required to tell you if the play is worth forking out money to go see, and Gaslight at Richardson Theatre Centre is worth it. Do not let any of my negative criticisms dissuade you from catching this play!

Pegasus News content partner - MBS Productions

Related stories

• Pegasus News Week in View: DIY edition (May 15, 2008)

See more stories in:

• Arts > Fine Arts > Theater > Plays

Comments