The Real Critics Editor/Publisher
Every year I look forward to going to see the latest productions of the Redlands Shakespeare Festival. Every year I look forward to the classics produced there, the new talent that emerges and the potential of that magnanimous venue. But every year I leave feeling somewhat disappointed.
As an avid Shakespeare fan I can, at most, appreciate the fact that Shakespeare is being produced for more viewers to see. But I also worry that the droll traditional productions will continue to turn away young viewers whose belief that Shakespeare is outdated is only furthered by these stale performances.
Granted, I am a fan of adaptation. I believe that Shakespeare’s universal themes can be echoed in countless cultures and time periods. But I am also a fan of traditional productions, though these productions must be even more on point to hold their audience’s attention.
This year the Redlands Shakespeare Festival was producing two of my most favorite plays – “Hamlet” and “Measure for Measure.” Both shows were directed by Eric Tucker and both shows felt uninformed, though somewhat inspired.
Let’s start with “Hamlet.” Something positive – the casting of Cedric Wright and Megan Pickrell as the guards Marcellus and Bernardo, Hamlet’s old friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, the comic-relief gravediggers and then the slightly effeminate Osric, was simply genius. The two actors got a chance to show their acting range and obviously had fun doing so. Wright seemed to perform in a similar comedic style, while Pickrell explored the true limits of her characters. Wright’s gravedigger was particularly hilarious. His floating head and nimble fingers used the table/grave as an excellent prop.
As a local director, I know how difficult casting can be in a production, which makes Tucker’s decision to cast the two actors in multiple roles that much more brilliant. On that note, casting is also said to be 90 percent of the director’s job and this is also where Tucker failed. Many of the actors seemed to have a general idea of what they were saying on stage, but did not seem to plunge into the depths of their characters. And believe me these characters have some incredible depth.
Both Ophelia (played by Crystal Munson) and Gertrude (played by Melanie Ramiro) have the potential to show some amazing emotion, reveal a good deal of backstory and work in some fancy blocking. In Ophelia’s crazy scene, there are so many emotions being conveyed through song and they all have to do with her dead father, missing brother, unknown mother, lost love (Hamlet) and the possibility that she is pregnant. Tucker’s direction, or Munson’s own direction, felt as though Ophelia had gone crazy, but for no apparent reason other than what the audience could guess. In Gertrude’s bedroom scene with Hamlet she goes from commanding and angry, to terrified but in denial, to realizing her own folly, to utterly distraught. Ramiro had two levels – questioning and upset.
Tucker would have done better to cast a non-comedic actor in the role of Claudius, rather than himself, as well as cast a younger and more valiant Hamlet other than Sabel. Sabel’s Hamlet left much to be desired. The audience should be able to sympathize with Hamlet, but this Hamlet was whiney and weak.Tucker also brought some strange comedy to the Shakespearean tragedy. The Ghost of Hamlet’s father (played by Bill Greeley) was strangely calm about “fasting in fires” for all eternity. He spoke of being poisoned by his brother as if it were a normal occurrence and did a Scooby-Doo-esque exit with his final line – “Remember me!”
Tucker did make some interesting blocking choices with freezes and his staging of characters across the vast bowl stage. But some of the character choices were so distracting that it was hard to appreciate the action.
In “Measure for Measure” Isabella, played by Jamie Sowers, was overly sensual for the naïve nun that she is supposed to be. And, in the usual Sowers way, extremely excited and smiley at all times. In Tucker’s version, Isabella enters Angelo’s study, oozing with sexuality, rather than entering naively and being shocked when Angelo offers her a rather aggressive proposition.
Ron Milts was fabulous as Angelo. But a comedic actor and a comedic director do not a dramatic performance make, and that was obvious.
“The Tempest” directed by Rhesa Richards was also lacking. Sowers made another appearance, this time as a smiling Ariel. One would not believe the character was a slave based on Richards and Sowers’ interpretation. Milts returned as the hilarious Stephano and held his own yet again. But unfortunately for Milts and Michael Eastman, who played Caliban in “Tempest” and Pompey in “Measure for Measure,” one good actor cannot carry a 20-person cast.
I could go on and on about each show and definitely could produce some good moments to divulge, but the problem is that the good in each show did not outweigh the bad. The problem with bad Shakespeare productions is that they continue to confuse the masses who already feel that Shakespeare is confusing. I want so much for the Shakespeare Festival to succeed because the idea was truly brilliant and it is sad to watch these misinformed productions at such an amazing venue, with fabulous costumes and a wealth of sponsors.
Perhaps next year the talent will pull through and the directors will do a little more research, including just going to You Tube and watching some videos. I’m sure Tucker could have learned a lot from the San Diego Old Globe’s “Hamlet” and Richards could have learned from a few local and out-of-state productions. Each director and actor has their own style, but when you are performing something that has been produced around the world for 400 years, you better know your stuff.
