I think it's the "music video" generation who think people can't "see" the music without help from a video production company.
Nobody sits and imagines anymore.
I disagree with that myself, but I think plenty of people feel this way.
The directors are putting the responsibility of completing the circle on the audience by giving them the rest of it in literal terms. That's actually easier (and lazier) than evoking it themselves through their vision and the production they are guiding.
"Here! See? This is what they're talking about on stage!" Now it's on you, audience, to "get" it.
Not usually an early preview goer, but the opportunity was there, and wow — you would never have know that this was a first preview. Very strong all around, and I'm excited to think how much stronger it will become. Being only familiar with Johansson's film work (I wasn't in the city for View From The Bridge), I was absolutely floored by her complete command of Act One (essentially a one-hour Maggie monologue). But the entire ensemble is excellent. (And it is an ensemble piece — 18 in this production. Kudos for the deserved full-ensemble bow — I hope it stays that way.) I was truly drawn in by Rob Ashford's directorial choices — the stage pictures are exquisite from the mezzanine, the rising Act Three storm wonderfully ominous and unbalancing — but what I especially liked was the choice to not make anyone a buffoon (even Gooper, Mae, and those no-neck little monsters). This is my first time seeing this play (and I've seen many productions) in which it's clearly shown that every character is trapped in their own lost orbit around the dead star called Brick — all illuminated over the course of one very forced birthday celebration. Already this production has made me want to re-read the text(s) — I'm amazed all over again at all that Williams accomplishes.
Clearly the lightning rod here will be the spectral inclusion of Skipper. I liked it. Yes, Ashford is adding an unreal Streetcar/Menagerie aspect that isn't called for by Williams in Cat, but it felt perfectly in keeping with the overall "house of the dead" tone of this production.
Of course he's putting his personal stamp on an iconic piece; a given. I believe these flourish-laden "stamps" are also part of the new disdain for the well-made play. If it's too "real," add projections, video, surreal touches, "irony" (oh, how they love added irony) -- and ghosts. Williams's pride (see the citation from his MEMOIRS) was in his craft, the idea that time itself is critical to CAT's achievement. A "ghost" is contrary to time, space. (And who sees this Skipper? Brick? Or only the audience? Not that I care.) The lack of trust is in craft itself, that a great play can be built from the ground up on ideas as old as drama, and those ideas are best served in production.
Ashford actually includes the ghost of Alan Gray in his production of STREETCAR at the Donmar; so he is obviously treading familiar territory with the device here. Auggie already perfectly explains why it's not a good idea, particularly in CAT which is not a play about illusion and fantasy.
these reviews sound very encouraging! Elizabeth Taylor is a hard act to follow but Im sure Scarlett will do her justice. Not sure about Big Daddy though, i dont think anyone can come close to Frosty the Snowman
I dunno, if a Ghost Skipper fits into a House of the Dead concept (and I don't disagree with you that there's an element of that), why not just go full hog and have the ghosts of the probably gay former plantation owners Big Daddy mentions too?
How is Ghost Skipper directed? Does Brick or anyone else ever see him? Does he moon over Brick the whole time? I dunn, I know Williams (for a variety of reasons) like to maintain how ambiguous their relationship was anyway, whenever he was asked about it, and it just seems weird to me.
Auggie said:"Such touches suggest direction that doesn't trust the text. Skipper's very much alive in the discussion, vivedly so, but who he was is part of the emotional suspense in the story. Part of the audience's journey is imagining how important Skipper was to Brick and Maggie. Seeing him -- rather than extending the theatricality -- actually hinders it. "
Without having seen it--and otherwise I really think I'd love this production, I have to agree.
Williams was no stranger to using innovative and even surreal effects on stage (Camino Real being the obvious early example, and I guess is next play with Kazan, Sweet Bird of Youth which used some, at the time, groundbreaking projections), but clearly he didn't need or want them in Cat (and even with his fighting over Kazan about Act III, and some other elements, Kazan had no interest in them either).
Eric, I had that same thought too, that if Ashford was trying to make the physical presence of Skipper represent something of the 'haunting of the past',' that he should arguably also show Jack Straw, Peter Ochello, Susie McPheters and all the other characters described in memory by the various characters.
As is, I'm not exactly sure what the 'Ghost of Skipper Past' is supposed to represent, or who exactly is supposed to be able to see him. The best I could tell is that he's simply being used as an omnipresence to illustrate (hammer over the head?) the subtext of Brick's relationship with Maggie.
The character appears three times: in Act One during the 'fantasia' sequence of Maggie's monologue ("the moon is out tonight...they're playing croquet...you were such a wonderful lover...") of course, during Brick's monologue in Act Two recalling the 'late night phone call,' and most perplexingly, during Big Mama's monologue in Act Three ("Brick, give Big Daddy a son"), in which his appearance is accompanied by music, I kid you not, that sounds almost exactly like the Varsouviana Polka from STREETCAR.
For me, these three moments are indeed the height of Williams' most emotional writing in the play, but having that physical presence onstage is just a complete distraction from the power of those words and a misinterpretation of the central theme of CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF, which isn't really about Skipper...
I think Ashford is likely trying to heighten the lyricism of the piece, but it really does do a disservice to what is otherwise a quite excellent interpretation of the play.
In Williams's preferred version of the text, published in '75 by New Directions (Ashley's Maggie famously on the cover) he addresses this issue. Yet it's written very specifically to the designer. Here Williams does indeed make specific reference to the original owners, Jack Straw and Peter Ochello. It's the playwright's intention that the set itself is haunted by the presence of two "bachelors" who were lovers there.
To my thinking, that's a lovely, poetic way to inspire the imagination of a collaborative designer, not trigger a literalized presentation of dead people (particularly dead people who never lived in or even visited this turf).
Those two spirits who hover over the proceedings have earned their place; it was their love in their house. Skipper, on the other hand, is here dragged into a home he cannot "haunt," by a director who wants to shoehorn a visual explication of a relationship already vividly discussed. I would argue that our "seeing" Skipper denies an audience a rich theatrical pleasure -- imagination. It also robs the actors of a chance to do their job. The actors playing Brick and Maggie "create" a Skipper for us. If we can already "see" him, why should they conjure his memory -- establishing the emotional impact of Skipper on their lives -- in performance?
I'd probably find the "bachelor" ghosts far more organic (and far subtler) but they would require a very deft hand by a director.
Just coming back from the show tonight, I absolutely LOVED it!! My first experience with "Cat" and I was very happy! I was up front and very well may have missed it, but I think Ashford may have already gotten rid of "Ghost Skipper". I didn't see him at all. The only flashback character was Brick in Act II and briefly Act III
Supersam, I saw the show at yesterday's matinee, and Skipper appeared three times. That was not Brick in flashback. Not only that, but Skipper was actually singing - at least two of the three times - "By The Light Of The Silvery Moon." Very distracting. I'm hoping that Rob Ashford will come to his senses and cut Skipper before the show opens.
Other than that, I liked the show very much except for a couple of things Brick did. First of all, I'm not so sure he would have gotten naked in front of Maggie. Maybe, maybe not - and I didn't mind seeing Ben Walker briefly naked. There were two other things. Very early on in the play, Brick lights Maggie's cigarette. I don't think he would have done that - he pretty much hates her for most of the play. Then in the last act, he pats his brother on the back in a very friendly way. They don't like each other either -- so that was strange. Both actor choices or director, I don't know, but wrong, IMHO.
One last thing - the set is HUGE! Too big, I think; both Act One and Act Two get pretty lost in it. And even though there is plenty of room for it, it is lacking the couch that is referred to twice that Brick sleeps on instead of in the bed with Maggie.
supersam1026, how close were you to the stage? Not knowing how high or wide the set would be I did not want to take a chance sitting in the front row so I opted for 3rd row aisle. Hopefully I will not miss anything.
Yup, COMPLETELY missed that then!! I was the sixth row (row D) all the way to the side during Act I and then we moved to the center of the second row. It was great to see it that close up, I didn't feel like I missed anything, but I guess I did. I took it as Brick in the flashback (the kid in the sports jacket), guess I was wrong!
I wouldn't call Johannson a great actress of any generation. In fact, I think she's weak. Don't get me wrong-I first saw her in Ghost World and was kind of mesmerized. She's interesting to look at, but in hindsight, that role was no stretch, I thought.
Lost in Translation is a favorite film of mine. Again, Scarlett was great to look at, but that role, I also thought, was Scarlett being Scarlett.
Since those two performances, anything I saw her in were, in my mind, flat and uninteresting. I'm hoping to get to see Cat because maybe I'll change my opinion.
Thanks for the feedback on the seating supersam1026. Hopefully my seat will be fine.
One of the reasons I like to revisit shows to see if and what I missed, which is easily done when it is something I have never seen, there is depth to the storyline and/or more than one thing going on. I find these message board discussions very helpful too, it is great to read other's perspective. I respect those who are more knowledgeable of a show & appreciate that they share.
I was there last night, and I thought the whole thing was incredibly heavy handed. It was like Ashford was in Directing 101 and this was a final exam project. Between ghost Skipper SINGING (I actually laughed out loud...) and the way the Act 3 storm was executed during the argument, the whole thing felt as though Ashford were saying "Hey... do you get the symbolism here? DO YOU?!" Honestly, I think Scarlett comes off the best here. I 100% disagree with Whizzer about Scarlett and Ben being good scene partners. Ben basically disappears into Act 1 (his best act of the 3), and then he completely goes over the top in Acts 2 and 3. Ciaran Hinds slipped into an Irish accent a few times, which was so weird (why cast an Irishman as a Southern estate owner?). Debra Monk barely makes an impact as Big Mama, a role that I feel often steals the show. The whole thing felt very amateur to me. The only thing I LOVED was the set.
I thought the production was great. particularly Scarlett, Ben and Deb Monk, but i do think you're being very unfair on the set, its really beautiful. The scale of it heightens and emphasizes the drama, not diminishes it. It is Williams after all, not Pinter. Its both feminine, with its soft drapes, and curvaceous furniture, yet cage like, with its tall vertical framing doors. The floor boards blossom outward from the bed at its center like petals on a flower, yet the ceilng (neither hot, nor tin) suggests a spiders web, a trap that none of the characters below seem truly able to escape. Worth saying, the lighting is also very beautiful. And to the other poster noting the absence of ghostly figures other than the Skipper character, I felt these were actually suggested, in a beautifully subtle way, when the household servants sing a vey beautiful spiritual silhouetted behind the soft drapes in the french windows as Maggie declares her phantom pregnancy, it is like the ghosts of the previous occupants of the house willing life to continue there.
How was the storm executed? Because, to be completely honest, the symbolism in the show ain't exactly subtle to begin with.
Fair. But for instance, as the argument was getting more and more heated, the thunder crashes were getting louder and louder. By the end of it, the characters were screaming at each other and the storm sounded like the world was ending. It was way too theatrical to be taken seriously at all.
johnmichael, I get what you are saying - the set does look beautiful. I just think it is too big, and the drama, particularly in the first and second acts, gets somewhat lost in it. I don't think the set in any way enhances the drama. At all. To each his own.
Drama Desk Award Winners - MATILDA, VANYA AND SONIA, PIPPIN, VIRGINIA WOOLF & More!
STAGE TUBE: MATILDA Cast Performs on The View!
TV: See the Cast of Paper Mill's THE LITTLE MERMAID Fly!
CHUCK Star Zachary Levi and Krysta Rodriguez Set to Lead FIRST DATE
Paris SUNDAY IN THE PARK Now Available For Download
VIDEO: Joss Whedon Chats THE AVENGERS 2 on LATE NIGHT WITH JIMMY FALLON
Rihanna for River Island Summer Collection Lands May 25th
Exclusive InDepth InterView Audra McDonald Talks GO BACK HOME Album & PBS Special, MARLENE DIETRICH'S ABC, Upcoming Projects & More
Donkey Kong Country Returns is Back and Optimized for Portable Play
BWW Blog: Leah Edwards - Practice. Perform. Repeat
BWW Reviews: Millepied, Wheeldon and Martins - A Mixed Bag for City Ballet
BWW Reviews: BMOP Presents Reza Vali's TOWARD THAT ENDLESS PLAIN
joined:6/5/09
Posted: 12/19/12 at 09:04am