'Camelot': No Magic at the Hippodrome

SHOW INFORMATION: Through April 6.  Tues – Sat at 8PM, Sun at 6:30 PM, Mats. Sat at 2PM, Sun at 1PM.  Tickets $25 - $70.  Call 410.547.SEAT or go to www.broadwayacrossamerica.com for tickets and information. 

◊◊ 1/2 out of five.  2 hours, 40 minutes, including intermission.  Adult themes, stylized combat. 

Camelot, on paper, sounds like the perfect setting and story for musical theatre.  Camelot, the place, is perfect, according to its title song lyrics.  Camelot, the legend, is full of mystical, magical folk, animal transformations, feisty young queens, endlessly brave, idealistic knights, adept at both sword play and poetry.  So why is it, that after years of tinkering, endless book revisions, stylistic choices and now a third professional touring company (at least to come to Baltimore, anyway) that Camelot the musical is so lousy?  Could it be the constant drone of ballad after ballad?  Could it be the muddled story, that in this version, at least, doesn't introduce a key conflict until 15 minutes into act two?  My guess is that it is all of that, plus a nagging feeling that we are about to take off soaring several times, only to barely hop off the ground.  Too many times, the promise of everything Camelot could be – exciting, magical, lusty, pageant-like – is right in front of us, only to be snatched away by a song that sounds just like the one before it, or a dance number never really climaxes past its humble start, or maybe it is simply that this beloved musical is unworthy of our love.  After all, even the show's creators admitted that the show only ran on Broadway as long as it did because President Kennedy adopted the title and title tune as his own.  Popularity by association, as it were.  The bottom line is that maybe it is time to say enough is enough, stop working on it, and admit the show is a failure.  Beloved junk is, in fact, still junk.  The touring production of Camelot, which opened last night at Baltimore's Hippodrome Theatre, is not without its share of pluses, but it does not do a thing to dispel the feeling that there's something foul in the land.

Director Glenn Casale has worked hard, it seems, to maintain the tone of Camelot.  I think he missed an opportunity to be multi-tonal.  As it is, it's a dreadfully serious affair from start to finish, with the scenes flowing pretty seamlessly (a plus) but with what feels like no forward momentum (a minus).  He also seems to have removed any sense of awe, wonder or magic that the piece fairly screams for.  While I'm not saying that things need to explode or that there needs to be budget-busting special effects, there could be a little more.  For example, Merlyn, the famed magician, is about to transform the opening scene to a time years before.  He huffs and puffs some magical gibberish and lifts his stick, and… a drop rises.  Oh, boy!  Later, in what turns out to be a significant plot twist, Merlyn is captured and taken away by a sorceress called Nimue.  In typical short shrift fashion, she slides out on a rock, waves her arms, warbling a tune that Merlyn can't resist, and off they go… sliding off stage on that rock.  Oh, boy.  Then of course there is the cool knight sword fighting thing, right?  There is one.  It lasts maybe 3 minutes and resembles an intro to fencing course at the local YMCA. (Fight direction by Sean Boyd).  No exciting daring do, even though the end results in a "miracle."  Since 75% of the songs are solos or duets, you'd think that the two or three times the ensemble gets to really work would be thrilling and cause the pulse to race.  Again, no.  Choreographer Dan Mojica has really underestimated his ensemble.  Well, maybe that's not fair.  Their big act one finale really requires nothing more than their marching in – it is a knight-dubbing scene, after all.  And later, nothing says "hunt down the beast" like torch-bearing locals in a Les Miz "One Day More" wedge, I guess.  So that leaves the ensemble with "The Lusty Month of May," which is decidedly lacking in the lusty department – there is nothing energetic about it.  Think the Renaissance Festival May Pole dance under the influence of too much Prozac. 

The scenery, designed by John Iacovelli, reeks of amateur quality – cut out trees that don't reach the floor, a show curtain with a blurry Camelot logo imposed on it ("kudos" to lighting designer Tom Ruzika – who also sets a new record for employing dark spots in broad daylight, and just the opposite at night), and set pieces that capture none of the grandeur or majesty of the piece.  Only Marcy Froehlich's lovely costumes redeem any of the technical aspects of the show.  Each one is artwork, and the attention to detail is right where it should be.  Unfortunately, trying to wrap the whole show up in pseudo Lord of the Rings fashion - tussled hair, ragged ends of fabric and putting sticks and leaves on everything does not Camelot make.  Dress second rate material in a tuxedo and it is still second rate material. 

Vocally, the cast sings the heck out of the score, though none of it seems particularly taxing, save for a few high notes.  Of the supporting cast only two people really make an impression either way.  On the down side (though it isn't all his fault) is Shannon Stoeke as Mordred, illegitimate son to King Arthur, who comes in to the show late (a brief "muah ha ha" in act one, not withstanding) to mess things up by exposing an affair, destroying his father, and taking the crown for himself.  It would be nice to have a father/son showdown, even as the Knight of the Round Table decree that fighting must be avoided. (Have we learned nothing form Star Wars?)  Not to be.  But Mr. Stoeke doesn't help much by being rather one-note about it all.  You have to wonder why he's allowed such "nanny nanny boo boo" stylings of such lines as "Camelot, where the tables are round and the relationships triangular."  What wit.  He's not nasty enough to hate and likeable enough to try to understand.  The other major supporting actor is Time Winters (love the name!) who plays both Merlyn and best friend of the Court, Pellinore.  Mr. Winters creates interesting characters in spite of insipid one-liners of the rim-shot variety. 

The real attraction of Camelot is its central love triangle – Arthur-Guenevere-Lancelot.  Ladies first: Rachel de Benedet has a beautiful voice, and translates her character well from the huge Hippodrome stage to the rafters.  She is most interesting when she is a happy Guenevere – aloof, smart, sharp.  Oddly enough, where most actresses would likely flourish, the darker scenes late in the play, she registers as little more than sullen.  Her internal conflict is too internal, perhaps.  Still, her voice, in ballad after ballad, is simply lovely and always a pleasure to listen to, even if all of her songs sound so similar. 

Nearly the entire reason to shell out $70 for this Camelot is for Matt Bogart who is a mesmerizing charmer as Lancelot.  He is the perfect balance of unmitigated ego, chivalry and good intention.  His self-absorption is utterly charming as it becomes increasingly apparent that the Lancelot is completely unaware of his own self-love; rather, he sees all of his attributes as naturally praise-worthy, kind of like knowing you have nice hair or pretty eyes.  In that way, Bogart charms us, beguiles us and makes us root for him.  Charisma is what this man has in excess - hell, he even makes baby blue look macho.  Then there is his voice – no match for Robert Goulet's, but then who really can match that?  Mr. Bogart sings beautifully and acts so well, the stage electrifies every single time he enters. 

Leading man Lou Diamond Phillips here lacks that same charisma, which would allow him to be equal to the miraculous Lancelot.  This is somewhat surprising to anyone who saw his star turn (and Tony nomination) for playing another royal in The King and I.  There he was just amazing.  Here, he seems to be held back.  Perhaps he knows deep down that the book is a mess.  He handles his "young king" scenes with boyish finesse, and looks to be having a lot of fun, which translates to the audience easily.  But as Arthur becomes more introspective, brooding and sad, Phillips loses his charisma and comes across more like a sulking child than a challenged knight of the round table.  It doesn't help that he's been blocked to deliver many series of lines by addressing them to the audience, turning and pacing far away, stopping as if he'll say, "and another thing…", returning center stage to deliver more of his thoughts.  Repeat this blocking over and over, and you get what I mean.  Now, Mr. Phillips may be no Pavarotti, but he is a better singer than this role shows.  In fact, there are several times where he'll end a phrase sounding off-key, when in fact, he is following the pitch of the orchestration, which has not been adjusted for someone who is holding end notes instead of speaking them.  I wish I could report that his final scenes are touching, full of torment or hold even just a dash of drama.  A frown isn't enough to convey the depth of emotion when a man saves his wife by letting her run off with his friend, is it?  Again, though, the material doesn't help his performance.  In his final scene, Arthur, alone and facing almost certain defeat, meets a young knight wannabe.  In an attempt to wedge in a "happy ending," the book has the boy dubbed knight, told to go hide, and Arthur begins a third reprise of the title song.  Curtain down.  Yawn. 

I never in a million years thought I'd say this, but Monty Python's Spamalot captures the magic, fun and grandeur of the chivalrous Arthurian legend much better than Camelot.  Maybe they should bring that back and put this current Camelot out to pasture.

 

Photos by Craig Schwartz.  TOP to BOTTOM:  Lou Diamond Phillips as Arthur; Rachel de Benedet and Lou Diamond Phillips as Guenevere and Arthur; Matt Bogart as Lancelot; Matt Bogart and Rachel de Benedet as Lancelot and Guenevere.

 

To post a comment, you must register and login.