Hamlet Review

Some works of art are so universal, so well known and so influential that they are relevant even after 500 years of their original showing.  Such is the case with the works of 16^th century playwright William Shakespeare. Shakespeare, who’s works are read and studied in classrooms all around the world, has had his plays done in nearly every language and in every setting that can be thought of and still sell out theaters all around the world. One of the most popular plays Shakespeare has written would be his tragic-drama Hamlet. It is probably due to it’s famed notoriety that Hamlet was selected to be the final play of the University of Missouri Theatre Department’s 2011-2012 season. Preformed on the MU campus at the Rhynsburger Theater, the classic tragic-drama is directed by Kevin Brown, who gives Hamlet a futuristic twist; set around the year 3000 B.C.E. and in a dystopian country. While this may sound a bit adventurous, Brown’s adaptation of the Shakespearian classic manages to make old classic feel new and vibrant all without changing the original dialogue.  

 In Hamlet, a distraught Prince Hamlet goes insane trying to avenge his father’s death after seeing his ghost, whom he believes to be the doing of his Uncle. After being chased by madness, Hamlet’s mind gets the best of him and eventually leads to his downfall. Hamlet builds on the themes of degenerate madness, revenge and obsession, all combined with paranoia and corruption. All these themes come together to tell the message that revenge is never good, and ultimately leads to demise.

Hamlet, for a college production, had a exceptionally strong cast. With a strong lead by Brian Scanlan, who played Hamlet, and with excellent supporting roles from Alyson Germinder (Gertrude) and Tamara Mullins (Ophelia) the two-hour and thirty minute production was never dull. What really impressed me about Scanlan’s performance was his ability to really connect with Hamlet’s character. For example, every time Scanlan was involved in a scene with the ghost (Peter Smith) you really saw his face twist and change with madness and grief. Not only did I feel like Scanlan really did feel for his characters’ loss, I really felt like when he saw the king’s ghost his madness and torment were real. In addition to Hamlet’s monologues, I was also really impressed with the scenes with some of the smaller actors. What especially was impressive was the second “play within a play” at which the players reenact the murder of the king. With a strong chemistry between Robert Glauz and Ian Matthew Sobule who’s silent act was among the most entertaining scenes in the play. The scene where the two take turns mock hitting each other was leaving me silently laughing and smiling in an otherwise tragic and depressing play.

The direction of Hamlet was equally as impressive as the acting. Dr. Kevin Brown, does nothing short of excellent work when brining the classical play to the stage. What impressed me most about the direction of Hamlet was the future that Brown sets the play in. What Brown does by setting the play in the “not-to-distant” future is pretty novel, but the way Brown does this is what was most impressive in my mind. The way Brown chose to only change the set a bit, and have the ghost on a video (I’ll discuss this more in the next paragraph) was really impressive to me. It gave a subtle felling of the future, but without overwhelming the entire play. Another directorial decision from Brown that impressed me was the blocking and staging of the play during certain scenes. For example, during one of the scenes that Hamlet is nervously talking to Claudius and Gertrude, Hamlet is often seen up-stage right and is jumping from the railing on the stairs, to some of the barrels, back to the ground. This motion that Hamlet goes through when discussing affairs with his uncle and his mother, really help show the madness and degeneration of Hamlet’s mind as he races from level to level of the set. The constant movement of Hamlet during these scenes is one that takes the performance to a level above mediocre, as it really helped place my mind in-twine with Hamlet’s and really helped me connect with the character.

The design elements of Hamlet were also very impressive. The set was a bit basic, but I think that it fit perfectly with the theme. What I mean by basic is that it was only a balcony, flanked by staircases on both sides, with a couple barrels and other basic wooden structures to fill the stage. Jon Drtina,  the scenic designer,  did a really great job with this show.  The color scheme was a lighter black, garnished with tattered pieces of cloth that were a rusty red color. What this color palette did for me was make me think of a wasteland with void atmosphere. The lighting, done by R. Dean Packard, was also very impressive. The wonderful array of spotlights and flood lights really helped set the mood during certain scenes, especially during the ghost scene. The lighting, in addition to the excellent video display, gave off a particularly extra-terrestrial vibe, especially due to the flashing and turning on and off of certain lights. The way the ghost was presented was also particularly impressive. Instead of having an “invisible” or a physical prop of a ghost, Brown decided to go with a video adaptation of a head (Peter Smith) that was back dropped onto a screen. The video was then distorted and made to look static-like and gave off a very futuristic and post-apocalyptic vibe, the scenes with the ghosts were easily my favorite parts of the show.

All-in-all Hamlet was a wonderful show. Granted, the Shakespearian classic hasn’t changed all too much in Brown’s adaptation, but it is just enough to leave the viewer with a refreshing feeling that can only come about after seeing a familiar classic. In a world of terrible adaptations (I’m looking at you, Tim Burton) some manage to do it right. From the acting, to the directing, to the costumes and set, Brown serves up a visually engaging Hamlet that is just the right amount of new, mixed with a familiar amount of classic. I look forward to Brown’s further work, as well as other shows done by MU Theater.

Top Girls

The creation of the world that Top Girls takes place in is one that I was rather impressed with. The interesting thing about Top Girls is the way it seems to have the majority of the first act takes place in a fictitious imaginary restaurant, while the rest of the play takes place in England around the 70’s. For me, there was very little confusion about where the play was set, as well as the “world” of the play and the difference between “real” (the second half) and the imaginary dream state of the first act. I think this was achieved because of the way the characters are presented, as well as the various reminders that were are in an office or a restaurant. For example, in the first act, the waiter kept coming on and off of the stage to clear dishes, take orders etc., this really helped remind me that the scene was a restaurant because otherwise I would have been so lost in the intense dialogue and other characters speech, that I would of hardly remembered where the scene was taking place.

The spacing and blocking for Top Girls was a bit iffy and confusing for me only at one time throughout the play. Because the way the theater was set up, I had trouble seeing some of the interactions with the characters because their backs were to me and their distance to the audience was a bit far. For example, when an interview is taking place between one of the employment agency ladies and a potential employee, the two chairs are set up at an angle that made it very difficult for me to see the actors faces and emotions. While the distance between the two chairs was fine, and I was able to hear them because they were in the foreground of the stage, I had trouble connecting with the actors in this scene because of the way they faced the audience at an awkward angle that wasn’t entirely towards the audience, nor completely turned away from them. It left my mind confused as to whether to focus on the interview, or the background set. Other than that scene, I had no qualms with the staging and positioning of the play. I was particularly impressed, however with the way each character in the first act would rise from the table and move to the corner of the stage to address the audience with a particularly charged monologue. This “area” that Ally Poole sets up allows the audience to know that each time a character starts walking toward that corner, an emotionally charged scene or confession is about to take place.

The casting was also very solid for the production of Top Girls. Because Stephens College is a fairly small liberal arts school, I was particularly impressed with how well each young actress was able to fit the role (or roles) they played. Knowing that the pool of actors is relatively small at Stephens, It was impressive to see each actress do their part or parts really well, especially the historical figures, as each character was from a different time or period. One particular casting choice I was impressed with was that of Dull Gret (Rachel Leyh). It was spectacular to see someone transform from a middle-aged warrior into a timid employment office worker. Other than that, I was nothing less than impressed with the ladies that participated in Top Girls as I was nothing short of captivated by the acting throughout the entire production.