SEASCAPE Review
SEASCAPE Review
#0SEASCAPE Review
Posted: 10/30/05 at 1:30am
SEASCAPE Review
The leading three non-for-profit theatre organizations with current Broadway runs, each have a straight play running with one common theme streaming through them like white on rice. Roundabout's "The Naked Girl on the Appian Way;" Manhattan Theatre Club's "Absurd Person Singular;" and now Lincoln Center's revival, playing nightly at the Booth theatre, of "Edward Albee's Seascape" all deal with universal and topical issue of the evolution of relationships. "Naked Girl" leaves audience members confused and asking "Why?" "Singular" takes a much more light hearted and blah-zae approach. And now "Seascape" will have theatre-goers piercingly thinking long and hard about the perceptions of how the sexes' behavior has evolved.
Perhaps one reason this tale is so intriguing is because "Seascape" is indeed playwright Edward Albee's happiest play and certainly his sunniest. In 1975 it won the Pulitzer Prize. Interestingly enough that season also offered Broadway its first version of "Absurd Person Singular" as well. But while Albee's work about humans, brute beasts, body parts, not belonging, art, and optimism remains interesting, it is also nowhere near as stimulating or profound as it thinks it's being.
George Grizzard recreates this role of Charlie, a grumpy guy who enjoys relaxing retired life. Frances Sternhagen portrays his ambitious more worldly wife Nancy. The first act is mainly these two stage vets spouting some of Albee's most lyrical dialogue. As the two conclude a seaside picnic on a transfixing set by Michael Yeargan, two lizards named Leslie (scene stealer Frederick Weller) and Sarah (Elizabeth Marvel) intrude in a rather comical manner, directed perfectly by Mark Lamos. After the intermission, the lizard's become rather curious and inquisitive about human relationships in their full creature get ups by Catherine Zuber.
Maybe it is the preposterous fantasy element of people talking to lizards that makes the play seem irksome and sophomoric, but the subtle and provocative insights embedded in the play's whimsy intellect do not seem very striking. Luckily for Albee, his recent revival of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" proves his work remains prolific even today. However, as sleek and professional as this production indeed is, "Seascape" has not evolved as well as the authors other works, or even as well as its own subject matter.
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
#1re: SEASCAPE Review
Posted: 10/30/05 at 1:56am
"the preposterous fantasy element of people talking to lizards that makes the play seem irksome and sophomoric"
This bespeaks a personal bias that doesn't induce me to evaluate your review as the opinion of an objective observer.
OneEros69
Understudy Joined: 10/21/05
#2re: SEASCAPE Review
Posted: 10/30/05 at 3:19am
What the F.ck? Again, DGrant, you dare to put fingers to a keyboard without ever seeing the play.
One would think with that Mensa IQ you are sporting that you would have deciphered the arrows shot over your gluttonous head many many moons ago. But instead, you are way too busy critiquing all the "reviews" here on broadwayworld.com... With I might add, these regurgitated plagiarized euphemisms that are far worse than any of the crap we have been reviewing.
Either see the play and critique it... or slither back under that cow pie you crawled out from under.
As always...
Warmest Regards.
Updated On: 10/30/05 at 03:19 AM
Yankeefan007
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/20/04
#4re: SEASCAPE Review
Posted: 10/30/05 at 8:24am2 hours and 10 minutes (including a 15 minute intermission), per Telecharge.com.
#5re: SEASCAPE Review
Posted: 10/30/05 at 9:08am
Telecharge is wrong, I was out of the theatre at 9:50. So...1 hour and 50 mins with a 15 min intermission. Quite short for an Albee work.
And DGrant...if you have that big of a problem with my reviews, you dont have to read them.
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
#6re: SEASCAPE Review
Posted: 10/30/05 at 9:54am
LaCage - I don't have a problem with your review. I actually like reading them, like I do everyone elses. I was just pointing out that what you wrote indicated that you weren't open to the conceit of the piece itself, which made it difficult to accept your response to this particular production as unbiased. I didn't say that was a bad thing - I was just pointing out that that was a reaction I had to your post.
Not only is this forum valuable for people to share their opnions, but also for everyone to see and experience how others respond to those opinions. I'm sorry you felt if I was criticizing you, because that wasn't my intention. I was just giving you feedback based on my reaction to your piece.
#7re: SEASCAPE Review
Posted: 10/30/05 at 10:24amThats cool and all DGrant...but I was pleanty open to the conceit of the piece...and wanted to embrace it. It is not embracable here though, and yes irksome and sophomoric...even with the wonderful Fredrick Weller giving it his all.
Videos