Talk about "The Dog in the Manger"
We want to know what you think...
Post a comment and tell us your thoughts about our production of The Dog in the Manger.
Above photo: Michelle Hurd as Diana. Photo by Scott Suchman.
Post a comment and tell us your thoughts about our production of The Dog in the Manger.
Above photo: Michelle Hurd as Diana. Photo by Scott Suchman.
Labels: Jonathan Munby, lansburgh theatre, Lope de Vega, Michelle Hurd, Shakespeare Theatre Company, Theater, Theatre
posted by Shakespeare Theatre Company at 12:48 PM
12 Comments:
A wonderful play! Great actors, scenery, and laughs garanteed! I particularly loved the singing throughout the play... a must see!
It was a good production and quite funny in parts. I did wonder about the translation. Some of the humor relied on language in English that some might consider bordering on gutter-talk and I wondered whether the original text was the same. The language didn't disturb me, I just wondered if the tone of language heard in 16th century Spain was the same. The only drawback for me was I had difficulty finding any sympathy for the leading characters.
I just came from the performance. I thought it was brilliant! Guaranteed you will laugh. I thought that the transitions betweens scenes ran very smooth. I know I will be coming back to see it again at least once.
It is a terrific production! Both old and young will enjoy it -- Great way to spend a Saturday afternoon and worth every dollar spent on the tickets! Tristan is a RIOT!
I thought that the production and acting, particularly Michelle Hurd in the lead role, were superb. I am unsure about the translation from the Spanish, because parts of the play were translated into modern English and parts of the play were translated into more classical English. This created some discontinuity for me. I am wondering what the play would have been like if the entire play had been translated into classical English.
Well worth seeing, and I look forward to the Shakespeare Theater doing more of these Spanish plays.
What lady's picture was on all the giant screens?
This was a worthwhile production of a little-known Golden Age play. The four leads were excellent with David Turner as the standout.
The set was a beautiful see-through latticework of carved wood, evoking Spain of the time. The designer's conceit of a giant portrait that multiplies as the love story gets more complex was distracting and doesn't work.
The choice of a red dress was obvious but not effective as it did not show off the true beauty of Michelle Hurd, a stunningly gorgeous woman. It was just the same dress she had on before, in a different color. It'd be great to see Hurd tackle Olivia in 12th Night.
The main thing this production lacked was a really visceral emotional connection for me as an audience member. I felt like I was ahead of the story and merely watching the characters' problems rather than being really engaged in them. This could be a flaw in the writing. The show was polished, physically adept, entertaining, quick-paced... but when these very capable actors were asked to communicate with the audience, they did not really demand us to hold their struggles in our hearts. Michelle Hurd did the best at this, for a few brief moments finding passion in the poetry; the same with the terrific Michael Hayden as Teodoro--some of his soliloquies were affecting, but the poetry did not stick and then pull us through the drama of the whole play. I feel the director got all the bells and whistles but missed the true magic of emotion behind all the glitter. Miriam Silverman's use of the classical text was particularly skilled and she was believable as the "good girl." But I never really cared about her character because I feel the helmer left her high and dry.
The costumes were adequate, but came to life in a comic scene late in the play. They never really distinguished the characters; they felt like costumes in a play, rather than real clothes people would wear in a fictional world. The exception was Turner's costume; and like his costume, his characterization was likewise three-dimensional where the others felt more flat.
The lighting was really cool when it shone through the latticework; nothing anyone hasn't ever seen before, but it was pretty.
Clearly this is one of the better productions by our country's best classical theater and it deserves praise. What it lacks, like much regional theater, is real fire and real risk, something that actors are unlikely to provide without a daring director. Nonetheless, this director is very, very talented and put together a well-paced, dazzling evening of theater. Some kind of psychic glue was missing; perhaps it was lack of chemistry in the casting, or just flat writing. But I would wholeheartedly recommend seeing this, provided you can afford to spend $68.50 on a good seat.
The Marquis & Tristan made the play!reminded me of Dana Carvey. Not sure why Flloyd wasn't cast in that role. Whyt was the painting of the boy's face under the shroud not exposed during the curtain call?
Loved it! Has you leaning in with anticipation! Strong wit and humor that keeps you smiling the whole time - excellent job!
Dog in the Manger is a definite must-see for anyone looking for genuine expert acting, a witty and hilarious script and an adaptation play that will hit close to home with anyone who's navigated the rough and tumble waters of relationships. The primary theme is "you always want what you can't have... then when you get it, you don't want it anymore.." but the play also has a sexy, comforting feel to it -- the characters were so funny and real. Diana is as beautiful as she is sharp, and the Marquis still has me rolling. Don't miss this one.. seriously.
What a brilliant production, worth every penny of the ticket price. I was most impressed by the simplicity of the set - I have seen productions with much more elaborate sets, but this was as effective as any of theirs - simply changing the lighting and a couple of props and in my mind's eye I saw the scene taking place in a completely different location. Kudos to all of the cast, who were outstanding, and particularly to the two leads, as well as the actors playing Tristan and the two men vying for the Countess' affections. It was a real honor to see these great actors/actresses doing what they do best.
The play didn't hold my attention, even though I was in the 6th row. It is challenging to present a modern interpretation of a 400 year old Spanish comedy and they did not get it right. The mixture of classicism with modern American English slang and sunglasses was tongue-in-cheek, yet a bit tacky. I don't believe TV sitcom style humor needs to be inserted to make a comedy. It would be fine with me to have less of a costume show gala and more focus on the acting. There were not enough older experienced actors to hold the play together.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home