Lack of extremes Jekyll and Hyde

Lack of extremes
Jekyll & Hyde
Through Nov. 28 at Greater Orlando Actors Theatre
669 Cherry St., Winter Park
407-872-8451
www.goatgroup.com
$18

Dr. Henry Jekyll has been mixing his drinks again – literally. One particular cherry-red concoction – formula HJ7 – could be providing him with quite a kick, shifting his normally placid personality from friendly to fiendish. The resulting identity has a penchant for murderous behavior and particularly nasty romantic proclivities. In fact, his qualities are so different from the good doctor’s that he even has his own moniker – Mr. Edward Hyde.

Robert Louis Stevenson’s 1886 Gothic tale, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, was transposed into a smash Broadway musical, Jekyll & Hyde, in 1997. The show’s book, music and lyrics are by Steve Cuden, Frank Wildhorn and Leslie Bricusse. The Greater Orlando Actors Theatre is currently staging the work under the direction of Paul Castaneda, with Don Hopkinson serving as musical director.

To its credit, GOAT has managed to cram the expansive creation into its less-than- cavernous Cherry Street space with a cast of 30 well-costumed performers who sing acceptably and move comfortably in the small acting area. The leads include John Gracey as Jekyll, Erin Brenna as Lucy, Scherezada Morales-Roman as Emma, Rob DelMedico as Utterson and, in a departure from the standard modus operandi, Stephen Pugh as Hyde.

While the acting and vocalizing are generally up to snuff, GOAT’s production suffers from a lack of the sort of special effects that can convert a middling book and score into a spectacular theatrical experience. For instance, instead of the same actor transforming himself from Dr. Jekyll into Hyde amid an array of optical illusions and flashy stagecraft, Gracey and Pugh must dart on and offstage as nimbly as they can, replacing one another in full audience view. More often than not, the seams show.

In addition, directors Castaneda and Hopkinson have decided to mic their actors, who must then battle a taped score played back at unsuitably high levels. Since the audience is never more than 10 feet away, the overkill is completely unnecessary. Lastly, how to light the tiny space with an audience on three sides totally stymied the tech crew – at least half the show is performed in relative darkness, and impenetrable shadows mar many scenes.

Fans of the musical will enjoy renditions of such popular tunes as “This Is the Moment” and “Someone Like You,” and GOAT is to be commended for tackling this theatrical behemoth. But on the scale of good versus evil, this Jekyll & Hyde falls somewhere between the two.

arts@orlandoweekly.com

Comments on this story:

---

On 11/11/2009 2:37:47 AM, Anonymous said:

Let me start off by thanking you, Al for reviewing our production. I'm glad you came and that you seemed to enjoy at least some of what we did. To respond to some of what you wrote (and I hope there is no offense taken as none is intended): 1. The lack of special effects was a directorial choice. We had more in there in our original concept, but the story in the end is a human story about the duality of man. On stage, it should be about the people and the themes, not about disappearing furniture, movie style effects involving the Jekyll/Hyde transformations or magic tricks. 2. The darkness, again, was a directorial choice. To me, Jekyll and Hyde is about goodness/light attempting to break through the evil/darkness that is within each of us. If everything is well lit and beautiful, then to me Jekyll's final act/victory is shallow. 3. I respectfully disagree on the miking of actors and the sound levels of the score. This show is known for its beautiful, full and lush orchestration. To not give that to the audience in order to not mic the actors was a choice I was unwilling to take. I guess all I'm really trying to say is, since "the acting and vocalizing are generally up to snuff", then any blame lies with my choices as director. And that I can live with, because I firmly believe that my musical director, assistant director, choreographer, cast and crew have done an unbelievable job with this show. Thanks, again, for the review. And hope to see you again, soon! Paul Castaneda Artistic Director Greater Orlando Actors Theatre www.goatgroup.com Thanks again for the review!

On 11/11/2009 12:45:15 PM, Anonymous said:

Well Said Paul....everyone sees something different...

On 11/11/2009 2:15:12 PM, Anonymous said:

I think that there are some technical issues with the space, but I fail to believe that the lack of special lighting fx completely deterred the audience from the story. I also feel that the technical aspects of a show should some how reflect the time period it is written as, and not be made the central focus of the audience. I agree with what is said here of the tracks being loud at times, but I would have liked to have seen more written of the story and the performances.

On 11/11/2009 2:21:07 PM, Anonymous said:

This reviewer seems to have walked into the show with a list of preconceived notions of how Jekyll and Hyde should be executed. While opinions are like a**holes (and they all stink), it's too bad that his opinion of this show is limited to that of a "spectacle" filled with flashing bells and whistles. Al, wouldn't the seams surface far greater with cheeseball, hocus-pocus effects? This isn't Wicked, and we're not trying to Defy Gravity here. As Paul stated, it runs much deeper than flash and 'razz-ma-tazz': It is a tale of duality and the struggle of living in a society torn apart, a message all-to-relevant in today's times. Goat Group stripped the play down to its bare bones in an attempt to reveal the true monster within. The result served to astonish not only audiences, but the cast themselves (I, being among them): We're not as separate from what drives our inner demons as we'd like to believe. That is true theatre....no "illusions and flashy stagecraft" attached. My name is Adam McCabe, and I should have been born with a sock in my mouth. Thanks! ^_^

On 11/11/2009 2:49:15 PM, Anonymous said:

P.S.....No offense meant in my words! Enjoy GOAT's quality theater (and dashing performers) at affordable prices! *bows out* -Adam

On 11/11/2009 2:57:05 PM, Lamar said:

I'd like to see the work, but there's something at odds about miked actors in a stripped down production. It's like a guy who wears prescription eyeglasses AND earrings.

On 11/11/2009 3:06:46 PM, Anonymous said:

Well I mean...."stripped down" doesn't exactly mean we're going to light our actors by candlelight either. Certain steps are a necessity. Let's be real here.

On 11/11/2009 3:27:51 PM, Lamar said:

I was thinking of The Fantasticks.

On 11/11/2009 6:16:35 PM, Anonymous said:

Interesting how whenever GOAT receives a bad review TONS of individuals post against said reviewer. Whether here or against Elizabeth Maupin. Funny how that happens isn't it?

On 11/11/2009 6:24:42 PM, Anonymous said:

First, I am blown away that a director would comment on a public forum about a review of his production. That is poor theater etiquette, in my opinion. A director and company of cast and crew must produce and perform the best product they can deliver and let it speak for itself. A play or any other live performance art is to be appreciated and judged by each individual viewer. Whether or not the audience "gets" the particular directorial choices is irrelevant. If the choice doesn't play well, if it doesn't land, then that is a judgement the production must live with and learn from. I have been a member of the Central Florida theater community for 12 years and I would be mortified to be associated with an organization that would behave in the manner that GOAT's director has exhibited here. As to the production itself, I did see the show on Opening night. I had high hopes as it is one of my favorite musicals. I saw the original broadway run with Linda Eder and Sebastian Bach. Needless to say I thought the broadway production was flawless and have been in love with the music and book ever since. At intermission of GOAT's production I was ready to walk out and ask for a refund. $33 dollars for two tickets was an astronomical price for the level of production they offered. While the ensamble numbers we "acceptable" the soloists were generally week with the exception of Hyde and Emma. Lucy continually showed that her part far exceeded her capabilities as she was often off key and off pitch. Overall felt the acting placid, the cast generally looked confused, nervous or like they were trying to remember their lines. There was little genuine interaction and emotion. Again, with an exception of Hyde and one or two admirable performances by ensamble cast members. I also thought that the relationship between Lucy and Hyde was misrepresented in this production. Lucy's character as a whole seemed to miss the mark of the intended arch. First we see her a some victorian english version of a valley girl with a terrible affected accent, then she is a wimpering lamb. Her arch may have been helped without the omision of Good & Evil (a song performed in broadway version) which was apparently stripped from the show in favor of Bring on the Men as a women's ensemble number. The choreography was uncomfortable to sit through at such a close proximity to the cast. Further, the inclusion of the child cast member in the scene was a tasteless choice. Lucy is intended to be a strong and confident character who shows small but increasing moments of frailty only to Jekyll due to his kindness toward her. The actor's portrayal of this role in GOAT's production was weak, whiny and lacking in depth. As for the technical aspects of the show, the faults were numerous. First I will point out the distraction of hearing the stage manager talking through the entire production from the tech booth. I was sitting in the furthest possible seat from the booth and still I could hear her and her crew talking through the entire production. Second, the execution of lighting cues often showed errors and caused distraction. Dead characters were being helped off the set in full light while characters performed ballads in total darkness. Whether the cast couldn't hit their marks or the lighting was poorly focused I do not know. However I do not see the directorial advantage to having your actor's face in darkness while they are lit from the knees down. Their is a proper way to use shadow and light to convey emotion in a scene, this production looked messy, unpolished and hap-hazard in the area of lighting. Set changes were messy and loud. Backstage the cast could be heard dropping things, cursing when they presumably bumped around in the darkness and occasionally were shoved out of stage without their proper props. Additionally the blocking either had me straining to see the focal character over ensamble members in my face or dizzy at seeing the characters pacing needlessly back and forth along the same three-foot path every actor took from the first mid-stage platform, back down to their downstage right mark and back upstage again. The constant need to move the characters was not supported when the stage right audience area still spent most of the show looking at backs. More often then not the cast was directed straight out or to the downstage right corner. There were decent performances and even a few very good numbers that were mired by poor technical planning, poor direction and other partially substandard performances.