Ham and Jam and Spam a Lot
Footlite Musicals’ current production is Camelot, (based on T. H. White’s The Once and Future King) starring David Wood as Arthur, Cindy Johnson as Catherine Zeta-Jones Guenevere, and Nathan Welch as an occasionally French-accented Lancelot. Chris Arthur was a very well-cast Mordred, and looked exceptionally fey (I can easily see him as Puck in the next local production of Midsummer Night’s Dream–hint, hint); certainly more so than Claire Wilcher’s Morgan, despite a fascinating black chiffon-chain-and-peacock-feather costume and makeup job. Chris Arthur, in fact, did a very good job with what is bascially a very one-dimensional and unsympathetic character, and commanded my attention more than any other actor in the second act. Catherine Zeta-Jones Guenevere comes off as a manipulative twit, and her scene with Lancelot in the second act seemed entirely out of the blue–despite the fact that the audience knows what’s coming–because there didn’t seem to be any interaction, let alone passion, between the two actors earlier in the show. David Wood does almost too good a job showing Arthur’s uncertainties; one wonders how anything ever got done with Merlyn stuck in a tree. And speaking of David Baker’s Merlyn, I was sad to see him go so early in the show, even though I knew it was coming. (Note to costume designer: Merlyn’s costume is distractingly loud when it drags on the stage. Hem it or replace the lining!)
According to the directors’ notes in the program, the production was intended to convey a more “stark and primitive,” fifth-century Britain, “within the framework of the script and score provided.” Granted, the script and score do contain anachronisms. However, I can’t say that the designers did much to further the directors’ goal, as the costume were not only wildly anachronistic, but came from a variety of periods. Perhaps as compenation, the set was exceptionally generic. Overall, my opinion of the production is mixed…as was more or less every aspect of the production. It’s definitely not the best show I’ve seen there.
Disclaimer: This production was not discussed, debated, chattered or nattered about, or otherwise spoken of with any Encore Awards judge who may have been present.
Powered by FireStats
November 30th, 2003 at 6:03 pm
This is utterly unrelated to your review of Camelot (one of Lerner and Loewe’s weakest, bookwise, though the music’s nice)–but the title of your post caught me, as I finally managed to sit down and watch my special edition DVD of Holy Grail last night. Worth every penny, may I say! The extras are delightful, particularly the “Subtitles for People Who Don’t Like the Film.” (They’re taken entirely from Shakespeare’s Henry IV, and bear only the vaguest relation to what’s going on onscreen. I laughed so hard it hurt.) Anyway, don’t see Camelot, but do get the special edition of Holy Grail if you haven’t already.