I was hesitant to go see this show, as The Mernier Chocolate Factory (London Bridge Tube) is reputed to have no AC, and being the first week of August, the theatre would be unbearably hot. But as they do Saturday matinees for only ten pounds, and as it’s a show I’ve been told is quite good, I figured I’d take the risk. And it was stifingly hot in there. Luckily the show was so riveting I wasn’t thinking about my own discomfort.

The central conceit of the show is gimmicky, yet unique. It shows a five year relationship between two people, Cathy and Jamie. Cathy’s story begins at the end of the relationship and works backwards, and Jamie’s begins at the beginning of the relationship and works towards it’s end. The show is comprised of a collection of songs, and minimal text. What is interesting is that they never really sing together. The songs are mostly all monologues/arias in which we see one moment in time from the relationship, but purely from one of their perspectives - never both. The action bounces back and forth between them, being both sad and happy in both the beginning and end, with the middle of the show being the halfway point for both of them.

I had reservations and a bit of confusion about the concept of the piece, but it works. Jason Robert Brown has fully realized these two characters. We see their strengths, weaknesses, likes, dislikes, quirks, and everything else we need to know about them. We also see why they fall in and out of love with each other. Brown based the two characters on himself and his ex-wife, which explains why the characterization is so good. No one is to blame, yet no one is blameless. And that’s why it’s so tragic - they just couldn’t make it work. The real problem is that his writing career is a success, and her acting career is not. This, as well as a lack of understanding, leads to his eventual adultery and then leaving her.

I was moved by the show. However I feel like the writing of the show is so good, that it would be really hard to not be moved by it, or at least enjoy it. And on a personal level, Cathy is a lot like me in a lot of ways, so of course it was moving and hard to watch her suffer.

The music is beautiful. But it’s a weird way to write a musical. Every single song is a stand alone tune. I wish there had been a way to incorporate more duet work, or some recitative style singing. As it is, it sounds more like a collection of great songs than a traditional musical.

Production-wise, I did have some issues. Matthew White’s direction was a bit stiff, and the staging was a bit ackward at times. Physically the action didn’t flow nearly as well as the emotions did, even with the aid of the rotating stage. The most horrendous error of all, though, was the sound. I was surprised to see that the actors were amplified at all, as it is a tiny space, and they both have very powerful voices. Perhaps they really couldn’t have been heard over the band, but in a tiny black box that fits no more than 200 people, I was really surprised to see body microphones in use. And worse than that, they were turned up way too loud. Particularly Jamie’s mic - as he has a naturally loud voice. When he really went for some of those high and intense moments in the music, I saw some people covering their ears. It was downright painfully loud. I just can’t understand why the sound technician couldn’t adjust the levels after the first scene!

Finally, the performances. Damian Humbley is good as the ego-centric writer Jamie. He’s cute and ambitious, but was a bit too ego-maniacal at times. I wished he had played it so that we like him a bit more, because as it is, he comes off a bit more like the villain than she does, and the point of the show is that it is neither of their faults. He just wasn’t as likeable as she is, because of the cocky manner in which he appears in most scenes. But his softer side is apparent in others, and we can see why she loved him. Lara Pulver plays Cathy with a quiet grace that is respectable and likeable. I, as well as anyone who’s ever attempted a life in the arts, would sympathize with her plight. She added a complexity to a character that could just as easily be played very one-dimensionally- as a neurotic, over-emotional failed actress. Her portrayal reached beyond that. Vocally, I enjoyed her much more, as she doesn’t have the same power as her co-star, and therefore didn’t blow my eardrums out every time she sang. Really, it was a huge problem. But they also do a beautiful job with an extremely challenging score.

The evening I spent on the night of August 1st, 2006, at the new London production of Avenue Q was one of the more interesting, disappointing, enlightening, and upsetting evenings of my life. Not because of the show itself, but because of my friends’ reactions to it and the cultural difference those reactions implied.

First, however, a discussion of the show. I saw Avenue Q on Broadway shortly after its opening, nearly 3 years ago. I absolutely adored it, thought it was irreverent, fresh, witty, and most importantly, very funny. The songs were catchy, the characters likeable, and the topics were all things I related well to. Nothing has changed from then until now. I still love the show. It is still funny. I still relate to the topics. And I still laughed my butt off.

The new London cast is as good, if not better in some cases, as the original Broadway production. Ann Harada is back as Christmas Eve, the loveable Japanese stereotype. Even though she’s been playing the role for years now, she’s as funny as ever.

Jon Robyns as Princeton and Rod was good, although he doesn’t have the same sheer charisma as John Tartaglia. His Rod was excellent, possibly better than Tartaglia’s; very goofy with excellent comic timing. But his Princeton was lacking something. Perhaps he attempted to humanize him too much, and so the character felt a bit flat.

And as much as I loved Stephanie D’Abruzzo defining the characters of Kate and Lucy, Julie Atherton is positively brilliant in this dual role. She makes Kate Monster more human than ever before, and cuter even. She makes Lucy sexier, trashier, and meaner. And vocally, her belt is shockingly strong.

Simon Lipkin as Nicky and Trekkie Monster is another great addition to the cast - particularly his Trekkie. What I appreciate most of all is while vocally, the character is pretty much the same as it was, he takes liberties with his comic timing and delivery of some jokes, making it a funnier Trekkie Monster than ever before. And physically, Trekkie is much more all over the place, and plays much more with the slapstick and cutesy factors of the character.

The most obvious difference in the cast, however, is that the character of Gary Coleman is now being played by a male actor. The role was originally done by Natalie Venetia Beclon, a young woman. I never understood why it was a woman playing Gary - to make him appear younger, and more like the child star we would remember him? It never really got past the suspension of disbelief problem in my opinion. Now with Giles Terera taking over the role, Gary is funnier, much more pathetic, and it works.

One thing to note is that it the London cast is a much younger, thinner, and hotter version of the original cast. In most cases, the actors here are prettier than their original counterparts, which is certainly nice to look at, but it makes me worry a bit that we are running out of casting opportunities for average looking yet talented actors.

I also enjoyed comparing the differences from the American version to this version. For the most part, the experience of the show is exactly the same, except for a few lines rewritten for the British audience. For example, the Long Island Iced Teas they drink in the bar scene are now Absinthe Cocktails. And for whatever reason, when Lucy comes back at the end after being injured by a falling penny, her character change is different. In the original, the penny knocked the mean part out of her brain, so she became nice again. In this version, the incident causes her to find religion and become a born-again virgin, so she’s not slutty anymore. Apparently it’s worse in Britain to be slutty than to be mean? I don’t understand that change.

Minor changes aside, Avenue Q is still the laugh-fest it was before. If you liked the original version, you’ll love the London cast just as well.

And if you’re planning on seeing this for the first time, and you’re born and bred in the UK or Europe, I honestly have no idea how you’ll react to it. Case in point: my friends’ reactions.

I took with me to the show, Chris, as always, as well as A, B, and P, the boys who were nice enough to let us stay with them over the week (and whose names I’m making anonymous unless they feel like responding in the comments). A is English, B is German, P is Irish, and they all live together in London. I took them all to see the show as a thank you for letting us crash with them. I honestly thought it was a safe bet, as I’d yet to come across anyone who didn’t like the show. And I really wanted them to like it. And they didn’t. Particularly A, who was so incensed by it that he couldn’t face sticking around for Act 2.

Now what’s weird is that before this, I would have assumed we all had similar senses of humor, based on conversation as well as similar tastes in film and television. I still can’t comprehend how differently the show was perceived by each of us. B, who had heard nothing but positive things about it, and wanted to see it, had expected something completely different based on what he’d heard in the press. He came away from it, I think, not finding it particularly funny, and finding the song “Everyone’s A Little Bit Racist” to be extremely offensive. He didn’t think it was ok to laugh about this topic, and that the song was mocking races via stereotypes rather than racism itself.

Now personally, I think B missed the point. The point of that song is to say yes, everyone has racist tendencies, but as long as we all admit and accept that, maybe it won’t be so taboo, and maybe that would help different races to talk about their differences in an attempt for understanding. It’s a topic that’s never done lightheartedly and while it is a topic that needs serious discussion, it’s refreshing to see a humorous take on it. I just don’t quite get why he was so offended by this, and have to chalk it up to cultural differences. Americans and Europeans must have vastly different ideas about what is ok to talk about, and what is unacceptably offensive material.

Far more offended was A, although I really wish he had stayed for Act 2, where everything comes together. We get more in tune with the characters, we learn a moral lesson and of course, laugh a lot more. So it’s hard for me to give full legitimacy to his opinions when he only saw the first half. If I understand correctly, his main argument was actually that the show is very dated. He saw the characters to be stereotypes and stock figures, particularly that of Rod, the closeted gay guy. He didn’t think there was anything funny or interesting about it and that this kind of material is not needed in the West End, and is ten years behind the times. He is currently composing a complaint letter to the producers, which I’ll gladly attach here when he finishes it.

My rebuttal to that line of thinking is that maybe America is ten years behind Britain in terms of it’s thinking. After all, it’s a sickeningly Christian and conservative nation, and even coming from NYC, it’s relatively new material for theatre. Topics like pornography and racism are definitely very new concepts for big budget Broadway shows, which are mostly attended by tourists anyway, who tend to be more conservative than the native New Yorkers. So take these subversive topics, add puppets, songs, and comedy, and I think it’s a wonderfully fresh idea for theatre. I don’t find the characters to be stereotypes - more like archetypes with whom the audience can relate. In the particularly contentious case of Rod, a closeted Republican who can’t come to terms with being gay, I know many, many people for whom this is a difficult reality. Perhaps it is easier to be gay in Britain and Europe at this point? I realize they’re more liberal than the majority of Americans but still, it’s a difficult experience for people all over the world. So where do you draw the line between archetype and stereotype?

Overall, I was just disappointed. You always want your friends to have a good time, especially when the choice of evening activities has been your idea! But the fact that their reactions ranged from lukewarm to hateful was a truly enlightening experience. It reminded me that a person’s sense of humor is a very complex thing, comprised of years of influences, coming from vastly different places for different people.

If it’s true that a good comedian is never satisfied unless he’s offended someone in the audience, then the makers of Avenue Q can sleep well, knowing they’ve succeeded!

Back in London for the week, and just for a week, so I must pick and choose wisely which shows to see in such a limited time. This production of Sam Shepard’s classic was well worth my time - but with a run time of one hour and 15 minutes, was it worth the 50 pounds spent for two tickets? And those were the half price seats. London theatre prices are increasing for every new show that opens, and now the top price for a West End musical now exceeds that of the Broadway prices (adjusting for conversions) for the first time (in my lifetime, anyway). It’s horrible and sad. Unlike the show, which was wonderful and great.

A fan of Ms. Juliet Lewis for some time now, I thought she was taking a break from acting to pursue her music career with her rock band, Juliet and the Licks. Last I knew she was touring with them. It seems she is taking a break from them to star in a West End show. Busy girl.

Mae and Eddie have a dysfunctional relationship. This is clear in the first moments we see them in a seedy motel room somewhere in the American West. The specific nature of their dysfunction becomes more clear as the action goes on, with the help of an old man in a rocking chair who speaks rarely. Also involved is Martin, Mae’s date for the evening who gets caught up in their violent, destructive dysfunction.

It’s really a sad, sad tale, about the destructive nature of love. Mae and Eddie should not be together, but they are doomed to repeat an endless cycle of loving and losing each other. In this particular episode of their lives, she has moved on and trying to create a somewhat normal life for herself. She is trying to find normalcy and happiness without him. But we see at the end that they are doomed. He only pursues her when she’s escaped, and when he succeeds in winning her yet again, he abandons her.

Each of the characters in the play would be classified as fools for love, and depicts the paths that people take when obsessed and overwhelmed by their feelings. Martin’s is the safest love. We get the feeling he’s looking for happiness and normalcy. He’s willing to get involved with the unstable Mae, in his attempt. The old man’s folly is that he was deeply and equally in love with two different women, and lead a double life. He says it was the same love, but for some reason got split into two parts. And Mae and Eddie’s love for each other is purely irrational. It’s upsetting to watch them destroy each other, because you know they’ll never stop.

Great performances all around, with the stand out cleary being Lewis. Powerful and willfull, yet emotionally conflicted and innocent, she plays the complex character brilliantly. And not as over the top white-trashily as I had assumed she would. Helping her flawless performance come to fruition is the chemistry she has with Martin Henderson as Eddie. She is the more subdued character, compared to his drunken, macho, shot-gun swinging swagger. Their chemistry is vital to the success of the production, and it really works. His American accent was shaky in the first few moments, but he slips into it and holds onto it for the remainder of the play.

Joe Duttine plays Martin, Mae’s date. He plays the part with a goofy helplessness that is both funny and pathetic. As the innocent bystander, he’s trapped in the motel room with them, totally scared of Eddie and unable to help Mae in any way. I have to say that his American accent needed work. While Henderson’s was a well done “hick” accent (a lazy drawl), Duttine’s bounced around from that, to his assumingly native English, to somewhat Bostonian at times. I’m sure the English audience wouldn’t have noticed, but the large amount of American students and tourists in the audience, surely did.

Finally, Larry Lamb, as the Old Man, is a nice addition to the cast, but the character feels a bit flat at times. Rather one dimensional, compared to the well roundedness of the other three. Perhaps this is an intentional choice, as the character is indeed a ghost and only ever seen through the eyes of Eddie. Perhaps we don’t get to see him for who he really is. And his sedated quality is a nice balance compared to the relative chaos of the world of the other three characters.

An excellent production of an American classic drama. And even though it was far too short for my liking, the quality of the production made me feel like I got my money’s worth. Even that’s not what theatre goers should really be focusing on.

The Full Monty is being done this weekend and next at Snug Harbor on Staten Island, in the Music Hall, the place where I did the Irving Berlin show last month. I was a member of the cast for one day. I then decided not to do the show due to scheduling conflicts. As much as I would have loved to be a part of it, I also wouldn’t have been able to just sit in the audience and enjoy watching it. So really, I’m glad I wasn’t in it, because it was some of the best fun I’ve had at the theatre in a very long time!

The story is not the most complex of shows, but that’s not really the point. The point is to tell a story that is both heartwarming and hilarious, and it succeeds.

Jerry lives in Buffalo, NY, (moved from the Sheffield, England locale of the film) where he used to work at a steel mill. The mill has closed, forcing him and his friend Dave out of work. They’re unemployed and miserable about it. They both want to “feel like a person instead of a slob.” Neither men are living up to their potential and it’s making their familial relations suffer. Jerry won’t be able to see his son, whom he loves more than anything, unless he can come up with the child support payments. Dave has lost interest in his wife, and to make matters worse, hates the fact that he’s overweight. Things look bleak for the both of them, that is, until they hear about a Chippendales’ -style strip show in town that had great success. They decide to put on a similar show, except in their case, they’re ‘real’ men, which is what women would prefer to see anyway. In act 2, they decide to go “the full monty,” a euphamism for full nudity, to ensure ticket sales. Their one night-only engagement would yield roughly $50,000. They do the show and make the money, but what they gain from the experience is far more than just monetary.

The casting choices are some of the best I’ve seen. John Griffin as Jerry is flawless. He doesn’t appear to be acting, he just is Jerry. And vocally, it’s challenging enough that he is able to show off his Broadway-caliber pipes, while making it sound effortless. He has a natural ease with this character that is a joy to watch.

Alan Pagano as Dave is comedic joy. To quote Chris Catt, the director, “Alan has a touch of honesty in everything he does.” I’d say more than just a touch. Every laugh line is nailed on the head, vocally he soars, and we sympathize with his all too familiar bouts of self-loathing. He makes us pity and love him. The fact that he is a touch too young for the role is forgiven due to his performance. He is effortless.

Andy Meyers as Malcom, the loser who still lives with his mom, is equally hilarious and heartwarming. The two moments I almost fell out of my chair laughing were his; 1) when he learns to do a pelvic thrust and 2) when Ethan takes of his trousers and shows off his massive appendage, and everyone else is all shocked; Malcom’s face is glowing with delight. I died. As I did during their rendition of “Big Ass Rock.” Comic gold. It looked like the part was written specifically for Mr. Meyers, it suits him that well.

Another notable performance was Nicole Juliett Libby as Georgie. Great development of character, with the physicality, vocal patterns, and goofy costuming. She managed to be funny and real even while doing something as non-acty as being asleep in a chair. Difficult task. Greg Halpen as Harold Nichols, the men’s ex-foreman and now choreographer, was excellently stiff and emasculated by his seemingly gold-diggy wife, Vikki. Vocally he’s excellent and I wished the character had more to sing in the show.

One of the most fun numbers is “Big Black Man,” sung by Gregory Allen, as Horse, the elderly black man who auditions for the show. He is so subtle and restrained in the role. Very cool and hip, with moves to match. His shock and horror when he sees his minister in their audience before the show, accompanied by his mother, is priceless.

A minor role is that of Estelle, a trashy woman with whom Jerry had a fling and is now pursuing him. Tamara Cacchione plays the role so well that even though she isn’t in many scenes, she is a well defined and interesting addition to the story.

Angel Valentin as Jerry’s son Nathan is a very talented kid with a bright future ahead of him in the theatre, if that is indeed the path he chooses. He’s already far more comfortable on stage than I am, with 20 years experience ahead of him.

The one issue I have is with the writing of the show, and the fact that it’s such a sausage party! The female characters really don’t have much to do, and mostly serve as supplementary plot devices to that of the boys. They exist in this world only because of their relationships, and it’s vaguely sexist that we don’t see more of them.

Many people think of this show as the one where they all get naked in the end. And it is. And they do. And it’s amazing. And somehow shocking, even though you know they’re going to do it. But this production (as well as Chris Catt’s direction of it) fully realizes and shows us what the playwright (Terrance McNally) was trying to do. It tells a story of triumph over adversity and coming through for your family. And it is wonderful. Perhaps I’m biased because I knew half of the cast. Yet somehow I think I would have had the same experience had I known none of them. It pains me to think they’re only running it for six performances. Far more people than will be able to see it deserve to see this show.