This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/31/theater/liaisons-dangereuses-review.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Review: ‘Les Liaisons Dangereuses’ Uses Love as a Weapon Review: ‘Les Liaisons Dangereuses’ Uses Sex as a Weapon
(about 11 hours later)
In the high-stakes sport of extreme stage acting, Janet McTeer and Liev Schreiber are champion cliff divers. Give them an emotional precipice to jump from, and they’ll soar through the air and stick the landing.In the high-stakes sport of extreme stage acting, Janet McTeer and Liev Schreiber are champion cliff divers. Give them an emotional precipice to jump from, and they’ll soar through the air and stick the landing.
Think of Ms. McTeer’s dawning, devastating disillusionment as the pet wife in “A Doll’s House,” or Mr. Schreiber having the mother of all meltdowns in “Talk Radio.” Or Ms. McTeer competing with a rainstorm and winning as the title character of “Mary Stuart.” And Mr. Schreiber casting a slime of moral pollution over everything that moves as Iago in “Othello.”Think of Ms. McTeer’s dawning, devastating disillusionment as the pet wife in “A Doll’s House,” or Mr. Schreiber having the mother of all meltdowns in “Talk Radio.” Or Ms. McTeer competing with a rainstorm and winning as the title character of “Mary Stuart.” And Mr. Schreiber casting a slime of moral pollution over everything that moves as Iago in “Othello.”
I could dwell on those performances endlessly. Unfortunately, my immediate duty compels me to consider these figures of natural grandeur in the state of unnatural captivity into which they have been penned in “Les Liaisons Dangereuses,” which opened on Sunday night at the Booth Theater, a production during which you pray for their deliverance.I could dwell on those performances endlessly. Unfortunately, my immediate duty compels me to consider these figures of natural grandeur in the state of unnatural captivity into which they have been penned in “Les Liaisons Dangereuses,” which opened on Sunday night at the Booth Theater, a production during which you pray for their deliverance.
You see, Christopher Hampton’s adaptation of Pierre Choderlos de Laclos’s 1782 novel of nasty musical beds in ancien régime France takes place amid a thin, rarefied air that is as much perfume as oxygen. It demands that its duplicitous characters — and especially the aristocratic manipulators in chief at its center — be as exquisitely arch and artificial as their environment.You see, Christopher Hampton’s adaptation of Pierre Choderlos de Laclos’s 1782 novel of nasty musical beds in ancien régime France takes place amid a thin, rarefied air that is as much perfume as oxygen. It demands that its duplicitous characters — and especially the aristocratic manipulators in chief at its center — be as exquisitely arch and artificial as their environment.
When this play was first seen on Broadway in 1987, in a Royal Shakespeare Company production staged by Howard Davies (a director of novelistic finesse who died last week), Lindsay Duncan and Alan Rickman slithered into its leading roles with the avidity of sleek, sexy foxes in a henhouse. In the same parts, Ms. McTeer and Mr. Schreiber come across as magnificent bulls who have strayed into a Limoges china shop.When this play was first seen on Broadway in 1987, in a Royal Shakespeare Company production staged by Howard Davies (a director of novelistic finesse who died last week), Lindsay Duncan and Alan Rickman slithered into its leading roles with the avidity of sleek, sexy foxes in a henhouse. In the same parts, Ms. McTeer and Mr. Schreiber come across as magnificent bulls who have strayed into a Limoges china shop.
They are portraying the Marquise de Merteuil and the Vicomte de Valmont, conspirators in crimes of the — well, not the heart so much as what lies below the waist, though hearts are broken in the process. Former and perhaps future lovers, they engage in sexual conquest as a competition in score settling and military strategizing, and pride themselves on being able to charm the chemise off anybody.They are portraying the Marquise de Merteuil and the Vicomte de Valmont, conspirators in crimes of the — well, not the heart so much as what lies below the waist, though hearts are broken in the process. Former and perhaps future lovers, they engage in sexual conquest as a competition in score settling and military strategizing, and pride themselves on being able to charm the chemise off anybody.
Laclos’s epistolary novel has a chilling, claustrophobic elegance. In adapting it to the stage, Mr. Hampton opened up the events described into a luxurious indoor battlefield, in which combatants exchange brittle epigrams and coded innuendos. Spoken in English, with plummy accents to match, “Liaisons” is in danger of sounding like one of those racy London drawing room comedies of yesteryear, with titles that lean heavily on words like “scandal” and “indiscretion.”Laclos’s epistolary novel has a chilling, claustrophobic elegance. In adapting it to the stage, Mr. Hampton opened up the events described into a luxurious indoor battlefield, in which combatants exchange brittle epigrams and coded innuendos. Spoken in English, with plummy accents to match, “Liaisons” is in danger of sounding like one of those racy London drawing room comedies of yesteryear, with titles that lean heavily on words like “scandal” and “indiscretion.”
Directed by Josie Rourke, this latest “Liaisons,” a production of the Donmar Warehouse in London, falls into the trap of such broadness early and lies there, gesticulating madly, for more than two and a half hours. Occasionally something like real feeling raises its startled head — especially in the second act, when Valmont falls in love despite himself. But such twinges of authentic emotion are more disruptive than illuminating.Directed by Josie Rourke, this latest “Liaisons,” a production of the Donmar Warehouse in London, falls into the trap of such broadness early and lies there, gesticulating madly, for more than two and a half hours. Occasionally something like real feeling raises its startled head — especially in the second act, when Valmont falls in love despite himself. But such twinges of authentic emotion are more disruptive than illuminating.
It appears to have been Ms. Rourke’s intention to create a historical distance between then and now, perhaps as a means of justifying the high floridity of what follows. When first seen, Tom Scutt’s grand salon has a look of cobwebbed desuetude, with its peeling walls and furniture sheathed in dusty plastic.It appears to have been Ms. Rourke’s intention to create a historical distance between then and now, perhaps as a means of justifying the high floridity of what follows. When first seen, Tom Scutt’s grand salon has a look of cobwebbed desuetude, with its peeling walls and furniture sheathed in dusty plastic.
Then out of the shadows (Mark Henderson did the expert lighting), rather like the reanimated royal court in the opera “The Ghosts of Versailles,” step the play’s cast of characters, in ravishing period garb (also by Mr. Scutt). The female ensemble members circulate singing creepy baroque-style “oohs” (the music is by Michael Bruce), and hopes are kindled that this might be a spooky deluxe treat for the Halloween season.Then out of the shadows (Mark Henderson did the expert lighting), rather like the reanimated royal court in the opera “The Ghosts of Versailles,” step the play’s cast of characters, in ravishing period garb (also by Mr. Scutt). The female ensemble members circulate singing creepy baroque-style “oohs” (the music is by Michael Bruce), and hopes are kindled that this might be a spooky deluxe treat for the Halloween season.
The voice Ms. McTeer adopts for the occasion suggests as much. It is cavernously deep and sonorous, as if she were auditioning to replace Angelina Jolie in a sequel to “Maleficent.” Her movements are equally exaggerated and menacing. Though the Marquise de Merteuil is widely perceived as the epitome of kindly politesse, to whom people (unwisely) turn in distress, Ms. McTeer plays her as someone from whom little children would surely shrink in terror.The voice Ms. McTeer adopts for the occasion suggests as much. It is cavernously deep and sonorous, as if she were auditioning to replace Angelina Jolie in a sequel to “Maleficent.” Her movements are equally exaggerated and menacing. Though the Marquise de Merteuil is widely perceived as the epitome of kindly politesse, to whom people (unwisely) turn in distress, Ms. McTeer plays her as someone from whom little children would surely shrink in terror.
In contrast, Mr. Schreiber — who is usually musky with sex appeal (as in “Ray Donovan” on television) — comes across as cloddish and amiable, an old-old-school frat boy stuck in culottes and an unflattering wig. His Vicomte is a cad, sure, but a jovial one.In contrast, Mr. Schreiber — who is usually musky with sex appeal (as in “Ray Donovan” on television) — comes across as cloddish and amiable, an old-old-school frat boy stuck in culottes and an unflattering wig. His Vicomte is a cad, sure, but a jovial one.
When it comes to plotting the demise of others, via romantic conquest, the Marquise and the Vicomte behave like figures in a Restoration comedy, hiding behind screens and signaling each other with grimaces and rolled eyes behind the backs of others. Their victims — embodied by, among others, the preternaturally poised Danish actress Birgitte Hjort Sorensen, Raffi Barsoumian and the delightfully callow Elena Kampouris — come off as particularly clueless.When it comes to plotting the demise of others, via romantic conquest, the Marquise and the Vicomte behave like figures in a Restoration comedy, hiding behind screens and signaling each other with grimaces and rolled eyes behind the backs of others. Their victims — embodied by, among others, the preternaturally poised Danish actress Birgitte Hjort Sorensen, Raffi Barsoumian and the delightfully callow Elena Kampouris — come off as particularly clueless.
The unceasing cleverness in conversation wears thin, and the exchange of polished aperçus often sounds like ersatz Oscar Wilde. (“I’m not sure at all how appropriate an emotion love is, particularly within marriage,” or, “I see she writes as badly as she dresses.”) Still, the audience with which I saw the show chuckled happily over these lines, as well as double-entendre-laden spins on familiar phrases like “stiffen his resolve” or “back in the saddle.”The unceasing cleverness in conversation wears thin, and the exchange of polished aperçus often sounds like ersatz Oscar Wilde. (“I’m not sure at all how appropriate an emotion love is, particularly within marriage,” or, “I see she writes as badly as she dresses.”) Still, the audience with which I saw the show chuckled happily over these lines, as well as double-entendre-laden spins on familiar phrases like “stiffen his resolve” or “back in the saddle.”
Ultimately, though, “Liaisons” is not a comedy, or not only that. Merteuil and Valmont wind up inflicting devastating injuries not only on others but also themselves. In registering their characters’ personal experience of these casualties, Ms. McTeer and Mr. Schreiber finally come into their own. But the visceral immediacy of their performances here seems wrenchingly out of context and reveals the ornamental thinness of the surrounding play.Ultimately, though, “Liaisons” is not a comedy, or not only that. Merteuil and Valmont wind up inflicting devastating injuries not only on others but also themselves. In registering their characters’ personal experience of these casualties, Ms. McTeer and Mr. Schreiber finally come into their own. But the visceral immediacy of their performances here seems wrenchingly out of context and reveals the ornamental thinness of the surrounding play.
Mr. Schreiber, by the way, has the unenviable task of enacting Valmont’s seduction of the virginal Cecile (Ms. Kampouris), in a scene that begins as rape and ends with the young woman’s enthusiastic acceptance of erotic pleasure. Given the current national conversation about sexual consent, it is scarcely surprising that the laughter this encounter elicits is fitful and uneasy. You half expect a throng of outraged protesters to mob the stage, bearing placards that read “Non means Non!”Mr. Schreiber, by the way, has the unenviable task of enacting Valmont’s seduction of the virginal Cecile (Ms. Kampouris), in a scene that begins as rape and ends with the young woman’s enthusiastic acceptance of erotic pleasure. Given the current national conversation about sexual consent, it is scarcely surprising that the laughter this encounter elicits is fitful and uneasy. You half expect a throng of outraged protesters to mob the stage, bearing placards that read “Non means Non!”