But oddly, although this “Hamlet” is admirably done and very entertaining, it is not the sole thing. It has to share billing with its occasion, the final directorial grand gesture of the Pittsburgh Public Theater’s longtime producing artistic director, Ted Pappas.
1 comment:
While I have not see the production, this review is really interesting because either Rawson praises the production and really digs into some of the actors and production elements. I can see how the elements that Rawson talks about could fall flat. Particularly, in Shakespeare one actor can bring the whole scene down. I could see how that happens. But in the article itself, the reviewer praises this as “Pappas’ best production,” but at the same time really digs into certain areas of the production. For example, the sound design, where I can see how a design could undermine the play like that, but at the same time I don’t really see the two comments gelling together. I like that Rawson acknowledges that Hamlet is difficult to produce. Both because of its reputation and its intricacies. Overall the play sounds like something worth seeing, it would be interesting to compare with other Public productions.
Post a Comment