 |
| Emotionally
stunted: (l-r) Rogers and Dinklage in Knickerbocker. |
At
a Loss
By
Ralph Hammann
Knickerbocker
By
Jonathan Marc Sherman, directed by Nicholas Martin
Williamstown Theatre Festival; Nikos Stage, through July 19
Last week I questioned why anyone would choose to produce
a play as insignificant as the underdeveloped Children
for the season opener on the Williamstown Theatre Festival
main stage. Now, the Nikos Stage opens with a comedy that
is even more inconsequential and less funny. If matters continue
in this manner, I am afraid I shall grow nostalgic for Roger
Rees’ three-year reign of terror in which, however poorly
performed, noble works opened each season. Then, at least
a critic could rail against the ineptitude of the execution.
Now, one merely sits in befuddlement and boredom, insulted
that Nicholas Martin (WTF artistic director and Knickerbocker
director) thought the works themselves were worthy of our
time.
Knickerbocker
is so named because it concerns New Yorkers, suggests knickers
(which in turn suggests children), and is set in a restaurant
that may be named the Knickerbocker. It doesn’t really matter;
though I do think “nicked” would better describe the feeling
I had on leaving the theater after being cheated of another
two hours of my life. I mean this very earnestly: If a theater
can’t do better than this in competing with other venues of
entertainment (the diversity on Netflix alone offers ample
reason to not even leave one’s home), then it deserves no
audience. I digress. But no more so than Jonathan Marc Sherman,
who too often simply marks time in his meandering dialogue
and can’t decide whether it is a simplistic comedy about the
anxiety of parenthood or a peek at existential survival.
Sherman unsuccessfully tries to marry the two in his series
of scenes, which each feature Jerry, a 40-something New Yorker,
in separate conversations with his pregnant wife, two friends,
ex-girlfriend, and father. The supposed glue between the scenes
is the unborn child and the fears it precipitates, but Sherman
also tosses in a monologue in which Jerry tells the audience
in direct address about the sweetly absurdist plight of Roy
Sullivan, who, after having been struck by lightning seven
times during his life, committed suicide due to a broken heart.
There is an interesting idea here, one that perhaps Woody
Allen could wrest into comic truthfulness, but it is more
than Sherman can handle.
Jerry is described as having spent his whole life as the baby
in the room, and the casting of Reg Rogers in the role couldn’t
be more perfect. I am not a fan of Rogers, one of whose chief
attributes is a shock of youthfully undisciplined hair, but
credit him with the requisite energy to keep the play moving
through Sherman’s overwritten, frequently aimless babble that
riffs on its own superficiality. Among the misused actors
are the delightful Annie Parisse and Brooks Ashmanskas, who
are chiefly foils to develop the rather unengaging Jerry.
An interminable scene finds Peter Dinklage dispensing nothing
of interest as Jerry’s weed-smoking friend who embarrasses
waitresses and adds, intended or not, an inescapable physical
irony (he is a dwarf) to a discussion about being emotionally
stunted.
The only writing to periodically merit any attention lies
in the scene wherein a sublime Bob Dishy appears as Jerry’s
father. But even as Dishy elevates the proceedings to natural
comedy, almost on the level of Neil Simon, Sherman sabotages
matters with dull talk about pubescence and an overextended
joke about Jerry being uncomfortable discussing sex with his
dad.
Martin attempts to enliven matters with business for the ubiquitous
wait staff, but it all feels manufactured, and one can’t help
but think that it is chiefly in service of giving the underutilized
members of the non-Equity company something to do. He also
tries, quite ridiculously, to overcome the static nature of
the play (all the conversations take place in one restaurant
booth) by moving the booth downstage for the last third of
the play, a move that does nothing except needlessly compromise
the sightlines.
It’s all in vain, though, for Sherman’s new play is in more
need of a burping than a production; more deserving of a wet-nurse
than an audience.
|