BY ANNE COLEMAN

In print | Published April 2, 2009

Transforming a book into a play can be just as risky as turning it into a screenplay. Where film adaptations are at the mercy of the fans, play adaptations not only risk accusations of straying from the text, but also of being too much like the book. We go to the theater to see a play, not to hear a book, but adaptations, particularly those of classical literature, often fail to function as stand-alone works.

Take the new adaptation of Charles Dickens’ “A Tale of Two Cities,” currently playing at The People’s Light & Theatre Company, as an example. The production’s greatest shortcoming may well be the fact that it is based on a famous book.

The story of good people caught in the crossfire of the French Revolution, “A Tale of Two Cities” should be anything but dull. After removing her father (Stephen Novelli) from Paris, where he had spent eighteen years in the Bastille Prison for defying nobles, to a quiet life in London, Lucie Manette (Julianna Zinkel) becomes the object of affection for two very different, nearly identical men. The first, a Frenchman in self-imposed exile, goes by the name Charles Darnay (Michael Stewart Allen) to conceal his status as a member of the French nobility. When Darnay is accused of stealing British secrets, it is his doppelganger, Syndey Carton (Kevin Bergen), who saves the day by casting doubt on the accuracy of an eyewitness’ testimony. Carton is no match for Darnay’s cheery disposition when it comes to winning Lucie’s affection, but when Darnay is dragged into prison in France to answer for his family’s crimes, Carton is once again in the position to save the day and prove his loyalty to Lucie.

The narrative has all of the ingredients of a drama, requiring none of the action enhancement that similar classics need, but it nonetheless falls flat. Too often, characters tell, rather than show, the story, leaving the few truly engaged characters to flounder. It is a failing both of the adaptation, for which this production is the East Coast premiere, and of the direction.

The raw material is there, with an obviously talented ensemble of actors and designers, but adaptor Dwayne Hartford and director Ken Marini are held back by their focus on Dickens. “A Tale of Two Cities” is a timely and powerful story which explores the politics of fear and the struggle to remain faithful in the face of atrocities. It is a story about surviving and finding something or someone worth living and dying for, but if it weren’t for the characters telling everyone who will listen that they have done just that, then it would be possible to miss that fact until the very last scene of the play, when Sydney Carton does that “far, far better thing … than [he has] ever done.”

There are some performances, however, worth mention. Mary Elizabeth Scallen, as the revolutionary Madame Defarge, gives a fiery, impassioned performance that feels more Lady Macbeth than Dickensian in the context of this production. She is fierce and imposing, but entirely accessible; even when Mme. Defarge’s revolutionary spirit begins to look more like pure bloodlust, the audience’s connection with her is tangible.

As Miss Pross, the comedic force of the play, Marcia Saunders is engaging. Pross’ English superiority complex, very pronounced upon her arrival in Paris, gives voice to the audience’s concerns on occasion, and Saunders does an admirable job with the challenge.

Another effort worth mentioning is that of the multimedia designer, Anton Marini. Marini designed black and white synched projections and recordings that allow live actors to conduct conversations with their recorded selves and to emerge from within old film clips. His projections bridge the divide between the demands of Dickens’ text and the nature of live performance in a way that Marini’s direction alone could not have done. The number of projections is limited, however, and the device is not enough to relieve the adaptation of its limitations.

This production is more of a Cliff Notes version of the Dickens’ tale than it is a new take on the classic. It is true to the text and visually interesting — they use the space quite well — but it provides no new insight into Dickens’ work, and fails to realize its dramatic potential.

« RETURN TO LIVING & ARTS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »