Corrections: The program of “Macbeth: We’re Shaking Up Shakespeare” clearly states that this performance's location is Brazil. In addition, the dildo mentioned in this review was in fact a candle, a phallic symbol in the tradition of the cultural group noted in the program.
After the audience waited more than an hour for the play to begin Jan. 24 at the Charles H. Wright Museum of African-American History, an announcer came on stage and said the show would promptly begin in 15 minutes.
As the lights dimmed and the actors prepared to take their places, the announcer bellowed, “Macbeth: We’re Shaking Up Shakespeare.” This was the point where it would have been wise to simply get up, walk out and go see the Tutankhamen Exhibit.
The lights came up and a woman kneeled before the audience. As two other women entered, she raised her head to reveal makeup artistry much like Mimi from “The Drew Carey Show” and was dressed in cheesy medieval garb. The other two who were dressed in a similar manner, only with significantly less makeup, began delivering the lines of the three witches.
According to a flier for the play, the women weren’t witches but three Condomble practitioners. Condomble is the Yoruba (West African) based religious teaching with a following in Brazil. This, however, was not mentioned at any point during the play. Nor was it mentioned in the program that the play was supposed to take place in modern day Brazil.
The performers simply threw this at the audience, much like the way they made Macbeth into a coke head.
The stage was completely minimalist in the furthest interpretation of the word. The only thing on stage was scaffolding that was sparsely covered in tie-dyed sheets. It sat between the curtains and served as an entrance to the stage.
Few props were used, but the more memorable ones include a humongous flashlight that shone in the eyes of the audience and a dildo that drew shock and embarrassed laughter from the crowd.
Bizarre costumes and makeup continued throughout the play, and instead of making it easier for the audience, they made the matter even more confusing.
With the exception of the actors who played Lady Macbeth (Angela Roberts) and Macbeth (Sean Rodriguez), almost every actor filled multiple roles — to disastrous results. All of the characters blurred together because the actors adopted the same manner of speech and body language for all of the characters they played.
It was hard enough to discern who was who because not only did the actors use new Brazilian names, but also the directors, Wyldchild L. Chemist and Bernard L. Causey, changed the gender of many characters.
The most confusing character was Donalbain (Antonio Rosaro), who was played by a man in a wig and heels. He looked every bit as ridiculous as he must have felt. It was clear that he was embarrassed to play the role because he delivered all of his lines to the ground and never fixed the wig that obscured his entire face.
The purpose of giving the play a modern setting and updated costumes was to provide young people with a better understanding of Shakespeare’s language. At this, the 4Theatrsake company failed. The actors did not understand what they were saying, making it impossible for the audience to follow them.
They made crude changes to Shakespeare’s work and inserted lewd references that caused an entire row of the audience to get up and leave. Perhaps its next production will be better, but for now, 4Theatrsake is on the list of companies to avoid at all costs.
3 comments
I find the tone of your reply completely absent of any real substance. It seems that you have no concrete support for your "interpretation" of Shakespeare's work, therefore leaving you with no other avenue of criticism beyond personally attacking Mr. Mock. How you would have any understanding of his own personal background one is left to wonder. Using President Obama as rational seems a cheap and cliche support of your own ideas of the arts. Obama stands for change, not desecration. Furthermore, it is insulting that you insinuate the diversity of Detroit requires a cheap price tag in order to appreciate a great work of literature. Of course your comment about high school students enjoying sexual humor is no surprise, because what high schoolers find amusing is often crude. You seem to be insinuating that all theatre goers "of this great city" are only capable of enjoying and understanding Shakespeare at the high school level. This is no insult to the students themselves, but it seems that you as a director have not evolved beyond the "dildo" level.