This production is a fun, energetic and buckle-swashing good time. It seemed pretty clear by the promotional photo (see above) that they were planning to take a lighter note with this production and I was really looking forward to it. I love the gravitas of Synetic Theatre’s more serious works but I looked forward to seeing them do a straight adventure and they mostly delivered. I will admit that I did experience a moment of pique when I realized that this was going to be one of their speaking productions, I much prefer their wordless productions but I will say that they managed to pull it off and as I saw the first pre-view performance I assume it will only get better with the repetition.

The first, second and third best parts of the performance are the actors playing Athos, Mr. Ben Cunis, Porthos, Mr. Hector Reynoso and Aramis, Mathew Ward; their performance perfectly captures the chemistry of lifelong friends and battle hardened warriors who enjoy life to the fullest knowing it may end quite summarily. I really wasn’t expecting much of the spoken portions of the production but this trio’s performance, lead by Mr. Cunis’s bedeviled Athos, felt genuine, moving and anchored the show for the rest of the performers. My favorite moment has to be the pas de deux with Mr. Cunis and Irina Tsikurishvilil (who really I can’t see enough of on stage); there was a palpable shift in energy on the stage, it’s that undefinable but utterly recognizable moment when you know what you’re seeing is exceptional. Hands down the best scene in the show.  Bravo!

For me the only off note of the production is our erstwhile D’Artagion, juxtaposed against the depth and strength of the Trio above the performance did not have the same feeling of authenticity. The remaining cast varied in performance with differing levels of facility with the spoken portions of the production. And a special nod to Robert Smith as Louis XIII, who provided a great comic performance as the buffoonish Louis XIII.

As always, Synetics productions soar during their balletic scene interpretations, and don’t imagine tutu’s when I say balletic, imagine athletic, acrobatic, energy driven, kinetic performance. I will admit I did gasp once or twice and how no one ended up impaled on a sword is a testament to the control they exert in providing us what appears to be a genuine frenzy of combat. Watching them is almost like a cardio work out by proxy.

It’s a show worth seeing and one I would rank as a family friendly production. It plays through June 9.

The latest offering from the Shakespeare Theatre Company is this pithy nearly one-man play by Eugene O’Neill. While the play is titled “Hughie” it is actually about Erie, an erstwhile gambler who has had a run of bad luck and is stumbling home to his third class hotel after a three day drunk and encounters the new, and almost entirely mute, night clerk.

Walking out of the play my first impression was “fine.” It’s a character study and was quite well acted but it didn’t really move me. It is entirely possible that Mr. O’Neill’s plays are perhaps a little too cerebral for my tastes. They seem to fall into the category of “interesting intellectual exercise” but never quite tip into the entertaining category. Or it’s possible that I’m still emotionally scarred by last season’s Sisyphean production of “Strange Interlude” and I tend to hold a grudge (ask me about The Pirate Queen sometime, if you want a good rant). But I digress. The play did keep my attention and even gave me a good chuckle here and there but my first impression was that it’s an intellectual exercise, not much more; however, in sitting down to write this and reflecting on the content of the play, there is depth to this play I did not appreciate on first viewing.

There’s the irony that Erie considers himself to be “lucky” but his “luck” as a gambler only affords him a room in a low rent residential hotel. He brags about his female conquests but they’re only tied to his winning streaks, they’re nothing of substance. His interest in the new night clerk who has replaced the former night clerk Hughie seems quirky at first not much more.

The original night clerk, Hughie, had recently taken ill and passed away and since the onset of Hughie’s illness Erie’s luck has left the building. Erie’s interest in the new night clerk is fleeting until he learns that the new night clerks name is Charlie Hughes. Hughes…Hughie…close enough to tweak the interest of the gambler. He then launches into his tales of his life and his fondness of Hughie. He probably never considered Hughie his good luck charm but has likely connected Hughie’s death to his streak of bad luck and now, with the fervor of the superstitious, erroneously connected the dots that Hughie must have been his good luck charm and perhaps, just perhaps, a Hughes is as good as a Hughie. It casts a different shadow on the play, this isn’t an affable drunk needing to expound on his life but a rather mercenary and desperate effort to regain that which he has lost. If in the next few days Erie’s luck does not change does he still attempt to cultivate the relationship? If his luck does change will he now be hanging all his hopes on a night clerk named Hughes?

In the end the play is more than I thought it was when I left the theater; it kind of stuck with me. Richard Schiff does a great job in the role although it’s possible the voice over got the biggest laughs but I think that was by design. The show is a pithy 55 minutes (perhaps in recompense of the operatic length of the last O’Neill play presented) and runs ‘til March 17^th.