Peter Pan and Wendy

By the American Repertory Theatre, Cambridge

(Keep in mind as you read my review that I love the Disney version of Peter Pan and that I am very familiar with the show, having directed it before for a children's cast. Someone not so enamored and attached to the Disney version might not have as strong an opinion of this translation.)

What were they thinking? By taking out all the music and many of the fantasy elements they seemed to be attempting to make it more realistic and less fantasy, however it means less or NO willing suspension of disbelief with which to appreciate the show - which is still a fantasy, no matter how it's slaughtered. Another patron leaving the theatre was overheard commenting, "Willing suspension of disbelief did not occur in this show," and I have to admit I agree with her opinion. The show is well-acted and technically good, but that did not compensate for the poor concept of this translation for me.

If they want it to be more realistic, as it appears the point may have been, what then is the point of having combined the maid and the dog characters into one?!- In this show the maid IS the dog standing upright with a dress and apron and with a huge bulldog head - Very weird, very confusing and very contradictory to the non-fantasy concept.

If they're going to translate Peter Pan by taking out all the best parts of it like the singing and dancing and fantasy and the really neat dog and visual effect of the crocodile, what is added instead should be stunning and shocking and add something unique and special to the show. It wasn't. I would rather be blown away by something horrible than left so empty - for instance - If Peter didn't let Wendy back into her bedroom after all and she returned to Neverland heartbroken, or if we saw Peter grown up and still in Neverland as the next generation Captain Hook with Slightly and Tootles as his pirates and the next gen. of lost boys as his arch-rivals, or even have Tinkerbell fly in on the kissing Wendy and Peter and in her jealousy blow them flat down on the floor - dead. Heck, Egloff doesn't even keep the lovely cyclic effect of having Peter return years later to find Wendy's daughter, Jane, and take her back to Neverland with him.

The flying is done well, though behind the window and very brief. The entire next scene is done with no visuals and is audio-only and in the dark, but seems to be coming from different parts of the auditorium as they fly to Neverland. It is difficult to follow without visuals, but for such a concept, it is technically well done, to the point of several people looking around the auditorium to see if we could see them. I would have liked to see the action once they arrived in Neverland and Peter leaves them alone and terrified, but this part, too, is only audio.

Justin Campbell does a good job in the role of the rebellious teenager, Peter Pan, who seems drawn to Wendy for more than her motherly qualities. With his spiky hair, neon green t-shirt and scuffy Bermuda length shorts and Tinkerbell with wild unkempt neon blue hair, a torn dress, Doc Martens for footwear, and her pessimistic 'Tude which she wears over everything, it's easier to see how he and Tink would be a better couple than he and Wendy - even if Tink's possessive jealousy would allow it. Nora Zimmett almost steals the show with her freezing the little boys trick and her teenage angst, but she is just a bit too pessimistic to grab everyone.

The role of Wendy seems confused. She starts the show pretending she is pregnant and dreaming of a magical boy from the stars who would come to her. She seems to want to be in love with him, but when Peter finally comes, she is drawn to go with him because of his promises of seeing mermaids, not just to be with him. When he reneges on his promise she is heartbroken and refuses even his consolation. She is terribly torn between fantasy and reality. Finally she decides she must return home and gives up on Peter. Once home she finds him there and makes him promise to return and visit her. This is one confused teenager - well at least THAT's realistic. Emma Roberts does a fine job acting our her confused role of Wendy.

Jason Weinberg as John, does a superb job as the older brother. The first scene in which he is playfighting with brother Michael, played by William Dunn, on the bed, is particularly well acted. In Neverland John is stuffy and down to Earth. One moment of dramatic intensity happens when Michael, played by William Dunn, refuses to go home and doesn't even remember home.

Remo Airaldi and Jeremy Rabb also turn in outstanding humorous performances as Tootles and Slightly respectively. They have very childlike mannerisms and voices and despite their adult bodies, and manage to give credibility to their parts. Effective costume design by Catherine Zuber is also helpful.

Mr. and Mrs. Darling, played by Jeremy Geidt and Karen McDonald, effect their angst well. The longer the children are gone, the more spacey and disheveled Mrs. Darling gets and then a bit later the father enters wearing a dog leash and collar and sleeping in the doghouse to demonstrate his guilt.

Will LeBow is a paranoid frustrated man-who-never-grew-up Captain Hook (and MUCH better in his role of Tiresias in The Bacchae). He and his cohorts, Skylight played by Robert Kropf, and Smee, played by Stephen Rowe, have been given roles which disappointingly aren't particularly funny and aren't disgustingly evil either. Their entrances are accompanied by 60's "hippy style" music, lending an impression that they're on a strange drug trip. On a very minor note, I found the diagonal angle of Skylight's glass mohawk a very intelligent choice as the audience could see the whole of it whether he faced forward or sideways at ninety degrees to the audience.

Be warned that this is not the Peter Pan you might think you remember or have heard so much about, nor is it a show for children. This refined and somewhat modernized adult version of Peter Pan has ripped the guts out of the fantasy of Peter Pan and despite the talented acting and technical excellence, left me empty in sharp contrast to the ART's wonderful translation of The Bacchae (in repertory at the same time), which I loved and felt thoroughly enriched by.

~Angel

entire contents © 1997-8 by Angel