Making the best of a free Sunday afternoon in Manhattan- a friend and I wandered over to the theater district hoping for a pair of student rush tickets and were surprised to find that Equus (which ends its engagement on 2/8/2009) had a pair still available. I first read this play sometime during my sophomore year of college while procrastinating for a final and found it rather intriguing- if a bit dated- and was unfortunately married to the image of Anthony Hopkins as Dr. Dysart (after reading the original cast list) from the outset. This revival wasn't half bad...The main problem I- or anyone with a background in social science- will have with Equus is Shaffer's armchair understanding of psychoanalysis. Rare in the 1970s (when the play was written) and almost unheard of in the contemporary mental health scene (as a primary means of therapy, at least), Shaffer applies a Freudian pastiche of therapeutic techniques to establish a level of rapport (and mutual dependence...) between the doctor and the patient.
Moreover, Shaffer takes this flip treatment as his opportunity to critique the mental health profession as cold and sterile which is, ironically, even more relevant (despite the dated content of the play) given the prevalence of chemical therapy as a primary means of treatment. Still and all, Shaffer never claimed to be representing factual events or methods and so I suppose he's entitled to a bit of poetic license in terms of content.
This run of the play saw a much more avuncular version of Dr. Dysart played wonderfully by Richard Griffiths (Mr. Dursley, if you must). This reimagining was a far more frayed and jaded character than the cold, detached, almost nihilistic character portrayed by Anthony Hopikins, but it worked. In terms of the other headliner: Daniel Radcliffe's performance was impressive, if bland. I never saw the role of Alan Strang as a particularly challenging one (nudity aside) for an actor and the temptation to overcommit to the character's mental state- or, going "full retard" (Downey Jr., 2008)- is always something of a hazard in a play such as this. Radcliffe's Strang was more or less the same performance that you saw from him in Harry Potter: Order of the Phoenix... but with more angst and yelling (if such a thing can be imagined). On the whole, the chemistry- as my companion pointed out- between the cast members was palpable at one never felt distracted by the story by the posturing of one actor's performance in a particular scene.
What was distracting, however, were the horses. While I dug the modern costuming and dance element, and was very pleased with the costumer's decision to choose a classically Greek horse head icon which resonated nicely with both the conflation of the equine with the divine as well as Dysart's preoccupation with Greek mythology, I did not enjoy the stomp-clomp-romp that was the dance numbers that the horses performed. While walking out of their stables. And lining up for their first appearance on stage. And shortly after (spoiler alert!) having their eyes gouged out by a denuded Harry Potter. A little less Lion King and a little more unobtrusiveness would have made them an incredible gestalt character but given the hyper-modern (and delightfully minimalist!) set design I suppose some level of modern dance was unavoidable.
This run of the play saw a much more avuncular version of Dr. Dysart played wonderfully by Richard Griffiths (Mr. Dursley, if you must). This reimagining was a far more frayed and jaded character than the cold, detached, almost nihilistic character portrayed by Anthony Hopikins, but it worked. In terms of the other headliner: Daniel Radcliffe's performance was impressive, if bland. I never saw the role of Alan Strang as a particularly challenging one (nudity aside) for an actor and the temptation to overcommit to the character's mental state- or, going "full retard" (Downey Jr., 2008)- is always something of a hazard in a play such as this. Radcliffe's Strang was more or less the same performance that you saw from him in Harry Potter: Order of the Phoenix... but with more angst and yelling (if such a thing can be imagined). On the whole, the chemistry- as my companion pointed out- between the cast members was palpable at one never felt distracted by the story by the posturing of one actor's performance in a particular scene.
What was distracting, however, were the horses. While I dug the modern costuming and dance element, and was very pleased with the costumer's decision to choose a classically Greek horse head icon which resonated nicely with both the conflation of the equine with the divine as well as Dysart's preoccupation with Greek mythology, I did not enjoy the stomp-clomp-romp that was the dance numbers that the horses performed. While walking out of their stables. And lining up for their first appearance on stage. And shortly after (spoiler alert!) having their eyes gouged out by a denuded Harry Potter. A little less Lion King and a little more unobtrusiveness would have made them an incredible gestalt character but given the hyper-modern (and delightfully minimalist!) set design I suppose some level of modern dance was unavoidable.
