Caesar Packs Strong Acting, Questionable Direction
Julius Caesar Review

by Christen Thomas

"For I have neither wit, nor words, nor worth,/ Action, nor utterance, nor the power of speech/ To stir men's blood..."

Marc Antony says this in his speech at Caesar's funeral in the third act of Julius Caesar, presented at the Olmsted Theatre October 8-13 and directed by Professor Brian Rose. It wasn't until this speech, in this act, that I was first stirred and first became invested in the play. The character of Antony is the model politician, powerfully but covertly stirring the hearts of his listeners to war. Passionately and engagingly portrayed by Brendan Keith, this pivotal second scene in act three began the second half of Adelphi's production.

There were times when the feeling of this scene was like that of a revival, with the dead title character lying on the stage, and Antony exciting the Plebian mass to go out and avenge the death of their idealized leader. And it was the excitement and the smooth talking of the politicians that clarified the parallel the production attempted to make between the larger ideas of Caesar and today's political climate. Adelphi's production of the classic Shakespeare work was transported in time from Ancient Rome to a kind of Brave New World-no time. While in theory removing the play from its historical context aids in highlighting the timelessness of the idea of politicians and the way they influence society, the lack of one clear direction in theme distracted from the power of that point.

Entering the theatre before the play began, the dramatically sparse set created curiosity as to how the director would use the blank white canvas of the stage and the two frames created by the varying heights of the steps and pillars to paint his idea of Julius Caesar. The initial image was that of a projection of Shakespeare's face against the blank back wall. This idea of the use of projections initially seemed like an interesting concept. As much as Caesar is about the historical figure of the man, it is even more about the way that Caesar projected himself and affected those who loved him and those who killed him. However, the projections were not consistently used in a unifying way. In fact, where Adelphi generally integrates technical aspects smoothly and complimentarily, in this production, I was disappointed in the use of lights on the whiteness of the stage.

Another aspect of technology in the show that I found problematic was the use of modern laptops, palm pilots and communication devises in the plot. If the time of the events unfolding was modern day, and the costumes matched this idea, perhaps the use of these accessories to modern living would not have bothered me as much. However, when a commander is studying a palm pilot standing before his soldiers who are about to go into battle and fight with sticks, I have a problem with continuity which is frankly distracting. Soldiers marched about the stage wearing ammunition belts, yet charged into each other with knives. If the idea was to create a Blade Runner-esque world, which use Asian elements with mixing of suits and mismatched peasant clothing, a commitment to one style, and one theme needed to be adhered to.

These are all technical and directorial aspects that distracted and detracted from the show. Beyond that, there were some truly good moments within the production. Robbie Grossman, as Cassius, was a very convincing slick and slimy politician, working all the angles at his disposal to convince Brutus that Caesar was a threat to liberty in Rome. He and his cronies, dressed in their shiny suits, formed alliances and convinced doubters that the beloved ruler needed to be removed. Jessica Clunn as Casca, a wealthy and blunt senator, was effectively crude.

The two "women" in the show, Portia, Brutus' wife and Calpurnia, Caesar's wife, were played with hysterical urgency by Sara-Michelle Bickweat and Kristen Beckmann, respectively. Both women were tapped into the supernatural and had portents of the tragedy that befell Caesar. The embodiment of the supernatural was played in an interesting mannger by Natalie Vincent, the Soothsayer, who so famously warns Caesar against the "Ides of March." Though she was not always on stage speaking, she frequently haunted the corners of the stage and the backs of crowds, a reminder of the evil that became alive among the citizens of Rome.

Caesar also employed a large cast of citizens and workers who filled various roles as soldiers, servants and Plebeians. Among the ensemble, Naima Moffett-Warden as a sarcastic Cobbler, Ray Munoz as the wrongly beaten poet Cinna, and Dennis Setteducati as a Carpenter and poet stood out among the masses as true characters. Unfortunately, many of the other characters faded into the whitewashed walls of the stage, failing to create memorable or relatable moments with the few lines they had. And though I appreciate the sheer volume of lines that had to be memorized, I never felt that Brutus' character emerged from the words that Megan Lohne delivered. While the titular role of this history dies in the third act, Brutus has the most struggle, the most internal conflict, and perhaps the most power in the story; and I never was never convinced that Brutus believed in what he was doing to the dictator of his state. I questioned the intensity of his relationships with Cassius, his friend, Portia, his wife, and Caesar himself.

In the same scene that Antony steals the hearts of the Plebeians to his cause, he repeats the line, "Brutus says [Caesar] was ambitious…" I went into Adelphi's production of Julius Caesar thinking it was ambitious to attempt this play. Shakespeare is always a challenge, one that is frequently rewarding, but always a gamble. Any Shakespeare one sees is likely to have some spin on it, and that modern idea which is to be imposed on such a timeless and known work can be brilliant or it can fail. This production of Caesar was ambitious, and there were moments of interesting, ironic, thought-provoking and good theater. However, those were heavily countered by the apparent lack of any clear and consistent direction in theme, and a frequent lack in direction of emotion and motivation.