Review Preview: "Henry VI: Blood and Roses"

OK, in a timely manner, for once. Here's the review preview for "Blood and Roses."

As exciting as it was, I'm not sure I can go out of my way to recommend it for casual theater fans, becuase it is long and somewhat demanding. That said, I still think most people, including those with an aversion to Shakspeare, might find it surprisingly exciting. The problem is keeping up with the story, but there's so much action, your attention never wanders.

As for the rest of you (and I assume most of the people who read this blog are theater fans), you simply don't want to miss this. The acting is top-notch, including numerous performances from actors new to this stage, and the the show generally rocks and rolls like one of those old Allman Brothers concerts. Rock on, Brian Crowe, and expect some of my worthless (but highly coveted) end-of-the-year awards.

Here you go:

Theater review
If you want to go:
What: “Henry VI: Blood and Roses”
When: through Nov. 11
Where: F.M. Kirby Shakespeare Theatre, 36 Madison Ave. (Route 124), Madison
How much: $28 to $52
Info: (973) 408-5600; www.shkespearenj.org

By WILLIAM WESTHOVEN
Staff Writer
Ken Burns needed 15 hours to document America’s four-year involvement in World War II. Brian B. Crowe needed only three to cover the 32-year War of the Roses, three Shakespeare plays and an intermission.
Crowe obviously was the better choice to adapt the Bard’s sprawling trilogy of Henry VI plays, Parts 1, 2 and 3, into the taut “Henry VI: Blood and Roses,” which explodes through Nov. 11 at the Shakespeare Theatre of New Jersey.
Crowe also directed this thrilling epic, wrapping up a thematic arc that began in May with the company’s season-opener, “Henry V.” Artistic director Bonnie J. Monte got the ball rolling with that one, then turned it over to Crowe to close, which he does with a noisy slam
When performed as separate entities, the “Henry VI” troika can run nine hours or more, so many past adapters have scissored Shakespeare’s fictional look at the infamous War of the Roses, which involved petty power struggles that escalated in the aftermath of the death of conquering King Henry V. “Blood and Roses” begins with V’s funeral, on the rugged, minimalist set used for “Henry V,” now clearly in decay. Also prominent is the scaffold-like London Bridge (used in “Henry V” for prop storage), with plenty of posts to hold severed heads. They are put to good use in the second act.
To detail the plot would require an adapter to fit this space, but young Henry VI’s (grammer-schooler Daniel Marconi is a marvel in a demanding role) peaceful world is being torn apart by his squabbling uncles, protectors and mentors.
The scorecard includes Gloucester (John Hickok), the Bishop of Winchester (William Metzo) and Suffolk (Fletcher McTaggart). York (Rufus Collins) and Somerset (Joe Discher) have their own ambitions, but are more interested in fighting each other.
Suffolk takes the early lead by fixing up Henry with the lovely Margaret (Angela Pierce). By now, Henry’s a sweet young man (Ryan Farley) in way over his head. He’s got no stomach for war, and clutches his Bible like a warm puppy. His wife, however, is always up for a fight, and plots with her lover, Suffolk, to seize power.
The players alternate forming conspiracies with fighting battles, and the pattern repeats for most of the evening. But Crowe’s sharp scissors and knack for staging action keeps the story rolling downhill, picking up speed as it goes along. Some battles last only a few seconds, but fight choreographer Doug West makes the most of every moment. At one point, a new scene begins to play while a battle, already under way, rages on in the background.
More than two-dozen actors execute this complex production with dazzling precision, exiting in the wings, switching costumes and then making dramatic entrances seconds later from the back of the theater.
Hickok and Metzo are memorable sparring partners in the first act, as Gloucester’s steely resolve infuriates the devilishly nasty Winchester. Pierce and McTaggart also raise some heat as the passionate conspirators. Farley tempers the passion with his sad-eyed Henry, who just looks like he needs a hug.
The second act is like a game of Risk, as unstable alliances are formed, armies are broken, players switch sides and the fighting resumes. As the lead players’ severed heads accumulate on the bridge, second-line characters rise in profile, including Scott Whitehurst as the mercurial Earl of Warwick and Derek Wilson as Richard, the homicidal humpback who would later surface as the infamous Richard III. Wilson has turned in some nice work on this stage, mostly in gentlemanly roles. He shows some surprising range here, a frightening sight with stringy hair and flashing an evil grin while declaring “I can smile, and murder while I smile.”
Crowe adds a nod to last year’s startling production of “Richard III,” adding the gasping sound effect used in that show as Richard makes his final exit.
The Shakespeare Theatre has a well-deserved reputation for making what looks like easy work out of difficult productions. “Blood and Roses” raises the bar in Madison by whipping three at once. The only problem is, what do they do for an encore?