Orpheus X

I started a big post about Orpheus X, which we saw last night at Zero Arrow Theater in Cambridge.  I’m annoyed, of course, that I somehow lost the post (despite an attempt to copy and paste), so I’ll just say this:

I would have emphasized some different things.  There’s far too much mopey Orpheus and not enough character development.  Given that, I would have concentrated more on Orpheus’s journey to Hades and what happens when he gets there.  But really, I would have fleshed out the emotional and philosophical pieces more in the early going rather than just having that part drag on.  John Kelly was wonderful–believable, good voice, good physical presence… Queen of the Dead?  Yes, indeed.  Eckert did not impress me, I’m afraid.  As with seemingly every ART performance, the visuals were very good (except a few of the video bits with Eckert at the end that just seemed ridiculous to me).  I’m not generally a rock opera person (didn’t realize that’s what we were getting into when I bought the tickets), and a good bit of the music didn’t work for me, but some at the end was effective.  It was all worth it for Kelly and the staging.  Hanson was pretty good, too, as far as what she had to work with allowed her to be.

Leave a Comment

If you would like to make a comment, please fill out the form below.

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Comments

1 Comment so far
  1. Ezra April 15, 2006 12:50 am

    >somehow lost the post
    What happened? Just blank screen again?

    See, I think the whole A.R.T. aesthetic is so un-naturalistic that normally I’d not think of criticizing them for a lack of character development. But you’ve got a point in this case. The fact that Eckert chose to make Orpheus and Eurydice strangers, yet Orpheus is still so obsessed with Eurydice’s death, it really does beg for some kind of at least nominal naturalistic explanation.

    And, as discussed last night, what is up with the “X” thing? Gimme a break.