Review: 'Eastland' at Chicago's Lookingglass Theatre

June 17, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Based on a true and tragic story from Chicago history, Lookingglass Theatre’s “Eastland” l (running through July 29) launches in familiar fashion.

We get a troubadour-esque musical prelude, an introduction to the optimistic innocence of passengers out for a 1915 pleasure cruise on the Chicago River, and we have the hindsight opportunity to tsk tsk at the arrogance of its captain, who doesn’t have the nautical foresight to see how the added weight of more passengers will influence the ship’s ballast.

We meet some characters—sketches, really—brought to life by a solid Chicago cast. And it feels like we are in for a trip through a lower-budget, regional version of Broadway’s “Titanic” musical.

But Eastland soon reveals itself to be something very different: A musical with the skill to stir the soul and the guts to question whether or not we have one.

When the minimal scenery dramatically changes and the body count rises, we are plunged into matters far more unsettling than iceberg-dodging. And the talented folks at the Tony-Award-winning Lookingglass aren’t about to throw in cheap romance or sentiment to mitigate the reality of the disaster.

A hero? Yes, this show sort-of has one in a supporting role. But he exists in a real world where even jaw-dropping acts of courage and selflessness are quickly forgotten while showboating celebrities (here personified by Harry Houdini) are burned into the public consciousness. I don’t know about you, but I can’t name any of the heroic people who ran into the World Trade Centers.

If I’m making “Eastland” sound grim, well, the subject matter undeniably is. It also suffers from a book whose dialogue too often over articulates (Its characters are far more effective in their less verbose scenes). But that’s mitigated by stunning design—including haunting sound effects, sudden and dramatic lighting shifts, and rich costume design abetting a breathtaking set. (If you go, make sure to get tickets with a head-on view rather than the ones on the side of the stage.)

 

Clocking in at a tight-but-never-rushed 90-plus minutes, “Eastland”--theatrically thrilling, profoundly moving, and boldly presented--is just one more reminder that the best way for Hoosiers to see great, groundbreaking theater isn’t to fly to New York—it’s to hop a bus up to Chicago.

Your thoughts?

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Liberals do not understand that marriage is not about a law or a right ... it is a rite of religous faith. Liberals want "legal" recognition of their homosexual relationship ... which is OK by me ... but it will never be classified as a marriage because marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. You can gain / obtain legal recognition / status ... but most people will not acknowledge that 2 people of the same sex are married. It's not really possible as long as marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

  2. That second phrase, "...nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens..." is the one. If you can't understand that you lack a fundamental understanding of the Constitution and I can't help you. You're blind with prejudice.

  3. Why do you conservatives always go to the marrying father/daughter, man/animal thing? And why should I keep my sexuality to myself? I see straights kissy facing in public all the time.

  4. I just read the XIV Amendment ... I read where no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property ... nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens ... I didn't see anything in it regarding the re-definition of marriage.

  5. I worked for Community Health Network and the reason that senior leadership left is because they were not in agreement with the way the hospital was being ran, how employees were being treated, and most of all how the focus on patient care was nothing more than a poster to stand behind. Hiring these analyst to come out and tell people who have done the job for years that it is all being done wrong now...hint, hint, get rid of employees by calling it "restructuring" is a cheap and easy way out of taking ownership. Indiana is an "at-will" state, so there doesn't have to be a "reason" for dismissal of employment. I have seen former employees that went through this process lose their homes, cars, faith...it is very disturbing. The patient's as well have seen less than disireable care. It all comes full circle.

ADVERTISEMENT