Review: Civic's 'The Drowsy Chaperone'

September 9, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 In 2009, when I saw the national tour of “The Drowsy Chaperone” at IU Auditorium, I wrote:

“…I'm speculating that future productions at Beef & Boards, Footlite Musicals and/or Indianapolis Civic Theatre will be successful ones, thanks to the shows tight book, charming lead character/narrator, gags large and small, and a set of clever, catchy songs…. I'm confident a production by any of the aforementioned three local theaters would be just as fun, if not more.”

Well, my confidence has been gloriously justified by Booth Tarkington Civic Theatre (formerly Indianapolis Civic Theater) with a production of “The Drowsy Chaperone” that not only exceeds in overall quality anything I’ve seen on any Civic stage, but simultaneously puts that national non-Equity tour to shame.

Yes, it’s that good.

The piece, in case you are unfamiliar, concerns an unnamed lonely gent who finds solace in recordings of old musicals. He shares with the audience a recording of a 1920s lark called "The Drowsy Chaperone" and, as the record plays, the highlights come to life in his apartment.

The challenge of the show, as I wrote in my earlier review, is to balance the intimacy of the loner's life--we need to be close enough to connect with him--and the big silliness of the show. That’s where the national tour dropped the ball.

I’m glad I saw that earlier production, though, because it gives some perspective on the outstanding work being done by Civic at its new home, The Tarkington Theatre at the Center for the Performing Arts. If I only saw this one, I could easily have labeled “Chaperone” as fool proof. But it isn’t. Excess ham can spoil the fun of the carefully kitschy numbers. Excess sentiment can tip the balance in the other direction.

But under Ron Morgan’s sure directorial and choreographic hand, it quickly became apparently that there was no need to worry. Actors who I previously thought were “good enough for community theater” shined brightly. No allowances need be made for the work of Vickie Cornelius Phipps as dizzy matron Mrs. Tottendale or Ian Cruz as hilariously stereotyped lover Aldolpho. The sets by David Gallo, costumes of Jean Engstrom, sound by Michael J. Lasley, music director of Brent E. Marty, lighting by Ryan Koharchik and hair and wig work by Debbie L. Williams rival national tours and professional regional theaters. And if one big number, “Show Off,” didn’t come together as it should, blame can be placed in part on the writers who concocted a number that demands nothing less than spectacular showmanship to fully work.

The production’s ace in the hole is actor Paul Hansen, who brings a heartbreaking joy to the lead. It’s the truthfulness and humane humor of his performance, coupled with the knowing writing, that allows “The Drowsy Chaperone” to transcend the genre of times-gone-by musicals. “No, No Nannette,” this ain’t. (For more on Hansen, click here.)

Perhaps the highest praise I can give Civic’s production is that it makes an effective case for “The Drowsy Chaperone” being a great American musical. I love leaving a show wanting to thank everyone involved for a blissfully fun evening of theater. And, if time allowed, I’d go back to see it in a heartbeat.

"The Drowsy Chaperone" runs through Sept. 24. Details here.

Your thoughts?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Bravo Civic!
    The Civic's 97th season is starting out with a roar. The show was absolutely fantastic and flawlessly performed. How lucky we are to have a community theater of this professional caliber. Don't hesitate to get your tickets, you will be laughing all night.
  • See This Show!
    If this production is even half as good as the Broadway show...it will be great. It's what big musicals used to be...not very serious, just loads of fun. Based on Lou's review it sounds like a great way to open the new theatre.
  • Bravo!
    Just want to chime in that this show was nothing but sheer joy and a love letter to musical theatre! Civic is off and running in its beautiful new home. Don't miss it!
  • Can't wait!
    I have tickets for next Thursday & now I can't wait. Didn't see the tour, but saw the show in New York & it's great fun. Sounds like the Civic is more than doing it justice!
  • Thank You
    Thank you, Lou, for such a great, supportive review. As a long-time Civic actor and current member of the Board of Trustees, I know how difficult it can be to put a show the level of "Drowsy Chaperone" on-stage. We've been blessed this time by a "perfect storm" of creative staff, musicians and volunteers that, together, have given us a great show. Civic's move to Carmel, though controversial to some, has given us a chance to produce complex shows like "Drowsy Chaperone", and we invite old and new Civic patrons to come share the fun in our new home.

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. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT