Prelude to a Kiss

Even though I saw it in previews, this was an instance of a play being greater than its production, simply stated. I found it pushed me to think about marriage, the topic in the play. And, the bare bones of the play (in contrast to the movie with nice shots, multiple locations, good movie sex and super attractive stars) allowed the ideas being expressed to come out in much sharper relief and a bit more clearly than the movie by the same name.

Here is the basis of the play. Marriage is a commitment for life to one person. Once you make that commitment it is likely that your partner will change. What if they change so dramatically that you no longer recognize them? How do you honor a lifelong commitment in light of drastic change? Great questions, right? I love the topic and the treatment of it.

Okay, now about the production. It was lackluster at best. And, most of all, it's not everyday that you get to talk about sets that actually worked AGAINST the play. So, let's start with the sets. There was a strange lit marble-like cross beam going across the stage with a vertical column of the same off-center. Let's call this visual structure upscale 80s stage definition. Additionally, the back of the stage was lit in different colors throughout the production. Someone chose purple or blue or something really cold to enhance the time early in the couples' relationship where they were super-hot, on fire and passionately in love with one another. Interesting choice, let's say. And, then my favorite critique of the sets were that the couple should have had to contend with a couch/sofa in the apartment. I know it is cliche, but two chairs set rather far apart did not cut it. And, if done well it would have served the performance rather well. If there had been a sofa, the entire story of the play could have been told through the relationship of the actors to the sofa. This play is about lust, love, intimacy and commitment and two non-interesting chairs do not support those themes. Especially, if they are the only items (besides a bed) on the stage.

Acting-wise it was okay. Not great by any stretch of the imagination. I liked the supporting characters best: the mother and father of the bride. The bride was not bad. The groom could have been a million times stronger. And, the old man--the father from Frasier-well, he didn't bring it down. I read a user review on the New York Times website which showed great optimism and confidence that the acting was going to become tighter. The main problem was probably in the beginning. The beginning was not necessarily convincing enough that these two people were really into one another. It was supposed to be love at first sight, and it just wasn't. It looked like two people trying to escape a terribly awkward first encounter, and never fast enough.

If you have to pay to see this I would say skip it and wait for the next revival. That's pretty harsh, because the play itself is rather nice. And, I took away some nice things. But, the production was so distracting in so many ways that I just can not recommend it. With so many other great options going on all the time, I just can't say this is the best one. If you have absolutely nothing else to do on a Saturday afternoon and it's not too beautiful a day, stop by for a matinee, I guess.