10/10
The challenge of The Cherry Orchard
27 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I don't know that it's possible to achieve a satisfactory production of this Chekov work. Written at the end of his life, the tone is always a question. When Chekov first saw what Stanislavski had done with the play, he was horrified. "This is a comedy!" Well, that's hard to pull off. While all the characters are certainly silly and vain and foolish, their circumstance--with the weight of the Revolution soon to rip the entire World open--is not anything to laugh at. And their future is undeniably grim, even though we have the perspective of history to assess their fate, in the context of the play, what's ahead is not going to be something where the audience can rejoice. At the premiere, audiences cheered at the sound of the ax cutting the orchard. Whether that was Chekov's intention (doubtful), it's impossible to create that kind of reaction today.

Cacoyannis, however, comes close to perfection. While some of the lines are stage-bound, his choice to open the play up to nature as much as possible was the right one. We see the investment in the family has in the orchard first hand and what it means to lose it. The music by Tchaikovsky adds an aura of authenticity to these fragile people and their bittersweet story; set decoration and costuming are both splendid.

Ms. Rampling, who is always interesting, works against the classic portrayal of Mme. Ranevsky. She's not simply a ninny who has suffered circumstances that she's unprepared to deal with; Rampling shows us she's suffered real tragedy and to survive has lapsed into a world bordering on delusion. It's a tender and loving performance.

The rest of the cast is more traditional but also excellent.

The camera shows us it's magic in the final tableaux. As it floats around the abandoned and locked country home, Chekov's most surprising device works better on screen than on the stage.

This is a very impressive work by one of the masters of the cinema who has brought one of the masterpieces of theater (again) to audiences of the cinema.

Note: I've since read where other viewers objected to the brief prologue Cacoyannis has added to the play, and I'm going to disagree that it was a mistake. In a stage production, the audience is somewhat disoriented as to why Ranevsky is arriving at the estate, and Cacoyannis clarifies that with the prologue. As well, we are allowed some of the poignancy of the return and to see where and with whom she's been spending her time. For me it added rather than distracted to the text.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed