When it was announced months ago that Woody Allen was going to tackle a trio of Operas - "Il Trittico" - a few snobs probably shook their heads in disgust.
Even Woody was inclined to question what he was getting himself into.
"I have no idea what I'm doing," Allen said in a statement to the press, "but incompetence has never prevented me from plunging in with enthusiasm."
The quirky filmmaker - known for his cerebral film style and for being a consummate New Yorker - signed on to direct the ever-popular- "Gianni Schicchi" - which was unveiled this past week.
At the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, the production stars Lauren McNeese, Brian Leerhuber, Jill Grove, Saimir Pirgu, Rebekah Camm, Greg Fedderly, Steven Condy and Andrea Silvestrelli.
The morning after Woody's star turn in the Theatre, a blog reader by the name of "Black Tulip" was quick to post her comments about the production which she found disappointing.
"I saw it last night. It was badly done. Please see the NY Times article. The staging was a disgrace to Puccini and Florence. The ending was changed. The singing and the orchestra were excellent, though."
Before I had the opportunity to check the NY Times review, a second blogger posted an anonymous comment which conflicted with Tulip's!
"Just saw the article," he stated matter-of-fact.
"The NY Times is very enthusiastic about Allen's Opera."
"Did we read the same newspaper," he quizzed.
How was it that two individuals came away from the review with distinctly different impressions about the criticisms - and subsequently - the quality of the show?
I proceeded to surf over to the NY Times web site to take a gander at the review written by Opera Critic, Anthony Tommasini.
The caption for the review read:
"Puccini With a Sprinkling of Woody Allen Whimsy"
Not a bad start, eh?
Tommasini proceeded to engage in a little idle chit-chat about recent conversations with Allen in which the celebrated artist allegedly sought to lower his expectations with regard to his directorial debut in Opera by noting on occasion he was clueless about the work at hand.
Then, with little ado, Tommasini launched into his review.
"Far from being incompetent, his "Gianni Schicchi" is a cleverly updated and inventive staging of the popular comedy, marred only by a regrettable directorial liberty at the end."
"With sets and costumes by Mr. Allen’s longtime collaborator, Santo Loquasto, the production has the look and style of some old black-and-white film. Not one of those black-and-white Woody Allen films. Think "Big Deal on Madonna Street".
"With comic pacing and dialogue already determined by Puccini, Mr. Allen may have felt there was not enough for him to do. So he fills the show with sight gags and busyness, perhaps too much so. Still, the comic maneuvers of the cast are deftly choreographed, and he elicits feisty portrayals from the singers."
"But the only real miscue comes with Mr. Allen’s altered ending. After bamboozling the family of Donati, Puccini’s Schicchi points to the happy Lauretta and Rinuccio, who now have the money to marry, and asks the audience’s indulgence, since his scam has fostered young love. But Mr. Allen has the indomitable Zita (Jill Grove), Donati’s avenging cousin, burst in and stab Schicchi, who poses his question to the audience and then drops dead."
"You can understand why Mr. Allen could not resist giving an Italian vendetta twist to Puccini’s happy ending. But isn’t it more comically, cynically, triumphantly right for Schicchi to get away with everything?"
There it is, in a nutshell.
By the way - it should be noted that in an advertisement for the production in the Los Angeles Times this morning - critics hailed Woody's Gianni Schicchi as a "riot" and underscored that everyone in the production "is a hoot".
All in all, fairly positive reviews!
So, how is it that Black Tulip came to the conclusion, that the production was basically a dismal failure?
Granted, she acknowledged that the singers and the orchestra were excellent, but - in sum - was inclined to refer to Woody Allen's star turn in the Theatre as "badly done".
Just maybe, it was all the "busyness" (and the sight gags) - that Tommasini asserted may have been incorporated into the mix to give Allen more "to do" - that negatively impacted her aesthetic experience?
But - why the strident dismissal of Woody's "Gianni Schicchi" - as a disgrace to both Pucinni and Florence?
Was the reviewer off-base in his assessment? Don't think so!
Tommasini's views on the staging of the production were intelligent, thoughtful, and well-elucidated.
Ah, it was the ending, no doubt.
Even Tommasini was inclined to refer to that oddball twist as a possible miscue.
'Ya know, some die-hard Opera fans prefer that a classic not be tampered with.
Others, on the other hand, pine for an exciting novel twist in their theatre-going experience whenever humanly possible!
It may be wise to consider a Tristan Bernard quote at this juncture.
"In the theatre the audience wants to be surprised, but by things that they expect."
“Il Trittico” is being performed through Sept. 26 at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in downtown Los Angeles at 135 North Grand Avenue.
