Rating (out of four stars): ★★
Arizona Theatre Company’s newest production at the Herberger Theater Center not only provides interesting perspective on modern political affairs, but allows royal family junkies to watch Kate, William, Harry and, of course, Charles, embroiled in some gossip-worthy conflict.
This particular production of King Charles III, Mike Bartlett’s new controversial play straight from Broadway, isn’t always fun to watch, but it’s definitely worth watching.
The Shakespearean-style play presents the following dilemma: Queen Elizabeth has died, making Prince Charles the new king of England. Charles doesn’t take his new role — which is, of course, supposed to be mostly “ceremonial” — lightly. He refuses to sign a bill that would limit the freedom of the press, shocking everyone in Parliament, which is used to the British “monarch” going along with laws approved by elected officials.
Charles, played by an outstanding Peter Van Norden, complicates the situation by arriving in Parliament with a cape, crown and scepter in tow. He demands that Parliament be dissolved immediately and new officials elected.
At the heart of the play is this interesting dynamic, in which audience members are torn between supporting the principled, if totalitarian, king, who is of course quite endearing at times albeit infuriating at others; or the democratic majority, which is appalled by Charles’ archaic expectation that his family history gives him the right to rule in a democratic nation. The situation plays out against the backdrop of Great Britain’s political turmoil, as it faces the consequences of the Brexit referendum.
This play is intended to make you think, and it does that quite well. What the Herberger production lacks is emotional impact, and that may be partly due to the challenges the script presents. None of the characters are particularly likeable. William and Kate, played stoically by Kate Maher Hyland and Adam Haas Hunter, are inherently flat characters who fail to ignite any real empathy from the audience.
More dynamic characterization on the parts of Hyland and Hunter could perhaps have fixed this. I would have liked to see, for example, a slightly more unhinged and power-hungry Kate. In this and other cases, the challenge for director Matt August seemed to be a reluctance to step too far away from the public personalities of the royal family, which are familiar and beloved to many Americans.
The romance that played out between Harry (Dylan Saunders) and bohemian-artist-socialist-type Jess (Jeanne Syquia) also failed to tug at my heartstrings. Although the pair drew laughs and played their parts well, their love story was not fleshed out particularly well in the script, and didn’t seem to accomplish anything significant in the larger arc of the story.
Van Norden, to me, was the glue that held the story together. He delivered his many Shakespearean-style monologues with a touching humor. At times, I hated King Charles, and at others, I just wanted to give him a hug and pour him a cup of tea. (He admits to not being able to make it himself.)
Bartlett’s use of Shakespearean-style verse lends the play even more historical perspective. The cast did an excellent job of maintaining pace and rhythm, even across dialogue. This was one of my favorite aspects of the production. Moreover, as Bartlett rightly claims in a 2014 piece for The Guardian, the verse is genius in the way it “rejects irony.” The result? King Charles III is not a “parody or a pastiche — it (is) a play, telling a story the audience should care about.”
Costumes, by Kish Finnegan, varied between fashionable modern dress for the main speaking parts (Kate’s style was an ongoing topic of discussion, one that got about as old as its real-life portrayal in celebrity gossip magazines — because I want to hear about Kate, not her clothes!) and a Gothic-punk-futuristic style favored by the ensemble members. This was an interesting choice, perhaps providing a visual representation of the gap between the traditional British elite and a more liberally-minded new generation.
It would be remiss of me not to mention the towering set, designed by G.W. Mercier, which perfectly complimented the nature of the play. Though minimalist in the sense that there were no fancy backdrops or multiple levels, it was a grand, stark backdrop. Huge white panels opened and closed to suggest passageways opening unto the main action downstage. During scenes in which ghosts of royals past appeared, dramatic lighting and curtains made the looming background even more foreboding. Shakespeare would have approved.
“King Charles III” runs through October 23 at the Herberger Theater Center. Tickets are available for purchase at the box office or online.
Contact the columnist at Faith.Anne.Miller@asu.edu.
