Theater Review | 'Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo'
Ghostly Beast Burning Bright in Iraq
Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo, with Robin Williams, near right, and Glenn Davis, in the drama by Rajiv Joseph at the Richard Rodgers Theater.
By CHARLES ISHERWOOD
Published: March 31, 2011
An exotic beast is stalking Broadway. No, I’m not referring specifically to the man-eating title character played by Robin Williams in “Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo.” I’m talking about the play itself: Rajiv Joseph’s smart, savagely funny and visionary new work of American theater, whose presence on Broadway invites fanciful comparison to the titular beast. A Pulitzer Prize finalist last year, “Bengal Tiger” is like a majestic cat serenely striding through a litter of cute-as-can-be kittens ready for their YouTube close-ups.
Multimedia
Related
-
Star Power Meets War’s Firepower (March 24, 2011)
-
A Little Good, a Little Evil, a Lot of Ritual (January 2, 2011)
-
Theater Review | 'Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo': In the Iraq War, People Acting Like Animals, and Vice Versa (May 15, 2010)
Richard Perry/The New York Times
From left, Robin Williams, Glenn Davis and Brad Fleischer in "Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo."
“Bengal Tiger,” which opened Thursday night at the Richard Rodgers Theater, asks us to think and feel like adults, absorbing the dark absurdities in Mr. Joseph’s microcosmic vision of the chaos that reigned in Baghdad shortly after the invasion of Iraq. Its quiet urge to attend to the moral problems that beset our world — not to mention the existential mysteries man has pondered for centuries — stands in stark contrast to the more prevalent invitations blaring from Broadway marquees: to be serenaded by sweet nostalgia or to Facebook-friend our inner teenager.
The production, directed with gorgeous finesse by Moisés Kaufman (“I Am My Own Wife,” “33 Variations”), does make a standard concession to the celebrity-centric economy of today’s theater by headlining a box-office name. (The rest of the terrific cast comes from Mr. Kaufman’s Los Angeles production, which I saw last spring.) But Mr. Williams, the kinetic comic who has sometimes revealed a marshmallowy streak in movies, never indulges the audience’s hunger for displays of humorous invention or pinpricks of poignancy. He gives a performance of focused intelligence and integrity, embodying the animal who becomes the play’s questioning conscience with a savage bite that never loosens its grip.
And, oh yes, Mr. Williams is quite funny too. He is after all playing a tiger with a foul mouth and a disposition to match, who’s been locked up in the Baghdad zoo for years and is growling as loudly as his stomach when the play opens. (Mr. Williams doesn’t wear a Tigger costume, only a grizzled beard and unkempt hair suggest an animal.) I should emphasize that “Bengal Tiger” is not a civics lesson kind of play to be dutifully attended like a cultural homework assignment. Man and beast, and man turned beast, are depicted throughout with a fanciful humor that still allows for clear-eyed compassion.
The American invasion of 2003 has just taken place, and Baghdad is riven by conflict and confusion. Two soldiers guarding the tiger’s cage — the cocky Kev (Brad Fleischer) and the business-minded Tom (Glenn Davis) — are killing time by swapping stories of their wartime experience. The tiger does some trash-talking himself, gloating over the stupidity of the lions, who fled their habitat only to be mowed down by artillery.
The juvenile Kev, played to dopey perfection by Mr. Fleischer, alternately gripes and makes absurd boasts about the prowess he is yet to prove. He seems to think that warfare is just a cool video game, and the other guys are hogging the Xbox. Tom, imbued with forceful gravity by Mr. Davis, was present when the American troops reached the palace of Uday and Qusay Hussein, Saddam’s sons. His spoils from the looting that took place: a gold-plated toilet seat and a matching handgun that he’s stashed in his knapsack.
This gleaming weapon, sowing mayhem as it moves from hand to hand, is a potent symbol of both corrupting greed and the brutality it can engender. A vulgar talisman of the rapacious Hussein regime, it also becomes a trophy sought after — possibly even killed for — by an American soldier intent on getting what he can out of the war. (Draw your own conclusions about the larger American imperatives in Iraq.)
The golden gun’s first victim is the hapless tiger. As the awed and envious Kev marvels at this spectacular bit of bling, Tom makes the mistake of offering a snack to the beast in the cage, with results that leave him without a hand and the tiger with a gut full of lead. “I get so stupid when I get hungry,” the tiger groans in self-disgust.
And yet death proves oddly congenial to this grumpy beast, who spends his time in the afterlife haunting the soldier who caused his death while pondering the mysteries his ongoing consciousness presents.
“It’s alarming, this life after death,” he confides. “The fact is, tigers are atheists. All of us. Unabashed. Heaven and hell? Those are just metaphorical constructs that represent ‘hungry’ and ‘not hungry.’ Which is to say, why am I still kicking around?” Suddenly this creature of dumb instinct begins acquiring a moral sense and with it the burning desire to know how the afterlife can exist without God, and how God can ignore the unruly garden of corruption that his world has become.
Such questions are tendered by Mr. Williams’s gruff tiger in an offhand, conversational tone that considerably lightens their weightiness. (The exception perhaps is a late speech decrying God’s indifference in overly bald terms.) Similarly, Mr. Joseph’s play to its credit does not aspire to make overarching and obvious statements about the morality of warfare. It is more deeply concerned with the facts on the ground, namely how the baser instincts of human beings inevitably come to the fore in an atmosphere tense with the threat of violence.
Kev’s hair-trigger anxiety and psychological fragility exemplify one potentially disastrous outcome. The bitterness and deadened humanity that Tom exhibits when he returns to Iraq after acquiring an artificial hand is another. And the play’s most movingly drawn character, the soldiers’ translator, Musa (played with soulful intensity by Arian Moayed), becomes perhaps the most heart-rending victim of the viral contagion of violence that the play depicts.
He is haunted by the ghost of Uday Hussein (a vivid, hilariously malevolent Hrach Titizian), who had employed him as a gardener to tend the exotic zoo of topiary animals on the palace grounds. Musa’s journey from friendly helper fascinated by the arcana of American lingo (a very funny scene dissects the meanings of the word “bitch”) to disturbed opportunist represents the most painful illustration of how the appetite for destruction that man shares with predatory beasts is unloosed when the structures of civilization suddenly fall away.
The mosaic of escalating violence depicted in the play takes place against a background of almost breathtaking beauty, in the elegant sets designed by Derek McLane, among his most poetic and effective work. The equally fine lighting design of David Lander blends velvety shadows with rich colors evoking the ravaged beauty of a once-great city.
It is an atmosphere inhabited by the play’s end almost entirely by ghosts. The ricocheting violence unleashed by the legacy of the Hussein regime and the American invasion that sought to end it has claimed victims both malign and innocent.
And yet “Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo,” for all the killing and suffering it contains, is buoyed by the vitality of its imaginative scope. Violence is not after all the only human activity that can have far-reaching, unforeseen effects, shaping lives far into the future. Mr. Joseph’s richly conceived play reminds us that art can have a powerful afterlife too.
BENGAL TIGER AT THE BAGHDAD ZOO
By Rajiv Joseph; directed by Moisés Kaufman; sets by Derek McLane; costumes by David Zinn; lighting by David Lander; sound by Acme Sound Partners and Cricket S. Meyers; music by Kathryn Bostic; production stage manager, Beverly Jenkins; technical supervisor, Brian Lynch; general manager, Richards/Climan Inc. Presented by Robyn Goodman, Kevin McCollum, Jeffrey Seller, Sander Jacobs, Ruth Hendell/Burnt Umber, Scott & Brian Zeilinger, Center Theater Group and Stephen Kocis/Walt Grossman. At the Richard Rodgers Theater, 226 West 46th Street, Manhattan; (877) 250 2929; ticketmaster.com. Running time: two hours.
WITH: Robin Williams (Tiger) , Glenn Davis (Tom), Brad Fleischer (Kev), Hrach Titizian (Iraqi Man/Uday), Sheila Vand (Iraqi Teenager/Hadia), Necar Zadegan (Iraqi Woman/Leper/Arabic Vocals), and Arian Moayed (Musa).
Get Free E-mail Alerts on These Topics
Average Reader Rating
Rate It
15 Readers' Reviews
Nothing real or interesting or intelligent about this play. It will die at the box office as word-of-mouth gets out.
– MCT, New York City
I saw the show last night and I really thought Mr. Isherwood would offer theatre goers a little more than just a plot summary as a review. My friends and I felt this show was a very pretentious piece of theatre, and regardless of the prizes it may have almost won we felt as though it was a bit of a cartoon. The scenery was lovely, the lighting was beautiful, but the acting was little more than caricatures of stereotypes. And Robin Williams simply played Robin Williams-just toned down Good Will Hunting style. The actor who played the translator gave the most nuanced performance by far, but even so, his character was the 'good guy', stuck between two different types of 'bad guys.' The character of Uday Hussein may as well have been Darth Vader or Voldemort he was so lacking in complexity. Rather than enlighten, the oversimplification of a very intense set of circumstances in our nation's history really does a disservice and I'm surprised Mr. Isherwood let that slide in his review.
– ElizWolf, New York, NY
For someone as original as Robin Williams, standing around and yelling at everyone with your eyes closed only brought thoughts of Gilbert Gottfried to mind. The play is unattractive and uninvolving. You don't latch on to any character, and the message is very, very old. Not the least engaging or entertaining.
– nyctheatrelover, new york
Complete waste of money and time; the profanity was overdone. The young actors were talented but I did not see the fit for Robin Williams in this role. What was Robin thinking? I wanted to walk out after the 1st act, but hoped the second act would be better, (‘it wasn’t); Actually I started to fall asleep at one point I was so bored. At the end when a portion of the audience stood for a standing ovation - all I could think was they were tourists who do not see much broadway or they were friends of the actors. The best performance was done by the Turkish interpreter.
– Rainy, NY
skip it...it was a total waste of time and money...and it was not cheap !i saw this play march 20, 2011 for a preview...opening march 31, 2011...i would be suprised if it opens!
many people left at intermission and although tempted, i thought it may get better, it did not!
skip it!!!!!!!
– jp, new york
Aside from the fact that Robin Williams sleepwalks through this show, the acting was compelling. However, since we went because of Mr. Williams, it was hugely disappointing. I believe that he is best when he can improvise and just let himself go. But tied to a tight script, he simply doesn't cut it. Contrast this show with War Horse, a very different play about war that we saw the same day -- like night and day. Skip Bengal Tiger, but don't miss War Horse.
– Julie119, Miami
Huge disappointment with a meandering poorly focused story. This is inaccurately billed as a comedy which is reinforced by having Robin Williams as the headliner. It is mainly unfunny and emotionally flat. The dialogue written for Robin Williams ends up substituting profanity for coherent thought. So much wasted potential to tell an effective story that could have used humor to set up an emotional climax of the serious theme of the parallels between the violence of the animal kingdom, the violence of Hussein's Iraq and the violence of Iraqi Freedom. Poorly staged as no difference in actor's costumes or makeup between the ghosts and the living, same with the Tiger as no difference between the Tiger and the people. Might as well go to an improv show. The interaction/dialogue between the translator and the soldiers was the highlight of the show.
– BC, New York
A brilliant script made manifest into a wonderful show.
As someone who's spent several years in the Persian Gulf and other areas of the Middle East, in my opinion, "Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo" very aptly portrays the tremors that underline politically-charged personalities and the collusion of cultural misunderstanding.
Mixing art and politics, with respect to today's current conflicts, is something that should be done more often, and, to our benefit, Rajiv Joseph did just that. Whether you're interested in theatre or politics, this show should not be missed. Bravo.
– Cheryl Haines, Canada
Bengal tiger at the Baghdad zoo is sure to stir up a lot of controversy for it's raw and honest portrayal of life in Iraq. There ate no heroes in this world, save perhaps Kev, a complex, confused and scared marine played brilliantly by Brad Fleischer. Kev acts as the hero for one brief moment at the top of the play, but his actions haunt him till the end. Other than that all the human characters are parallel to the tiger , played by Robin Williams. They all do what they believe they need to do to stay alive
The central example of humans doing what they need to survive Is Musa, the translator for the marines, played to perfection by Arian Moayed. The most intense example of this is when Musa say's "I always work for the wrong people, I always work for the tyrants!" when struggling with his place in the universe
The play challenges our beliefs in good and evil, questions the exsistense of God, and makes us remember the human cost of war all while making us laugh, cry and wonder
– Kkillavey, Providence, ri
Disappointed with Mr Williams. He did phone his performance in last night as the Tiger but fortunately was supported by a fantastic group of actors who were riveting! Come on Mr Williams, look lively the critics are coming. Very maudlin at the stage door, vacant looks - unengaged.
Go to see the supporting cast, well worth it.
Subject matter - the usual irritating stuff about Iraq but its theatre take it for what it is .
– Thespian Daughter, Los Angeles
If you want to be hit over the head with the state of affairs in the world, especially the middle east and need to be reminded of the violence, the blood and the impotence felt by all then go see the show. If you already know all of these facts, spare yourself and see Robin Williams in another venue. He is the comic relief however manipulative that relief may be. We saw this show on the first night of previews-many people left at intermission. There are a variety of methods one can get to the depths of the pain in our world. This play certainly is not one of them. The acting, however, is superb. All of these splendid actors need a different play in which to envelope their talents.
– Koehler, NYC
The show opens to a standing ovation to Williams as obviously he is the main attraction. Without Williams, however, the play would be a collection of meandering scenes struggling to find a theme. Sometimes, one thinks that it will be a more contemporary version of Waiting for Godot. But in his effort to be politically current, the playwright misses the opportunity to write a great play by diluting its philosophical themes. Thus the play allows itself to be yet another criticism of the Iraq war (and a very superficial at that) rather than a substantive and modern discussion of good and evil particularly in a FUBAR environment such as the Iraq war.
The lack of proper editing is equally unhelpful. At almost every scene a new plot or thematic element is introduced, the topiary, the rape, the leper. These elements, which could serve as powerful tools for the playwright are never effectively tied to yield full impact.
Sadly, the playwright does not need 2 hours of audience time for the depth level reached by this play. Half hour to 45 minutes would have been enough time to raise the obvious questions in the play. The additional hour and a half would only be necessary if the playwright were determined to make a real effort to tightly develop and discuss the issues.
This was a missed opportunity. Go see it only if you are really into Robyn Williams. Even then, this is not the best role for him.
– jlcnyc, NY, NY
Rajiv Joseph is a rising Superstar playwright and this is his best, most sophisticated, thoughtful and enjoyable show to date. A fantastic night at the theater!
– Ademola, Manhattan
Amazing, intellectual, riveting, new, funny, dark, beautiful. makes me think of that first few years of the war and how crazy everything was. not really that political but more existential. real human characters. Robin williams was incredible. so was the rest of the cast.
i loved it. i'm going back with friends.
– theaterfan, NY
Robin Williams should be ashamed of being associated with such horrific show. This dark comedy portrays American soldiers as idiots and thieves. Iraqis are the poor souls that are being mistreated. Williams doesn't even act well and in 1st act, he only shows up for 10 minutes. This show is a ripoff and disgrace to all Americans. This should banned from Broadway immediately.
– Showgold, New york
No comments:
Post a Comment