A hastily-written paper for my acting class on the play (musical) that we had to see. It was either this or Ten Little Indians, and this was sooner.
I had the opportunity to review the West Chester University Theater’s presentation of You’re a Good Man Charlie Brown on Saturday, July 8th. This production reinterprets the characters of Charles M. Shulz into a two-act musical, featuring in-character songs by each of the famous characters in Shulz’s Sunday comic strips. Throughout the musical, the actors bring to life the characters and their all-too familiar skits. Presented in the thrust theater of the E.O. Bull Center, the stage presented some interesting challenges to the actors and stage crew.
The thrust stage forced the actors to portray their roles to a wider field of audience. The actors were largely aware of the surrounding seating, and rather than presenting a single outward view as would be possible while using a proscenium stage, individual skits were arranged to face in different directions to accommodate different sections of the audience. Optimally, the actor might better choose his presentation to the audience; whether he is open or closed. In this situation, the actors often had to choose a section of the audience to alienate during their performance. Nonetheless, the dialog was clear throughout the performance regardless of the aspect they presented.
The costumes played an important role in the production. Without the costumes, the show really would not have been Charlie Brown, but simply some group of kids that seem familiar but no placeable. Linus’ blue security blanket and Charlie Brown’s yellow shirt with black zig-zags so utterly define those characters visually that changing those aspects would do a disservice to the show. Thankfully, the costume elements of the show were mostly in-line with the comic, the only exception being Snoopy. As a man portraying Snoopy the dog, his mannerisms were the main tip-off, and his costume alluded to very little.
All of the scenery seemed to be crafted of wood and painted flat to resemble the comics from which the musical drew its story. This was a nice touch. The clouds in the background were puffy and cartoon-like, and the sets were simple and effective. The only stage prop that truly defied this flat categorization was Snoopy’s house, which was a human-sized dog house for accommodation of Snoopy, who was portrayed by a human-sized actor. Rather than employing a stage crew, the actors manipulated the scenery on stage, including Snoopy’s dog house, which was craftily rolled about the stage during the “Red Baron†scene in which Snoopy partook.
In characterization, the actor who played Snoopy did a wonderful job of playing his part. In the comic, Snoopy remains the faithful yet anthropomorphic companion of Charlie Brown, and in this play he was no less. The actor fully captured the needs of Snoopy the dog, with his daily food requirements, and the behavior of Snoopy the almost-human receiver of valentines. Unlike Snoopy, Charlie Brown’s actor played him a bit flat.
The audience is supposed to see Charlie Brown as a good guy who finds himself awkward in an unforgiving world. He is very human – clumsy, nervous, and apprehensive, but incredibly stubborn – but the actor did not portray these traits very well. The Charlie Brown in this production behaved more clueless than hopeless, and didn’t evoke the same feel that comes from the comic. An example of this occurs during the kite-flying scene, where Charlie Brown should really present a surprised expression, excite that his kite is flying. Instead, he comes across as dreamy and harebrained. Perhaps this is due to the rewrite for the musical production, but the actor seemed to have his own interpretation of Charlie Brown to present.
Lucy, on the other hand, was dead-on. The actress who played Lucy VanPelt had exactly the idea of what makes Lucy the person she is. The attitude conveyed by her in the scene with Linus came across perfectly, as if the audience was reading the comic. In her interaction with Schroeder, she played the part of the scorned admirer very well.
Unfortunately for Lucy, Schroeder did not play well against her. Rather, he never portrayed a different attitude than the one he portrayed with Lucy. This is a shame because his song is one of the better musical numbers in the play, and suffered from his lack of emotion. One wonders if Schroeder could have been a bit more animated in scenes where he was not interacting with Lucy, if only to show contrast between his distaste for her affections and his every day conversation.
In the Friday production, Sally had a particularly difficult time. After a scene in which she discussed her utter dislike for jump rope, a younger member of the audience loudly commented in the theater, “She’s such a drama queen.†The actress heard the remark and rather than ignore it or fumble, she played to it perfectly in characterization of Sally, who is often ridiculed by her classmates for her eccentric behavior, by storming off in a huff.
Sally’s “Sweet Babbooâ€, Linus, also played his part in the musical very well. His skill with manipulating his security blanket must have been well-practiced. Linus often appears in the comic as a youngster who is both exceptional but underappreciated by the older kids. This is clear in this actor’s portrayal of the character. Of all the musical productions during the show, Linus’ had the most intricate blocking, requiring many characters to move about the stage synchronously, while wielding their own security blankets.
The show was quite entertaining on the whole. Some of the actors might have characterized their parts a bit differently than one might expect from reading the comic, but the effect of the performance overall brought the original Shultz strips to life.
