Jennifer Chung Klam

San Diego Arts

"Mack & Mabel"

By Jennifer Chung Klam
Posted on Sun, May 15th, 2005
Last updated Tue, May 17th, 2005

If you’re going to stage a musical about the king of comedy during the silver screen era, it should be -– like the director’s life, like his films, like the era itself -- glitzy, colorful and funny.

Korbett Kompany Productions’ “Mack & Mabel,” now playing at the Adams Avenue Studio of the Arts, fails on all three counts. Though the company has heart, this already troublesome musical suffers further from a number of directorial missteps, poor choreography and miscasting.

The musical, with music and lyrics by Jerry Herman (of “Hello Dolly” and “La Cage aux Folles” fame), is based loosely on the real-life story of Mack Sennett and Mabel Normand, a waitress who became the Hollywood director’s comic leading lady and lover. Through flashbacks, Mack takes us through the early years of his studio, the first meeting with Mabel and their rocky love affair.

The problem begins, unavoidably, with the book by Michael Stewart. The very thin plot is devoid of emotional complexity, low on character development, and appears to have been shaved even further by director Bob Korbett. Gaps in exposition make for odd leaps in the action.

The story is mostly just a vehicle for Herman’s score, often considered one of his finest. But LeRoy Davidson’s organ arrangements tend to overpower the actors, particularly if you’re sitting stage right. Worse yet, the tinny prerecorded percussion and indelicate organ sound isn’t at all evocative of the era.

The Korbett Kompany lacks the choreography, direction, showiness -- and, let’s face it, the budget -- to pull off what should be big production numbers. There’s only one girl in “Hundreds of Girls.” Instead of the "bathing beauties," we get a small company of men singing falsetto and dancing around with towels in a decidedly un-Busby Berkeley-type number that isn’t even funny.

This is of coursepart of the problem. A musical about a comedic genius film director should be funny. In director Korbett's uneven hands, “Mack & Mabel” fumbles; it has neither the darkness of Mabel's tragic untimelydeath (mentioned then glossed over) nor over-the-top physical comedy and farce. There’s just one bit of slapstick in the whole show.

Korbett perhaps deserves credit for being one of the hardest working men in San Diego theater, but you simply can’t do it all yourself. Or rather, you shouldn’t. Korbett directed, choreographed, did lighting and sound design, and starred as Mack in this production.

The other major problem is that the love between insecure, love-starved Mabel and egotistical, stubborn Mack just doesn’t ring true. Korbett and Autumn Corbett Bodily have virtually no chemistry together. This point is almost disturbingly driven home when Mabel and young writer Frank (high schooler Kevin Koppman-Gue) share a dance together in “When Mabel Comes in the Room,” and this unlikely pairing seems better suited than Bodily and Korbett.

Koppman-Gue, for his part, does well with what he’s given. The young actor has a fine singing voice, is spry on his feet and gives his character some fiery passion. Bodily has a lovely voice, and lends some spunk to “Wherever He Ain’t” and pathos to “Time Heals Everything.” But she doesn’t effectively demonstrate Mabel’s neediness in love.

Korbett’s Mack is unbelievable in almost every aspect. He doesn’t have the voice or mannerisms of the proud, gruff and abrasive man obsessed with movies. He doesn’t quite have the singing chops, either, and some of the notes seem too low for his register.

Barbara Cole can belt it out as Lottie, but she gets shortchanged in what should be her big number, “Tap Your Troubles Away.” Cole is also subjected to a few unfortunate costume choices. Brian Cooney, Garrison Ross and Josh Morris fill out the cast in more or less unspectacular and forgettable roles.

“Mack & Mabel” is a little-produced work, and if this production is any indication, it’s easy to see why. Korbett Kompany was already at a disadvantage with a flawed book, and a few more missteps make this show regrettable. Save your money and purchase the original cast recording with Robert Preston and Bernadette Peters instead.

View the playbill.

View the cast list.

About the author: Jennifer Chung Klam is an editor at The Daily Transcript and a freelance arts and culture writer.
More by this author.

Subscribe to Arts

 · 

Comments

Posted by Glen Watson	Tue, May 17th, 2005
I'm no theatre critic, but my wife and I very much enjoyed Mack and Mabel on Sunday afternoon. Jennifer Chung?s review was very complete, but I?m wondering if she went to the same theatre that we did. We saw the show in a dilapidated building that does not resemble a theatre from the outside. But the group, working on a limited budget, made this place look and feel like a real theatre. It took a lot of guts, imagination, and hard work from each actor to pull this production off. We found this show extremely entertaining. The singing and dancing talent were excellent. Kevin Koppman-Gue and Autumn Corbett Bodily were exceptional, but all of the actors held up their end. I recommend this play ? you won?t regret going. Glen Watson 6746 Solandra Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 858-385-5389 760-431-1938

Posted by Forgettably Yours	Tue, May 17th, 2005
Apparently, from the sound of her review, Ms. Chung mistakenly thought that she was about to see a lavish, slick, multimillion-dollar, Broadway production, when she walked into that tiny Adams Avenue theater building? As for her statements? "If you?re going to stage a musical about the king of comedy during the silver screen era, it should be -? like the director?s life, like his films, like the era itself -- glitzy, colorful and funny"... Considering that Color Motion Pictures were not regular fare in Hollywood in the 10?s and 20?s (when the play takes place), and that Mack shot his Mabel films in black and white, why would the show be in color? And, anyone born in Santa Monica, California, such as I, would know that things were not ?glitzy, colorful and funny.? This was a small town, not New York. It should be funny? If you bother to read the biographies of Mack, he wasn't exactly Chaplin... that's why the play refers to his "bellowing", even in his sleep! "The era" that Ms. Chung refers to was the Mack and Mabel Keystone era. This was the early 1910's and to the early 1920's. Fashions were hardly extreme, with the women?s hat being the one of the few items of excess. Men's little-changing fashions, a drab suit. The Roaring 20?s were just underway. As to Ms. Chung?s music comments? ?Worse yet, the tinny prerecorded percussion and indelicate organ sound isn?t at all evocative of the era.? News update to Ms. Chung, that tinny piano and ?indelicate? organ sound was synonymous to Mack?s Keystone Pictures. And it IS evocative of the time. Maybe not in your version of American history, but, I can understand how you might not have taken part in the American experience of watching a silent movie in a majestic theater with the grand Wurlitzer playing. Try it sometime. Perhaps you should have Ms. Chung take a basic American History course before critiquing other works of American theater. Otherwise her rambling, wanton, historically incorrect critiques will continue to be baseless gibberish.

Posted by the porpoise	Wed, May 18th, 2005
I was in the same theater, but I have different reasons for celebrating this play. Behold the madness:  I watched one of the players exit the stage in a rush, knock the curtain rod (stage left) out of its holes, and get entangled in the fabric.  What a great metaphor!  Sometimes the stage eats the players. The music was so "indelicate" at times it scared me into giggling. Somewhere between the whispering stage techs and the scratching organ, the banging heels on hollow wooden boxes and the sudden quite awake bursts of white light, I began to enjoy the play immensely. At one point, actor Kevin Koppman-Gue, painfully declared, "She's on dope."   (Mabel had succumbed to smack.)  In the next scene, however, Mabel came out fresh and pink.  If I'm not mistaken, heroin addiction takes off the shine.  There were so many improbable leaps and transitions that I found myself begging for more.  This was an exercise in quantum theory, pure mathematics, science! Here's an idea for a new production if anyone's bold enough to revisit the play.  How about a wonderfully twisted scandal to spice up the love motif:  Mabel robs the cradle and gets all over wee high-schooler Frank.  Their chemistry in Mack and Mabel was the shiznit.  Totally believable. History be damned.  Rewrite the thing as pure comedy. Mack Sennet would love it.  He'd do the two-step in his grave.  Have Mabel fall in love with a gorilla, a bungling cop, a donkey, whatever. As for Chung's review.  Thank you.  The play was awful? but wonderfully awful.

Posted by Ipee Freely	Wed, Jun 8th, 2005
Shame on sandiego.com for removing some of the comments from this page. Perhaps they were right on the money about Ms. Chung's absurd review?

Posted by Administrator	Thu, Jun 23rd, 2005
This forum is monitored. Rude, hateful or otherwise inappropriate comments will be removed at our discression. Thank you.

(1)sandiego.com, Inc. invites comments in which readers can respond freely and anonymously if they wish. Comments submitted by readers will be rejected that are deemed by the editors to be damaging to the future of this web site.
(2)Comparison is made from the IP Address identity of the computer placing the posts. Some networks share these addresses between users.