REVIEW: UMBC's Problematic "Problem Child"

            From the outset, let me temper everything in this review with this:  The student actors, designers and technicians have done a terrific, professional job with the play Problem Child by Canadian playwright George F. Walker.  Otherwise, the script and direction are, well, a problem.

            The play, which centers around a young lower-class couple, tells the tale of their attempt to get their child back from foster care.  As you may guess, they have had a spotty history.  One of the couple, RJ (played by Kevin James) has chosen the path that should lead them to a reunion – he has a steady job, he stays out of jail, he goes to church.  Denise (Renata Melillo), the trailer trash young wife, not surprisingly, thinks wanting the kid back is enough.  She claims to be off drugs, but her bizarre behavior might indicate otherwise.  But mostly she is a mouthy, needy mess.  Enter the cliché character, the social worker,  (Jessie Dulaney) who spouts wisdom to Denise like she should be lapping it up like cream – the platitudes only make Denise dig in her heels even more.  Seems the social worker also has an axe to grind, loving the power over lives she has a little too much, though in one of the many holes in the script we never really find out what that axe is.  And finally, there is the most unnecessary character, but the by far the most interesting, Phillie (Michael Houk), the alcoholic desk clerk at the seedy hotel where the action (?) takes place.  His claim to fame is that he stays sober on Wednesdays to clean the rooms in order to keep the job.  Of course, even in his drunken stupor, Phillie also waxes philosophical on the meaning of justice.  Add to this merry band a fixation on trashy talk shows (Jerry Springer, et al), a completely bizarre and unbelievable plot-twist, and a weapon and you get what is allegedly a serious comedy.

            What you really have here is, I hate to say this, a stereotypical college play – the kind spoofed in movies and TV shows that portray such things.  (Think MTV meets Lifetime)  It is a play ABOUT MANY THINGS.  It has SOCIAL RELEVANCE.  It is artistically ABSTRACT.  It is funny ONLY TO COLLEGE STUDENTS.  It is MODERN and EDGY.  It lets the actors SWEAR like adults.  The bottom line:  it is a pretentious, unfunny mess.  I am frankly shocked that a department as acclaimed and with such a history would stoop this low.  Wasn't there anything in the script catalogue more worthy of so much effort?

            Part of the blame for what goes on here must go to the director, Colette Searls (who, from everyone I've talked to, has a sterling reputation as a director).  Apparently, she (along with the rest of us) is unsure what the play is.  Is it funny?  Is it social satire? Is it a scathing attack on the class system?  Is it a horror film?  To be fair, the play touches on all of these things (and much more), and the ultimate culprit here is the script.  Even still, all four actors seem to be in a different play, and that is a directorial issue.  One actor has been allowed to become a caricature of a caricature, all but eating the set, he chews the scenery so hard.  Another speaks in the oddest cadence I have ever heard – pauses between words, phrases and sentences to such a degree that the meaning of the sentence when finally complete is all but lost.  Of course, one gets the inkling that all of these people's lives are off-balance from the set (more on that in a minute), so maybe that's where all of this fits – they are each separately off-balance, blah blah blah.  Who knows?  Who cares?  The pacing is a dreadful funeral march, the timing of most of the (wholly unfunny) jokes is poor at best.  In short, the entire affair reeks of a "we-are-being-artistic-aren't-we" mentality. 

            So much of this production, though, is praise-worthy.  The set, designed by the always reliable Daniel Ettinger nails the seedy lifestyle befitting the lower class folk who inhabit the play, and the walls, floor and set pieces that are all askew and come to a downhill point upstage creates a very interesting effect – the characters are off kilter and so must the audience's perspective of them be.  Kudos, too, to the construction staff, which includes members of the Theatre 100 class – you have obviously learned some excellent stage craft skills.  Ditto the costume staff, including designer M. Celestine Ranney-Howes (whose renderings are on display in the lobby) – clearly going through Goodwill would have been the easy way to costumes, but the time and effort put in here is noteworthy.  Again, these theatre students are learning much.

            The four students in the cast deserve much praise for working their way through such a difficult piece (even if it didn't have to be so difficult).  Jessie Dulaney as the social worker has the difficult task of making mundane, pedestrian dialogue work.  She sounds every bit the governmental paper pusher as she drones through everything a social worker is supposed to say.  In those terms, her speech pattern is an excellent choice.  However, and I think this was a directorial choice, when her character gets away from her "scripted" platitudes and infuses her own beliefs into the conversation, perhaps the government drone tone should be altered.  Michael Houk, as Phillie the drunken desk clerk, gets the lion's share of the evening's laughs, but mostly because he plays quirky to the hilt and has been allowed to get carried away.  Nothing about the script really indicates the need for him (or anyone else for that matter) to work that hard to get a laugh.  A few times though, Mr. Houk, self adjusts and brings it down a notch or two to reveal a more interesting deeper character.  His anguish at being unable to kidnap the child from foster care is very real and heartfelt.  He is an actor to watch for in future productions.

            Renata Melillo as Denise, and the real problem child of the title, has a lot to work with and usually does well.  The inner conflict between right and wrong is most evident when her character is plotting or stewing in anger.  It is these moments that ring the truest in her portrayal, and she also does well when her character must get physical.  Her ability in these areas, notoriously difficult for young actors is quite excellent, and with more experience should make her a real force to be reckoned with.  Strangely, though, Ms. Melillo has the most difficulty with the smaller, one on one, low key scenes.  Fortunately, her acting partner for most of those scenes is Kevin James, a natural talent, as RJ.  He takes the stereotype of white trash oaf to a completely new level.  His characterization is deft, economical, nuanced and deeply layered.  Considering the material he is working with, he is pretty much brilliant.  Mr. James sets a new standard for creating such a character.  One can only dream of what he could do with Of Mice and Men.  He could easily have slipped into a droning cadence, as much of what he says and does is, by design, repetitive as befitting a not too smart guy.  But his passion and belief in the character makes this portrayal fresh and heartbreaking.  It almost aches that RJ is fighting a losing battle.

            I have wondered from time to time what like is like for people before they hit the Jerry Springer stage.  What happens in Problem Child answers that, I think.  It is an ugly mess of all that can be disgusting about human beings.  If you believe what happens on the Springer show, then this play is for you.  If you don't, it may be for you, too, as you will fully be able to appreciate the anguish RJ feels and the righteous indignation he bellows at the absurdity of such "entertainment."

 

(PHOTO: (L) Renatta Melillo and (R) Kevin James in UMBC's Problem Child.)

To post a comment, you must register and login.