‘Man of La Mancha’

Readers generally scan theater reviews either to determine whether they should see a show or (having seen the performance) whether the reviewer can expand on or better articulate what they have experienced. Sylvie Drake’s review of “Man of La Mancha” did neither (“A Musty ‘Man of La Mancha,’ ” Dec. 7).

Drake’s review seems to have missed what hasn’t escaped even a casual observer: This is a revival for the show’s 25th anniversary, not a reinterpretation.

Audiences have been coming to this “Man of La Mancha” (and will continue to, despite Drake’s cheap shots) either to see a play they liked years ago or to see the show for the first time. If the former, they want to see what they enjoyed; if the latter, what bothered Drake can’t possibly look old and familiar. Either way, real audiences clearly couldn’t care less about this critical carping.

Drake’s attack on Sheena Easton’s performance is particularly misplaced. Having panned the entire production for being archaic, Drake then inconsistently slams Easton for being “contemporary.” Drake says Easton’s Aldonza lacks genuine emotion--an opinion that bears no relationship to the audiences’ reactions so far this run.

Drake’s criticism also misses the basic character development inherent in the role: Aldonza’s emotions deepen and become more manifest as she first feels the inner echo of Don Quixote’s values and then vows to reflect them despite his death. The two principal numbers that showcase this emotional range are the very songs that Drake (grudgingly) calls Easton’s “brighter moments.” Easton is spectacular here, and strong throughout.

This review reads like a predetermined pan. No thoughtful commentator would close with the hoariest cliche for any critical hit on “La Mancha”: a forced word-play on “impossible dreams.”

Anyone wanting to see a fine play should catch this Mitch Leigh production.

C. RICHARD ALLEN

Beverly Hills