A daring production of Mamet's 'Life in the Theatre' at the BCA

Renowned playwright David Mamet says the main purpose of the theater is, rather simply, to entertain the audience. Therefore, by Mamet's own standards, the Basement on the Hill Stage's production of Mamet's A Life in the Theatre is successful.

This rich and daring production, directed by Lilia Levitina (also the founder of the company, which literally started out in her basement), is now playing at the compact Leland Center at the Boston Center for the Arts. In this intimate, Off-Off-Broadway setting, Mamet's story of the trials and tribulations of two actors in their effort to "entertain their audiences" comes to life through a cascade of bold choices _ some of which pay off, and some which do not. Yet, this setting _ home of Levitina's previous production of Mamet's The Shawl _ serves as a theatrical laboratory wherein the traditional staging of any play would be a misuse of the space.

Keeping this in mind, Levitina makes what turns out to be a great directorial decision in choosing to use dolls for the scenes of the play where the two actors are supposed to be "onstage" acting out a play-within-a-play. In the original staging of this show at the Goodman Theatre in Chicago, director Gregory Mosher decided to use two curtains, so that one would open out to the audience and the other to the back wall, which was painted to look like the audience. This concept, now written into the published script, allows the actors to do those scenes that take place "backstage" facing the audience and those scenes that take place "onstage" with their backs to the audience.

In this production, however, Levitina cleverly chooses to have the actors do the "onstage" scenes essentially like little kids playing with their dolls. While at first this seems a bit ridiculous, especially for a Mamet play, this decision helps give the production a playful and magical feel without ruining its serious and somber aspects of the play. In short, this choice simply shifts the focus to the more lighthearted features of the show.

This bold decision, however, does not stand alone in this intrepid production. Drawing from the preface of the original script again, which says a stage manager is usually added to the cast to move around the set, this production adds a third character who becomes less of a stage manager and more like the eternal muse of the theater. Played splendidly by Chiara Durazzini, she represents the joy and beauty as well as the rejection and hardship of a life in the theater by clinging to those at the top of their careers and abandoning them as they fall.

This beautiful metaphor is played out wonderfully in the performance. At the beginning of the play, she clings to the older actor, Robert (Will Cabell), as he comes off the stage from a performance glowing and they dance around happily while the younger actor, John (Zachary Falconer), looks on. Later on, however, as John's career seems to be taking off and Robert's slowing down, she clearly shifts her attention to John. Unfortunately, this culminates in one of the worst decisions of the performance, where John and the muse have sex on stage while John is talking offstage. Although the point is made that John now no longer needs to listen to the washed-up Robert and that he has obviously won the favor of the muse, the scene's dialogue is lost along with the muse's innocence, which made her such a magical, symbolic character.

Despite this shameless diversion, the character of the muse is salvaged in an endearing and magnificent ending, which preserves the resonance of Mamet's play but highlights it in a very unique way. At the end, Robert and the muse are alone in the backstage of the theater. As Robert reflects on his life in the theater, they go around picking up all the dolls and putting them in a wagon. When he has filled the wagon and starts to pull it, the audience realizes that these dolls stand for the characters Robert has played in his lifetime and that now he is taking them with him, literally and metaphorically, because they have become a part of him.

Cabell, in the part of Robert, deserves high praise for his organic and resonating performance. His character becomes the focus of the show, as it is his fall from power seen through his initial triumphs, his fits of anger and finally, his mature appreciation of his life in the theatre, which are most interesting to watch. He understands the role perfectly and provides the perfect blend of arrogance and self-consciousness and severity and tenderness in creating his character's speaking-from-experience attitude.

On the contrary, Falconer, in the role of John, is very unimpressive playing opposite Cabell. He begins with a very annoying, over-the-top energy and stays at this one level for a long time. Then, when his character begins to change, he pulls a u-turn without even signaling his blinker, which allows the audience to see right through his obviously "unnatural" acting style. Throughout the rest of the play, with the exception of a few moments of sincerity, he stumbles from emotion to emotion from line to line creating a very choppy and unrealistic portrayal. In fairness to Falconer, however, the director shares as much responsibility for the creation of the character as the actor.

Yet, all in all, the show is still a delight because it is full of risks and innovations _ some brilliant, some not _ as one would expect of a non-commercial, theater-for-the-sake-of-theater production.

A Life in the Theatre is playing at the Boston Center for the Arts until November 16. Call 617-426-2787 for tickets and information.