“Uncle Vanya”, pleasant in all respects – Newspaper Kommersant No. 47 (7492) of 03/21/2023

The Chekhov Moscow Art Theater hosted the premiere of Uncle Vanya, the first event in the extensive program of celebrating the 125th anniversary of the Moscow Art Theatre. The play by Denis Azarov, with the participation of the stars of the older and younger generation, coped well with the tasks of staging for the anniversary of the esteemed theatre, believes Marina Shimadina.

The new “Uncle Vanya” was created for the 125th anniversary of the Art Theater, which will be celebrated on a grand scale all this year. Chekhov’s play was first staged here by Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko in 1899, during the author’s lifetime. Later on these stages it was embodied by Mikhail Kedrov in 1947 and Oleg Efremov in 1985. It would seem that the next appeal to the iconic text requires some kind of rethinking of the play and our attitude towards it. But no, Denis Azarov’s production is like “a lady pleasant in every way” from Gogol’s “Dead Souls”. It does not look old-fashioned, but it does not irritate with the radicalness of the concept, that is, it definitely cannot offend anyone’s feelings. But it is ideal for the cultural entertainment of viewers who have not seen about 125 other interpretations and, perhaps, have not read the play.

First of all, the scenography by Nikolai Simonov is impressive – moderately conditional, but still quite in line with “scenes from village life”, as Chekhov designated the genre of his work: wicker furniture, shavings underfoot, a grove of ship pines on the curtain and logs of a manor house leaving somewhere high under the grates. With each act, the space opens up more and more, taking us from rooms with a samovar (where could we go without it) to a foggy space distance, where in the final three moons hover over the stage at once, as in Kirill Serebrennikov’s recent Black Monk, creating the mood of Trier’s Melancholia “.

This “Uncle Vanya” looks very stylish – in its scenery you can arrange photo shoots for fashion magazines right in the luxurious costumes of Maria Danilova. And in the entourage of the last act, an opera would look good. Denis Azarov began his career precisely as a musical theater director – he worked at the Novaya Opera, the Boris Pokrovsky Chamber Theater, etc., and in his dramatic productions this operatic scope, the statuary beauty of mise-en-scenes and majestic slowness are also felt. It seems that now the heroes will sing. But they have to speak in despicable prose. And then the spirit of Stanislavsky wakes up in me as a spectator and says “I don’t believe it.”

The choice of performers for the main roles from Azarov, to put it mildly, is extraordinary. If Vanguard Leontiev in the form of a retired professor Serebryakov, a pompous and self-satisfied old man, is understandable and predictable, then all other characters are bewildering. The role of the fatal beauty Elena Andreevna unexpectedly went to Svetlana Kolpakova – the actress is rather characteristic, vital, they say about such people “blood with milk”. And Elena Andreevna, according to Uncle Vanya, “mermaid blood flows in her veins.” Pavel Chinarev plays Dr. Astrov, who is concerned about saving the forests, and it seems that he does not believe a single word of his idealist hero, who dreams of a wonderful life in some two or three hundred years. The actor plays rather a downtrodden playboy who powders the brains of women with beautiful words and is not averse to taking them to the forestry, but only without any serious relationship. Therefore, the sincere and passionate impulses of Sonya (Daria Trukhina) frighten him and instantly sober him up. Another thing is the seductive but indifferent Elena Andreevna, who beautifully takes off above the stage on a high swing.

But the most extravagant decision is the invitation of Sergei Epishev to the role of Uncle Vanya. He has already worked with Denis Azarov before – he played the brilliant schemer Chichikov in his “Dead Souls” at the Roman Viktyuk Theater. Here the role is completely different: Epishev portrays a big child, awkward and awkward – such a two-meter-tall Epikhodov who always stumbles over chairs and breaks something. But this child is angry and envious, who hates the successful Serebryakov and loses his temper when the desired toy is taken away from him. In his hysterical monologue – “Schopenhauer, Dostoevsky could have come out of me” – he is scary, like a man who has lost control and is capable of any wild trick. This one can easily grab a gun and shoot for real.

Voinitsky’s mother – the “old jackdaw” – is just as unexpectedly played by the quite young Daria Yurskaya. A great admirer of the arts, she practices painting, reads the furious art history texts of Professor Serebryakov and makes the household speak French and do classical dance (choreographer Anna Zakusova). The corps de ballet of courtyard girls in airy skirts and heavy boots, which the gentlemen drag around the stage back and forth, like logs on a subbotnik, produces a comic effect and does not let the audience get bored for a long three hours.

But about the same impression is made by the rest of the characters – as if the actors tried on the roles “from someone else’s shoulder.” Perhaps, with the help of non-trivial casting, the director wanted to break the stereotypes of our perception, bring down the usual optics and force us to look at the Chekhov conflict with a fresh look. But the only fresh conclusion that comes to mind after the performance is that we, today, are not up to Chekhov at all, and maybe we should leave him alone for 125 years, until the next anniversary.