Equivocation

Imagine Dick Cheney forcing Steven Spielberg to direct a pro-Republican propaganda film that vilified the Democrats. Bill Cain probably had a similar scenario in mind when he penned "Equivocation," a work of historical fiction with a contemporary vibe that depicts Robert Cecil, a devious advisor to King James I, forcing William Shakespeare to write a pro-Protestant drama that vilified the Catholic conspirators who attempted to blow up Parliament in The Gunpowder Plot of 1605. And throw in some witches too.

Shakespeare, referred to as "Shag," can't seem to find real drama in the story. When he interviews the jailed rebels behind the scheme, he finds that the facts are dubious and the truth is elusive. With no other option, he somehow pulls "Macbeth" out of a hat, which has enough murder and witchraft to satisfy the king.

"Equivocation," which resembles a loveless "Shakespeare in Love," is too ambitious for its own good. The dense play overflows with subplots, insider jokes and philosophic themes such as the power of language and the difficulty of portraying truth in art. After Cain's intriguing premise is set up, the play turns into a puzzling mess that constantly cuts back and forth.

Garry Hynes' production fails to make sense of the play. Some of her directorial touches, like combining modern and period clothing, actually do more harm than good. The cast of six actors, most of whom perform multiple roles, are overextended. John Pankow, who portrays Shakespeare as meek and downbeat, gives a lifeless performance. Meanwhile, David Pittu is too over the top as the vindictive, tortured Robert Cecil.

Bottom line: While academics may appreciate Cain's ambitious mix of English history, conspiracy theory, classical drama and pure fiction, "Equivocation" is a disappointing bore.

"Equivocation" plays at City Center, 131 W. 55th St., 212-581-1212, manhattantheatreclub. Through Mar. 28.