Theatre for a New Audience’s current production of Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra immediately submerges its audience in a world of sensuality and passion in which the title lovers engage in acts of lust as soon as the lights go down. Most of the show’s initial charm, however, wears off by the second act, as a weak supporting cast and a variety of unsupported directorial decisions leave it regrettably undercooked.

The title characters are both portrayed beautifully. Laila Robins shines as Cleopatra, capturing at once both strength and sensuality, eccentricity and control. Even in moments of weakness, Robins’ Cleopatra never wavers—she handles situations with an incredibly seductive poise. Marton Csokas brings an almost Russell Crowe-like element to his role as Antony, embodying both the lover and the man of duty. At times, the native New Zealander’s recitation of Shakespearean language comes across as drab and monotone, but these moments are overshadowed by Csokas’s immensely passionate overall performance.

The play’s technical elements are no less than brilliant—light and music contribute to the sharp division between the scenes in sensual Egypt and the more austere Rome. The costume design alone makes the production worth seeing, adding a stunning visual component that constantly rivals the performance itself.

Unfortunately, though, two strong leads and a visually appealing design cannot bear the full weight of Shakespeare’s text. Many of the actors in smaller parts often seem uninterested in or even confused about how to react to the happenings on stage, lowering the intensity of some of the play’s more powerful moments. During Enobarbus’s speech about Cleopatra’s glamorous appearance, for example, the actors playing Maecenas and Agrippa stare at him as though he were reciting a eulogy. One gets the sense that director Darko Tresnjak devoted so much time to Antony and Cleopatra that he forgot to pay any attention to the actors surrounding them.

Although some of his innovations are certainly clever, most of them seem either to grow stale by the second act or never really to come to fruition at all. The small pool on the front of the stage, for example, creates an interesting symbolic, maritime depth, but the toy boat that floats upon it throughout the entire production diminishes not only the symbolism of the pool itself but also the weightiness of some of the play’s more intense moments.

The text-based changes seem most out of place, though. Tresnjak insists on adding two babies to the show, one for Cleopatra and one for Octavia. The babies are interesting additions and perhaps are even supported in Shakespeare’s source material, but to add them without any sort of actual acknowledgement—and to let them disappear as quickly as they come—renders them purposeless distractions.

The expanded role of the Soothsayer, who awkwardly appears after different characters’ deaths, serves no purpose but to add an imposing supernatural presence that contributes little to the overall performance. Combined with the transposed setting—which the program notes explain as “Around 1884, when the term ‘The Scramble for Africa’ was coined”—these decisions compromise, without justification, the conflict between sexual love and formal duty that lies at the heart of the play.

This production—with an unusual underlying concept and stunning visuals—packs enough spectacle to make your $10 student ticket seem worthwhile. But by play’s end, the theater’s spatial limitations and lackluster supporting cast have become woefully apparent, and the compression of such a large tragedy with an often wavering direction detracts from its overall effect.