There is nothing about liberation, nor is there anything liberating in Bess Wohl’s “Liberation” currently running at the Laura Pels Theatre in the Harold and Miriam Steinberg Center for Theatre. There is gratuitous and unnecessary nudity on stage that requires patrons to relinquish their phones before entering the theater. That nudity is completely unnecessary: the questions raised about the characters’ body image (like/dislike) can be addressed while clothed. But that is not the only problem plaguing this overstuffed, overlong, overwrought, maudlin, and insipid play.

At a time when the agency of women remains a critical issue, and when the rights of women are being challenged and degraded by the current administration and the Supreme Court, a powerful and engaging play is needed: “Liberation” does not qualify as that play. I choose not to mention any of the actors’ names in this review so as not to “blame” them for any of “Liberation’s” missteps. This brilliant ensemble cast, and the director have done everything possible to save this play. The problem here lies with the playwright and the choices they made.

The action takes place in a basement basketball court at a local recreation center, somewhere in Ohio where a group of women have gathered in 1970 in response to a flyer posted by one of the women. The time is “Now,” “And Recently,” “And in the 1970s.” The flyer is looking for women interested in discussing “The Women’s Liberation Movement.” The narrative’s action moves awkwardly between those time periods. In the opening scene one of the characters (whose deceased mother is also in the group) drones on about the structure of the play and recognizes that audience members might be concerned about the play’s running time. This should have been the clue for audience members to get up, exit the theater, and reclaim their stolen (sorry, confiscated) mobile devices.

This monologue (again, in no way due to the skill set of the actor) is unnecessary, long, and boring. Not the way to engage an audience. In the remaining scenes of “Liberation,” the group members (in the past, recently, and in the future) exchange concerns about their lives in a sexist environment, whether it be with a spouse or partner, with all men in general, or with society at large. There is nothing new in these exchanges and that is the core problem with the play. The stereotypical “complaints” run the gamut from one’s retired husband always being at home” and wondering why there are not “artificial wombs.” Although there is a warning to “not become a wife” for all the reasons offered, the main character marries in the end and chooses a life that seems not unlike the life her mother chose decades ago.

There is no dramatic arc (except the sometimes-confusing back and forth between present and past). There is no clear character definition or development. One leaves the theater wondering, “What’s the theme? What is the play about?”

If I had not promised to stay through all the performances I see as a reviewer, I would have left at intermission.  The cigarette smoking was annoying – heavy smoke – unnecessary. My advice, avoid seeing the mis-named “Liberation.” Better to occupy your time rereading Betty Friedan’s “The Feminine Mystique,” exploring Gloria Steinem’s life history, or purchasing a subscription to “Vogue.” Sorry the news could not have been better. See the names of the talented cast members below. My apologies for not connecting your names to any of the characters in this ill-begotten drama.