I don't see mounting horror in The Cherry Orchard, just a bunch of people talking about a Cherry Orchard that none of them are willing to do anything to save, because they are concerned with other things. It's significant in-action.
   
A thing that happens in drama is that we feel it is slow, but the solution is often to slow down even more, to find the significance of what's happening. Then it doesn't bore us, or seem slow.

I recently found a name for the problem of the tree. If it's too life-like it falls into the "uncanny valley". A japanese robot maker named the problem that when a robot looks too real you don't notice it's positive life-like qualities as much as the zombie-like missing part--things like the eyes not being able to fix on and follow an object.

Most of the acting we see in film is method-y or related to the so-called "system"--which isn't very systematic really. Sanford Meisner's book is a good up-close look at a version of teaching it.

I doubt Hollywood is afraid to make a movie like that story, but is just busy with others. Lots of stories get bought and shelved, and sometimes the writer would just as soon get paid and not endure the movie. Hollywood isn't very systematic either, not even to make money. G-rated movies make the most money, and have the biggest audience, but they make 3 R's for every G. And many PG's or PG13's could be released as G with just a snip--like they do for t.v. later. But that would compromise the artistic integrity of a lot of cheesy crap. It doesn't run like a business, but just the way the people run it, just like everything else.