CROYDEN'S CORNER
by Margaret Croyden
|
|
| Margaret Croyden is a theater reviewer and essayist for the New York Theatre Wire. | |
Thoughts In The Night
It is getting increasing difficult to write reviews about the
Broadway season. Most of the shows are revivals that should not have been
revived, and some of the new plays on the boards should not have been produced.
Most difficult to evaluate are some of the actors--the female ones--that are
forced to take these awful roles in awful plays.
For starters, you have the most delightful Jill Clayburgh ("A Naked Girl
On the Appian Way") who has not been seen on stage or screen for more
than a decade and here she is playing one of these sappy so called comedy
roles. Not that she is bad, but she is capable of more. Unfortunately Richard
Greenberg, an author who seems to be full of himself with phony wit allows
the script to run away with platitudes and laugh lines that diminish the actor's
chance for real acting or real situations. That Jill Clayburgh may have had
no alternative but to take this role, is something one can not assert with
certainty. But I do wish her husband, David Rabe, would write a part for her--a
serious part--in his next play. At least he is a gifted writer who always
has a clear point of view, and doesn't cater to the audience. At any rate,
I offer this suggestion to Mr. Rabe who I admire, and hope it is worth considering.
Another actress who is slammed in "A Mother, A Daughter And a Gun,"
is Olympia Dukakis. Some reviewers consider her performance a cliche, a loud,
upsetting performance, unworthy of her ability. Here is another example of
a talented actor in a lousy play giving a lousy performance. Ms. Dukakis has
a lifetime of good performances behind her; she has been the recipient of
acting awards and is generally considered by the theater world as a serious
actor. My question is why is this happening to these women? Is it a matter
of bad taste, or is it that the theater has become a man's world? Or a world
for juveniles only.
Consider the so-called biggest hit to hit Broadway. Two guys, Nathan Lane
and Matthew Broderick-- who have created myths about themselves owing to their
perfect acting team in "The Producers," have now decided to capitalize
on that by playing in an old, worn out, much produced "Odd Couple."
Item: each of them is reported to receive $100,000 a week!! How's that for
nerve? Nice work if you can get it, most people would say. But what does that
say about the theater on Broadway --a Broadway that is unsatisfied with the
$100 top has now raised the tickets once again. I suppose the saying that
you can never have too much money belongs in lights on Broadway--and has become
the theme song for our theater.
As for the actors--well, can they afford to turn down such sums? Can they
afford to take a stance against this kind of thing? And what about the producers
and theater owners, the real culprits running everything? I suppose they will
answer that as long as people are willing to pay more than $100 for this kind
of dreck, then actors and producers will take the money and run. There are
no heros on Broadway. There is only more of the same coming up. And that is
a very depressing situation.
Margaret Croyden's most recent book is "Conversations With Peter Brook, 1970-2000" (Farrar, Straus & Giroux)
| museums | NYTW mail | recordings | coupons | publications | classifie