|
HOME PAGE SITE GUIDE SEARCH ADVERTISING AT CURTAINUP REVIEWS FEATURES NEWS Etcetera and Short Term Listings LISTINGS Broadway Off-Broadway NYC Restaurants BOOKS and CDs OTHER PLACES Berkshires London California New Jersey Philadelphia Elsewhere QUOTES TKTS PLAYWRIGHTS' ALBUMS LETTERS TO EDITOR FILM LINKS MISCELLANEOUS Free Updates Masthead Writing for Us |
A CurtainUp Los Angeles Review
Just 45 Minutes from Broadway
By David Avery
A CurtainUp Los Angeles Review
Having never been to the Edgemar theater in Santa Monica, I was looking forward to seeing the debut of Henry Jaglom's Just 45 Minutes from Broadway. With it's clean cement lines reminiscent of mid-70s sci-fi, the place was delightfully hopeful, a far cry from the usual Hollywood 99-seater. The lobby was small, but tasteful. Reception was polite and warm.
I was surprised at the complexity of the set design. Several layers at odd angles neatly simulated the rustic, cabin-like setting that was the prinicple focus of the play. I know artists in Topanga Canyon with rambling cottages just like this. The lighting and strewn leaves suggested the full force of an east coast fall. If only the play matched the surroundings. . . The Isaacs are a family of actors with long stage histories and connections, though they obviously are not killing them in the aisles anymore. Patriarch George Isaacs (Jack Heller) was a Yiddish theater star before taking on English-speaking roles later in life. Vivien Cooper (Diane Salinger) was a successful stage actress but is now mostly a stay-at-home wife. s Vivien's brother, Larry Cooper (David Proval) is crashing with the family while doing a local dinner theater production of Guys and Dolls.Due to tough times and probably burned bridges the Isaacs have taken in Sally Brooks (Harriet Schock) to help pay the rent. Surprise surprise — she too is an actor too. The latest presence in the family home is George and Vivien's daughter Pandora (Tanna Frederick) as a consequence of a situation not new to her, a failed long-term romance. There's another daughter, Betsy (Julie Davis), who moved away long ago and has established herself as a successful in the "real" world, and pretty much despises all things actor-y. She too returns to the dilapidated family home to introduce her fiance, Jimmy Halkin (David Garver), a "civilian." It is his normalicy and simplicity, that Betsy prizes as much as she abhors her family's complicated strangeness. Sound like a fairly familiar setup? But wait. All, as they say, is not as it seems. Unfortunately the second act revelations are fairly ludicrous. What's more, It's hard to judge the individual merits of the actors, as the dialog they got saddled with here is stilted and ridiculous. David Garver manages to squeeze some pathos out of his "secret."Diane Salinger is pretty convincing as a callous stage whore still pining for the glory of yesteryear. Tanna Fredrick works hard at her free-spirited woman-child routine, but comes up short in the sympathy department. The rest of the cast isn't given a lot to do, though David Proval proves a good second fiddle to the legacy of his brother-in-law. The subtle undercurrent of disdain for his Guys and Dolls role at least makes him tragic, and he has a real moment of anger towards the end of the play. As I've said, Daavid's set was immaculate, and Gary Imhoff's direction at least doesn't exacerbate the play's pretentiousness. The second act introduces references to audiences, actors, acting, and sets that are obviously meant to induce a sense of meta-reality. Too bad, they fall flat. The whole eccentric artist being greater than the common man motif is just too familiar to resonate unless in an outstanding play. As an English major at UCLA in the late 80s and early 90s, I got to hang out with all the movie and theater students on north campus. It was pretty much impossible to not know who Henry Jaglom was. His style of cinema —- using friends and people in his life, playing himself in his films, and involving the act of movie-making into the plot— inspired both high praise and deep ridicule. In this play he is probably once again plumbing the depths of his personal life and it may once again divide audiences into those who see it as a great piece on the nature of family and those, like this writer, who are less intrigued by its disfunctional aspects.
|
|