The Day Full Of Reviews, Post Four:
And finally, the review that Kat has been bugging me for: Finishing the Picture at the Goodman.
It's an interesting play to get into, especially when you know the main players behind the idea of it. It's written by Arthur Miller, and it's about a film shoot in Reno in 1960 that has ground to a halt because the star, a woman the whole world adores and envies, is too fucked up and fragile to go to work.
If you know anything about Arthur Miller of film history or movie stars, you know where this came from: It's The Misfits, which Miller wrote for then-wife Marilyn Monroe. Miller and Monroe divorced during or shortly after the movie. This was Monroe's last full movie -- she died a year later. It was also Clark Gable's last film, and a lot of people say the stress of dealing with Monroe killed him.
So here's a guy who had a starring role in the life of one of the most tragic celebrities of all time, and who is writing about the moment it all went to hell. That's a lot to live up to.
And if you go in thinking "This is a play that, once and for all, explains what happened to Marilyn Monroe, that reveals the person she was, that makes it all make sense," you're going to be disappointed. The Marilyn character, Kitty, doesn't have any lines we can hear. What the audience sees are the various people orbiting around Kitty/Marilyn -- the director, the cameraman, the industrialist/producer, her assistant, her husband and the scriptwriter, and her acting coaches. Each of them has something they want or need or get from Kitty, and none of them agree on what she really is and what she really needs. She's as much a mystery at the end of the play as she is at the beginning.
Once you get past that -- and I'll admit, it's hard to get past -- it's Marilyn Monroe! And Arthur Miller! And The Misfits! There's so much I want to know.... -- you can start sinking into the play as it is. And it's worth sinking into.
The cast is amazing -- Scott Glenn, Stacy Keach, Linda Lavin, Matthew Modine, Frances Fisher, and more -- and they live up to the hype. Heather Prete, who plays Kitty, has a pretty thankless part from he audience's point of view -- she stumbles on stage naked and spends the entire play naked, disoriented and wordless. Apparently she really gives a lot to the actors working with her, but from my point of view, I just couldn't help but think "Oh you poor thing, you're on stage with all these amazing actors and you don't get to say anything! Is this something you want your grandma to come see?"
Parts of the play are really funny -- a straight-talking cameraman dismissing art and saying the key to a good movie is the ass on the leading lady, the flighty, egocentric and just plain ridiculous behavior of the acting coaches -- and parts are incredibly sad -- this woman is falling apart, and no one, no matter how much they care, can help her. The good ones realize they can't help her and feel awful for it. The others see her as a means to an end, which is not trivial -- there are hundreds of people working on the film whose paycheck depends on her getting her act together. The cameraman is probably the chief exponent for this view, and you can tell he genuinely cares about Kitty, but he has no clue how to deal with someone who's this fucked up, and no patience with what he sees as her manipulations. Maybe if someone like him had gotten ahold of her early, it would have helped. But by that time, it's too late.
And she just crumbles.
Miller says doesn't want this to be about Monroe -- he asked that the actress who plays Kitty dye her hair (all of it, and yes we see all of it) brown so she's look less like Monroe. I got the sense he wanted to look at what celebrity does to those around it, what it's like to be held hostage by someone's talent and demons. But at the same time, the first several minutes felt like an apology and a rationalization from him -- Marilyn was so damaged that no one could have saved her, and there was nothing I could do, so it's not my fault. I don't know how much of that sense is because that's what I was still expecting the play to be about. I'd like to see it again to see how it feels the next time.
Also, for all his "no, it's not about Marilyn!" bluster, I couldn't help but feel he was settling scores with his depiction of the Jerome and Flora Fassinger, the acting coaches, who were frauds and users and insane and most concerned with how they would look coming out of this. "I'm not responsible for her!" Jerome keeps saying, as if that's the biggest concern. Not "She needs help" or "I want to support her or heal her or just help her through this," but "You can't blame this on me if she crashes and burns!" He very much wanted to take the credit if Kitty succeeded, but be absolved of all responsibility if she fell apart.
All of the other characters seemed pretty balanced, but Jerome and Flora Fassinger don't really seem to have any redeeming qualities. I get the sense Miller had no use for Lee Strasberg, and he thinks Strasberg did Monroe actual harm. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but that's the sense I got.
The production itself does a really interesting thing by incorporating film into the play, both as interstitials that look like rough-cuts of the picture they're finishing, and in the last act, where various concerned parties are hovering over Kitty in bed and trying to see if she can or will work. The faces loom over kitty on the bed and go in and out of focus, as if she's having trouble focusing -- or as if she feels like things are only real when they're on the screen. I dunno. It's an interesting technique, and I think it really works for the story.
Anyway. Good show. Go see it. Lots to think about. But don't expect to learn the real story behind Miller and Monroe and the Misfits -- it's not there.
And finally, the review that Kat has been bugging me for: Finishing the Picture at the Goodman.
It's an interesting play to get into, especially when you know the main players behind the idea of it. It's written by Arthur Miller, and it's about a film shoot in Reno in 1960 that has ground to a halt because the star, a woman the whole world adores and envies, is too fucked up and fragile to go to work.
If you know anything about Arthur Miller of film history or movie stars, you know where this came from: It's The Misfits, which Miller wrote for then-wife Marilyn Monroe. Miller and Monroe divorced during or shortly after the movie. This was Monroe's last full movie -- she died a year later. It was also Clark Gable's last film, and a lot of people say the stress of dealing with Monroe killed him.
So here's a guy who had a starring role in the life of one of the most tragic celebrities of all time, and who is writing about the moment it all went to hell. That's a lot to live up to.
And if you go in thinking "This is a play that, once and for all, explains what happened to Marilyn Monroe, that reveals the person she was, that makes it all make sense," you're going to be disappointed. The Marilyn character, Kitty, doesn't have any lines we can hear. What the audience sees are the various people orbiting around Kitty/Marilyn -- the director, the cameraman, the industrialist/producer, her assistant, her husband and the scriptwriter, and her acting coaches. Each of them has something they want or need or get from Kitty, and none of them agree on what she really is and what she really needs. She's as much a mystery at the end of the play as she is at the beginning.
Once you get past that -- and I'll admit, it's hard to get past -- it's Marilyn Monroe! And Arthur Miller! And The Misfits! There's so much I want to know.... -- you can start sinking into the play as it is. And it's worth sinking into.
The cast is amazing -- Scott Glenn, Stacy Keach, Linda Lavin, Matthew Modine, Frances Fisher, and more -- and they live up to the hype. Heather Prete, who plays Kitty, has a pretty thankless part from he audience's point of view -- she stumbles on stage naked and spends the entire play naked, disoriented and wordless. Apparently she really gives a lot to the actors working with her, but from my point of view, I just couldn't help but think "Oh you poor thing, you're on stage with all these amazing actors and you don't get to say anything! Is this something you want your grandma to come see?"
Parts of the play are really funny -- a straight-talking cameraman dismissing art and saying the key to a good movie is the ass on the leading lady, the flighty, egocentric and just plain ridiculous behavior of the acting coaches -- and parts are incredibly sad -- this woman is falling apart, and no one, no matter how much they care, can help her. The good ones realize they can't help her and feel awful for it. The others see her as a means to an end, which is not trivial -- there are hundreds of people working on the film whose paycheck depends on her getting her act together. The cameraman is probably the chief exponent for this view, and you can tell he genuinely cares about Kitty, but he has no clue how to deal with someone who's this fucked up, and no patience with what he sees as her manipulations. Maybe if someone like him had gotten ahold of her early, it would have helped. But by that time, it's too late.
And she just crumbles.
Miller says doesn't want this to be about Monroe -- he asked that the actress who plays Kitty dye her hair (all of it, and yes we see all of it) brown so she's look less like Monroe. I got the sense he wanted to look at what celebrity does to those around it, what it's like to be held hostage by someone's talent and demons. But at the same time, the first several minutes felt like an apology and a rationalization from him -- Marilyn was so damaged that no one could have saved her, and there was nothing I could do, so it's not my fault. I don't know how much of that sense is because that's what I was still expecting the play to be about. I'd like to see it again to see how it feels the next time.
Also, for all his "no, it's not about Marilyn!" bluster, I couldn't help but feel he was settling scores with his depiction of the Jerome and Flora Fassinger, the acting coaches, who were frauds and users and insane and most concerned with how they would look coming out of this. "I'm not responsible for her!" Jerome keeps saying, as if that's the biggest concern. Not "She needs help" or "I want to support her or heal her or just help her through this," but "You can't blame this on me if she crashes and burns!" He very much wanted to take the credit if Kitty succeeded, but be absolved of all responsibility if she fell apart.
All of the other characters seemed pretty balanced, but Jerome and Flora Fassinger don't really seem to have any redeeming qualities. I get the sense Miller had no use for Lee Strasberg, and he thinks Strasberg did Monroe actual harm. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but that's the sense I got.
The production itself does a really interesting thing by incorporating film into the play, both as interstitials that look like rough-cuts of the picture they're finishing, and in the last act, where various concerned parties are hovering over Kitty in bed and trying to see if she can or will work. The faces loom over kitty on the bed and go in and out of focus, as if she's having trouble focusing -- or as if she feels like things are only real when they're on the screen. I dunno. It's an interesting technique, and I think it really works for the story.
Anyway. Good show. Go see it. Lots to think about. But don't expect to learn the real story behind Miller and Monroe and the Misfits -- it's not there.
posted by SAJ at
2:43 PM
0 Comments
