'Tis the season of Mamet. Ben Brantley took care of Anarchist at the John Golden theater, but as for Glengarry Glen Ross, despite having begun previews on Nov. 11, the reviews are not yet out. This is because it doesn't open until the 8th of December. Officially this is because of Sandy, unofficially this is because Al Pacino supposedly doesn't know his lines.
To be perfectly honest, I'm not entirely sure Pacino was the right choice for his role. In this production, he plays Levine. He is ageing and failing; he can no longer sell and is grasping at straws. Al Pacino is ageing, but he reads - to me at least - as a bit too confident for the role. He really was perfect in the movie as Roma (played excellently in this production by Bobby Cannavale) and Jack Lemmon really was the quintessential Levine. The other roles of the play are cast perfectly (John C. McGinley is perfect as Moss), but I have some serious reservations about Pacino. I feel terrible about saying this, but it's the case. It's just enough to draw me out of the world of the play slightly.
The world of the play is really ingeniously crafted. The entire first act is set in a Chinese Restaurant, which is brought to life brilliantly with little touches like a child's high-seat or the subtly shifting window (the pattern of a window is cast onto the set in the cool tones of night from a different angle for each scene). It really is a believable Midwestern Chinese restaurant. When the action shifts to the office of the real estate company, you really feel like there's something in every filing cabinet. For me, it called to mind the set of Gatz at The Public which was actually stocked with the theater's tax returns from many years back to make it look like a real office.
The production is certainly worth it. It features some titans of acting. But I'm not entirely certain that it is worth the hype of the marquis name. Al Pacino is doubtless a great actor, but I'm not entirely sure he was right for the part. The show does not suffer with regard to quality because he is in it, it suffers some with regard to believability. Al Pacino's Levine doesn't read to me like someone who would take the drastic step of stealing the leads that are so crucial to the action of the play.
To be perfectly honest, I'm not entirely sure Pacino was the right choice for his role. In this production, he plays Levine. He is ageing and failing; he can no longer sell and is grasping at straws. Al Pacino is ageing, but he reads - to me at least - as a bit too confident for the role. He really was perfect in the movie as Roma (played excellently in this production by Bobby Cannavale) and Jack Lemmon really was the quintessential Levine. The other roles of the play are cast perfectly (John C. McGinley is perfect as Moss), but I have some serious reservations about Pacino. I feel terrible about saying this, but it's the case. It's just enough to draw me out of the world of the play slightly.
The world of the play is really ingeniously crafted. The entire first act is set in a Chinese Restaurant, which is brought to life brilliantly with little touches like a child's high-seat or the subtly shifting window (the pattern of a window is cast onto the set in the cool tones of night from a different angle for each scene). It really is a believable Midwestern Chinese restaurant. When the action shifts to the office of the real estate company, you really feel like there's something in every filing cabinet. For me, it called to mind the set of Gatz at The Public which was actually stocked with the theater's tax returns from many years back to make it look like a real office.
The production is certainly worth it. It features some titans of acting. But I'm not entirely certain that it is worth the hype of the marquis name. Al Pacino is doubtless a great actor, but I'm not entirely sure he was right for the part. The show does not suffer with regard to quality because he is in it, it suffers some with regard to believability. Al Pacino's Levine doesn't read to me like someone who would take the drastic step of stealing the leads that are so crucial to the action of the play.
No comments:
Post a Comment