Book review - "Son of Any Wednesday" by Muriel Resnick

William Goldman alluded to this book in The Season though he didn't name names - he quoted the comment about all English directors being called Peter and the quote that the author had never read an Ibsen play. It was a little mean.

This is an entertaining book. I had a lot of fun reading it. Resnick decided to write a play after the failure of her last novel, feeling that it at least would get reviewed. She joins the Group Theatre writers workshop of Molly Kazan, writes something that she is told will be sellable (part for a star, one set, small cast)... pitches it to Greer Garson who turns it down, but it gets optioned quite quickly, money is raised quite quickly.

But then the troubles start. There's never enough money so more producers have to be brought in. They have troubles getting directors then when they geet them have trouble keeping them. George Morrison for instance keeps wanting changes and things added, and slows the play down. They keep getting people as they go before eventually getting Henry Kaplan.

They get a cast, after a lot of rejection but have trouble holding on to it. Sandy Dennis doesn't want Gene Hackman because he's not hot enough so they get Dick York who quits so they get Gene Hackman who does so well that Michael Rennie, the big star attached, gets jealous and quits so they bring in Don Porter.

There are nice reviews but a bad one from Eliot Norton makes everyone panic. They have trouble getting a theatre. Trouble with balloons the author wrote in. Mike Nichols pops in periodically and assures her it's fine but people still panic. Opening night goes terrifically well, the piee runs and runs and sells for a huge amount to the movies.

Triumph. Although exhausted.

Resnick lists the short runs of the next shows her cast and crew did which is a little mean, as it the appendix of all the people who turned down the play, but I guess she's entitled to.

This is like a season arc of Mrs Maisel where she wrote a play. She gets married to some dude during it too. I really enjoyed it.

Grant Taylor theatre performances

 Grant Taylor is probably best remembered today (if at all) for his film appearances - Forty Thousand Horsemen, Rats of Tobruk, Captain Thunderbolt, Long John Silver.

But in the 40s through to the 60s he would've been better known in Australia for his theatre work. He did a lot of touring for JC Williamsons in things like Two of the Seasaw, Teahouse of the August Moon, Woman in a Dressing Gown and Dial M for Murder. His physical presence would have helped.

He also appeared in a few Australian plays. This was not common at the time.

These plays:

*Dark Enchantment by Max Afford

*Pirates at the Barn by Eleanor Witcombe

*Curly on the Rack by Ru Pullan

* Slaughter of St Teresa's Day by Peter Kenna

*The Bastard Country by Anthony Coburn

*Shipwreck by Douglas Stewart

*The Break by Philip Albright

Most of these were with the Trust. Still, that's not bad. Apparently he was particularly great in Bastard Country.

Book review - "Mainly on Directing: Gypsy, West Side Story and Other Musicals" by Arthur Laurents

 Could have done with an edit especially on the bits about Gypsy - some of it is interesting but it just goes on and on, and it was a revival. But the interesting stuff is really interesting and there are entertaining recaps too of I Can Do It For You Wholesale, West Side Story, Anyone Can Whistle, Nick and Nora, La Cage. Everyone is keen to sack people all the time in theatre. My favourite story is sacking Robert Stack from La Cage - that's very funny.

Merrick wanted to replace Elliot Gould on Wholesale with Michael Callan.

Book review - "Wendy and the Lost Boys" by Julie Salamon (2011)

 Wendy Wasserstein doesn't get much play in Oz - I don't recall her works being done that much. There aren't many films made from her scripts - The Object of My Affection was one. A bunch of others were for PBS but didn't travel. 

But in New York she was big.Jewish population helps of course. She spoke for a large group - was very popular lecturer and essayist. Interesting family (brother was a tycoon). Had the full Jewish mother, the dreams, heaps of gay friends. Had a sexual relationship with Terence McNally. Cripes - lot of girls thought they could covert back in the day. Sad ending - she died quite young, leaving a little girl.

Salamon does a really good job - top quality interviews, and research.

Book review - "Razzle Dazzle The Battle for Broadway" by Michael Riedel (2015)

 Super entertaining look at Broadway of the 70s and 80s... its decline then Chorus Line led revival. There was maybe a little too much on the Schubert organisation for me.

Full of colourful characters, Michael Bennett leading the way. It gives Frank Rich a shellacking, which is entertaining. It maybe warps the view of Broadway by focusing on the hits - tales of a few more flops might give a more accurate figure. And jeez every hit production is full of personal narrative of triumph. I don't think Phantom of the Opera can play the underdog card.

Book review - "Singular Sensation: The Triumph of Broadway" by Michael Ridele

 Wonderful book. As good as The Season. Well maybe not that good. But excellent. I didn't think of the 90s as a golden age in Broadway. But when you look at it as written here... Sunset Boulevard, The Lion King, Rent, the straight drama plays of David hare and Edward Albee... It really made Broadway pop again. Garth Dabrinsky offers a great old school hucketer.

Book review - "The Season: A Candid Look at Broadway" by William Goldman (1968)

Had another read of this fabulous work and enjoyed it as much as ever - gossipy, opinionated, smart, funny it has aged very well. Occasionally it feels a little mean, with cracks about actresses weight and the section on Mike Nichols, but consistently comes up with good, original ideas and fresh takes on the theatre.

Radio review - BBC - "The Three Sisters" adapted by Brian Friel

This didn't do it for me. Friel's adaptation is performed by Irish actors complete with accents but still seems to go on forever and it was hard to tell who was who. Around the middle it picked up - less whining, the human stakes increased, it got deeper and better. But it lacks strong narrative drive. I still haven't seen (heard) this done in a way that really touches me.

Movie review - "Jeanne Eagles" (1957) ***

It's a matter of taste of course but while Kim Novak could be effective in some roles, and she has her moments here, she's mostly pretty dreadful, indicating all over the place and never being remotely convincing as a great actress, which Eagles was meant to be. She does have a sort of charisma, a lovely figure which is shown off during early dancing scenes, and does okay with some of the breakdowns - but has laughably bad drunk scenes, emotes are too much and is generally out of her league.

I didn't know much about Eagles career apart from the fact she died young and was in Rain on stage. I gather a lot of this is fictionalised, including Jeff Chandler's character - he's a carny operator who was Eagles' first love.

Chandler is more animated than we usually find him, sparked off by a different sort of role. He and Novak are well matched physically, though neither is up to the acting talent of Agnes Moorehead. It's quite and adult, serious tale (there's heroin, per-marital cohabitation and rape), well directed by George Sidney, and despite Novak's limitations I enjoyed it.

Theatre review - "Eat, Pray, Laugh" July 8, 2012

It's still bizarre to me that our universally recognised theatre genius has this weird concoction of vulgar humour (farts, belches, vomiting), songs, satire, word play. He's managed to keep Sir Les current because its a way to access the political situation and Edna can talk to celebrities. Sandy Stones aren't around any more but those of us old enough remember their inspiration and his monologue, about losing their child to infantile paralysis, is touching.

Sometimes I swear he vagued out particularly during the Sir Les segment when he was cooking a BBQ but as Edna and Sandy he was spot on - ditto as the pedophile priest. The humour is vicious and broad - he pokes fun of everyone equally. There are some songs and dances to help ease the pain of that one hundred dollar ticket. The night I went the audience included Bob Ellis, a monk and a woman with a baby.

Book review – “Noel Coward Diaries” by Noel Coward

Noel Coward created many fabulous performances, songs, plays, scripts, etc - but few of them matched the fabulousness of his life. A constant whirl of hard work, travel, parties, theatre going, film going, moving around the globe... This diary is an enormously entertaining account of his life from World War Two to 1969, when he found out he was going to be knighted (he died a few years later). He starts on a massive career high: the war was the time of Blithe Spirit, In Which We Serve and Brief Encounter, plus his famous tours - but when peacetime came things were a bit more difficult. There were a few flops and fizzes - but he kept banging away, working hard, turning out plays and books and stories, etc. He enjoyed massive success as a cabaret entertainer and some medium size play hits - although none of his post-war work seems to have reached his pre-war highs. He also turned down an astonishingly high number of roles in films/shows that became classics: The King and I, My Fair Lady, Dr No, Lolita, The Bridge on the River Kwai. His diary is often witty, always fascinating - like a lot of people who've worked since they were a child he was very conservative. Always interesting to read his take on other plays and films (eg he wasn't a fan of the Angry Young Men, but he did like Pinter). A delight.

Book review – “William Goldman” by Richard Andersen

A critical appraisal of Goldman’s work from the late 70s (it goes up until Magic) and as such well worth reading for Goldman fans. Well, fans of his novels at any rate – his plays, short stories, screenplays and non-fiction don’t get much of a look-in, except for the Butch Cassidy script. I think this is a shame since some of this is his best work, especially The Season. But still there’s some first rate analysis of the novels as well as an illuminating interview with Goldman himself. One quote in particular I found striking – Goldman says he always knows which character he is going to kill, and makes that character as likeable as possible. It’s a shame there isn’t an updated version of this book, which covers his novels of the 80s (after which he stopped writing them).

Book review – “Dazzler: The Life of Moss Hart” by Steven Bach

This is the bio of Hart to read – splendidly written, diligently researched, a lot of fun. Hart had one of those careers you simply can’t have any more – stage struck as a child, he broke into the business as an office boy; he managed to get a debut play onto Broadway but it sank like a stone; he perfected his talent in the Catskills; achieved fame with George Kaufman in Once in a Lifetime; worked on many now-forgotten revues with major talents like Irving Berlin and Cole Porter; hit a golden streak with Kaufman and a series of classic plays; then became an accomplished director.

Lots of things I didn’t realise – he was really good mates with Dore Schary (the two corresponded throughout Hart’s life); the struggles behind almost all Hart’s hits (even My Fair Lady); the contribution of Pascal to My Fair Lady via the changes he made to the script of the 1938 film of Pygmalion (I was totally unaware of this); the influence of psychoanalysis on his work. I love how they tried to solve the problems of Once in a Lifetime by adding more comedy and more spectacle – then going the other way and adding more drama, which ultimately worked; it’s a golden lesson for all comedy writers.

Book review – “Leo McKern” By George Whaley

Leo McKern seemed to have everything going against him for a young actor: short, stumpy, plump, one eye, left school at 15, uninspiring military service, working class, no artistic connections in the family, no training, a dud marriage behind him, etc. Not to mention the fact he started in Sydney of the 1940s, not exactly a hot bed of theatrical activity. But he was interested in a girl who passionately wanted to be an actor, and he found that he enjoyed it. He got some jobs around the traps and ended up following the girl to London.

For a man with no training or connections, McKern’s rise to steady work was astonishingly rapid. Within a few years he was happily ensconced at the Old Vic and was never out of work over the next fifty years.

In hindsight, and only in hindsight, you can understand why. There is always room in actor land for a tubby character player, especially one who is skilled at comedy and conveying menace, as McKern was – you can play jesters, sidekicks, porters, fathers, priests, etc. It also helps to have a wonderful speaking voice, a hard work ethic, and genuine natural talent, and McKern went on to have a great career. In addition to Rumpole, he worked with Olivier, the Beatles, Tyrone Guthrie, David Lean, Williamson, etc – films, theatre, TV, radio… the sort of career English actors can have.

Despite all this McKern still found things to whinge about – fear of typecasting as Rumpole (as if it mattered), too much work, not enough work, etc. Although he married his soul mate he cheated on her, and he clashed at times with his daughters. But in general it was a rich life and he seems to have been a nice person.

Whaley is very strong on acting and the theatre – it’s a shame when discussing McKern’s performances he didn’t concentrate more on analysing his art rather than listing fellow cast members and reviews. (This is excusable for theatre performances which Whaley didn’t see; less so for McKern’s film and TV roles) It’s also annoying that there isn’t a list of credits at the end. McKern deserved a bio and I enjoyed reading it, it’s just a shame Whaley didn’t dig a little deeper.

Book review – “The Naked Truth” by Graeme Blundell

In Australian film history, is any actor more responsible for the success of the film in which he starred in than Graeme Blundell in Alvin Purple? Off the top of my head I can only think of a few – Jack Thompson in Petersen, Bruce Spence in Stork, Hogan in Crocodile Dundee. It’s hard to imagine who other than Blundell could have made Alvin work as well as he did: his sad eyes, gawky nature and unassuming nebbish face took the sting out of the central concept, and helped turn this one joke film into a massive smash. Alvin has not dated well – it’s repetitive and dull, all that nudity notwithstanding – but Blundell’s performance has.

There was something very Australian about Blundell – he was as Aussie in his way as the macho Chips Rafferty or Jack Thompson: shy best mates, quiet soldiers, Liberal voting businessmen who get bullied at Labor election night parties. And his background entirely suited his “look” – working class Melbourne lad, son of a ex-serviceman who worked in a shoe factory, loved cricket and died young, honourable and a little sad, (it was a shock to see a picture of Blundell’s father to find he didn’t look like Graeme Blundell).

At the time of Alvin, Blundell was already familiar to Australian cinema audiences through his lead role in The Naked Bunyip and support part in Stork. Indeed, with Alvin Blundell could make some claim to being the first new film star of the 70s revival. Unfortunately, he never enjoyed a follow up star part to match it in the way, say, Jack Thompson had in Sunday Too Far Away to follow Petersen. (Blundell did go into Don’s Party but that was an ensemble piece). Nonetheless, he was as busy as any actor in Australia during the 70s and 80s.

There was a lot more to Blundell than movies, though – he made an incredibly important contribution to Australian culture through his theatre work. He at the beginning of La Mama, the Pram Factory, the MTC; he was involved in early productions of Don’s Party, Norm and Ahmed (for which he was arrested for obscenity) and Dimboola; he helped set up Playbox and Kinsellas. Blundell’s never really been given credit for this – partly I think because of the Alvin thing, partly because of his problems with the Carlton set (he seems to have been politically a liberal rather than a hard-core leftist and those people seemed to cop it in the theatre land of the 70s). Nonetheless, it’s a massively impressive track record and it’s a shame he gave away setting up theatre companies after the late 80s.

For the past decade or so Blundell has mainly been a writer – his biography on Graham Kennedy is superb – and this autobiography is very well written, full of vivid descriptions and excellent analysis of various actors and directors eg George Ogilvie, John Sumner, Kennedy. I also think there’s a play (or a rom com) based on his experience writing a biography of Brett Whiteley with his de facto, Margot Hilton – it ended up ruining their relationship and Hilton ran off with the former lover of Whiteley’s wife.

Having said that, the book felt a little bogged down in places. I couldn’t think exactly what it was – maybe it a lack of joy and humour. Blundell seems tired by his experiences at times, particularly his marriages and the politics of the Australian theatre scene. There’s a little too much analysis and description and not enough life, if that makes sense. For instance, sketches of Frank Thring and Barry Humphries fairly leap off the page – maybe there needed to be more of this, or more stories. In particular I would have liked to have known a bit more about filming the various movies, putting on the shows (surely there was one decent anecdote from Pacific Banana?). But that’s just a personal opinion.

Book review – “Moss Hart: Prince of Theatre” by Jared Brown

I’m surprised someone felt the need to write another biography of Hart so soon after Steven Bach’s Dazzler but this is an entertaining look at one of the giants of a period which is essentially gone now. Out of show try outs, new shows every year, disdain for Hollywood, houses in Connecticut near other showbiz type, writing a show on a trip around the world with Cole Porter and his entourage (144 days – imagine!), glossy apartments, dining out at restaurants. It really did happen.

It’s important to create the world because Hart himself isn’t that fantastically interesting – possibly bisexual, once poor, money burned a whole in his pockets, charming and easy to work with, major battles with depression, etc.

Brown has access to Hart’s diaries and letters, giving us an invaluable insight into his mental state – particularly his battle with depression. Well researched, workman-like prose. Brown never really succeeds in making the past come alive the way say a Simon Callow might but he does well enough.

Book review – “David Williamson: Behind the Scenes” by Kristin Williamson

It was time for another David Williamson bio – Brian Kiernan’s excellent work hadn’t been updated since the early 90s. And Kristin was particularly qualified, being an author in her own right, not to mention ex-journo. I was interested to get her point of view, since Williamson’s plays are full of shrewish wives and adulterous husbands, and have been criticised for bad female characters. What is it like to be married to such a man?

Well, we find out. Dave is engaging, passionate, paranoid, likeable, talented, hard working and very perceptive about his own class and generation but nothing else (including the world around him). His wife seems the same. Oh my gosh – you mean soldiers were brave in World War I? The Chinese communist government was oppressive? Open marriage doesn’t work? It’s cold in Denmark? Paul Keating has the effrontery to refer to Balmain basket weavers – which apparently offends the Williamson’s friends, who included, we are told, economists, scientists, academics and film directors. How can they be basket weavers? Apparently there hadn’t been an international star in an Australian film before Susannah York in Eliza Fraser and the only Australian play on Broadway before The Club was Summer of the Seventeenth Doll. These faults can be forgiven in a memoir but not a biography by a professional writer.

This would have been better off had it taken the former course because the personal stuff is strong, apart from needing a bit of a cut. The story of their meeting, affair, marriage troubles, fights, etc are excellent as is the account of their life in Denmark and so on – invaluable for any serious student of Williamson. It probably could have done with a little bit less “that was a fun night” and “how great are my children” but at least that gives flavour (if repetitive flavour) about their homelife. 

The “proper bio” stuff isn’t as strong; the background of political stuff is clunky, and she ridiculously shares her husband’s preoccupation with critics (calling people who don’t like his plays critics or “failed playwrights” – it is possible people just don’t like them?).

David and Kristin argue viciously, have dinner parties, support left wing causes,  have affairs, work for the National Times, are on the board of the ABC, are friends with lefty politicians, don’t like conservatives or working class people, loathe working class slappers with cash. Just like characters in Williamson plays.

Louis Nowra wrote an interesting, perceptive review of the book. The review is a little unfair in places (I think Williamson’s plays do explore dark aspects of the human condition), but in some places he’s dead right, particularly Williamson K’s sometimes clunky prose, and lack of skill evoking characters. There is too much about critics. You have to discuss critics when talking about Williamson because he’s so obsessed about them, but you don’t have to be obsessed about them too. The space spent on quoting good and bad reviews would have been far better used talking about the people who were involved in the productions. We can always look up a crappy review, but wasn't Kristin there at the time?

People often talk about how actors are childish – it’s sometimes used as an insult but there is a serious component to this as well. It’s important for actors to be childish in that they can forget their inhibitions and play pretend the way a child can. Simon Callow refers to one rehearsal where the action was “desperately, seriously childish”. Writers need to do this too. (This is why so many actors and writers have drinking problems.)

Part of the reason why David Williamson is so successful I think is that he has remained childish. Mature adults don’t sent off faxes to five critics after 20 years of playwriting asking for a fair go; they don’t tell their wives they are having an affair. This means he’s always discovering new things and being enthusiastic about it.

It’s a must read for fans of Williamson (and those just interested in him). It doesn’t mean it’s not a heavily flawed book.

Book review – “Female Brando – The Legend of Kim Stanley” by Jon Krampner

There are actors and there are actor’s actors – performers whom other actors love and admire. Brando would be the best know – others would include Montgomery Clift, Olivier. Apparently Kim Stanley was the 50s equivalent for women.

Kim Stanley is not that widely known today, at least in Australia. I got her confused with Kim Hunter. Unlike Barbara Bel Geddes she didn’t have a hit TV show late in her life, unlike Helen Hayes she never played a series of cute little old ladies, unlike Geraldine Page she didn’t get a great film role towards the end of her life, unlike Maureen Stapleton she didn’t appear a lot in movies.

You’d know the roles she created on Broadway, mainly from film versions in which the roles were played by other actors: The Chase (Jane Fonda), Picnic (Susan Strasberg), Bus Stop (Marilyn Monroe). She was also in a popular stage version of A Touch of the Poet, and the film Séance on a Wet Afternoon as well as the famous Actors Studio disaster, Three Sisters.

She drank like a fish, ate like a pig and rooted like a rabbit – while married to her second husband she had a child to her lover (Montgomery Clift’s brother). Adored by other actors and writers, many of whom she had sex with – Ben Gazzara, Lorenzo Semple Jnr, Cliff Robertson, J P Miller. Several writers also turned her into fictitious characters.

If Stanley had died around 1960 she would have been this great legend. As it is she got fat and boozy, lost her looks and figure, and she’s more of an underground figure today. Her great performances were mostly given on stage and live television – of course its impossible to recreate stage performances but there’s still a fair few live TV performances available, it’s just hard to see them. (Marketing idea for this book – re-release The Goddess on DVD and throw in a couple of Stanley’s best television performances.) Of course there is a tantalising quality about this, very susceptible to cultism eg “ah, if only you’d seen Kim Stanley, now there was an actor.”

Krampner has done a lot of admirable research, including a stack of reviews from many of her colleagues and friends, who talk about her with a mixture of exasperation and admiration. Everyone attests to her acting genius, though some argue it went a bit off the boil towards the end. He does a very good job – I enjoyed his little asides – although at times I felt if he was an actor himself perhaps he might have been better able to convey what Stanley was like as a performer. But this admittedly is a very difficult skill – off the top of my head Simon Callow is the only writer I can think of who can do this – and generally what Krampner does is fine. (Maybe also he could have gone into more detail about Stanley’s influence on other female actors.)

Play review – “Stallion of Death” by Drew Fairley

Enormously enjoyable romp, a sort of pastiche of Aussie bush melodramas that flourished 1890s-1910 eg Squatter’s Daughter, Breaking of the Drought. It has a little something to say too about armband history, though that is not belaboured. Excellent performances: Gibson Nolte is a name to watch.

Book review - "The Season" by William Goldman

For my money, the best book ever written about the theatre and one of the best books ever written about show biz - or any biz, for that matter. Its Goldman's masterpiece, well one of them, even better than Adventures in the Screen Trade. It looks at Broadway during the 67-68 season and is wonderful - well researched, funny, pungent, skilfully written, thoughtful, opinionated, smart. I've read it a number of times. Peter Bart reportedly tried to match it with The Gross but he doesn't come close, not even in the same league. Broadway is admittedly easier to tackle than Hollywood - more self contained, easier to find out what is going on, but Goldman really tackles his subject and comes up with original thoughts. 

I'd love to read a follow up article on this book - why are there no Friday matinees? Why did the NY Times keep on Clive Barnes as critic? (I thought Goldman's criticisms of Barnes - perhaps the most skilful hatchet job on a critic in history - were a bit strong but then went and read a selection of NY Times theatre reviews and they are pretty shocking) Why did none of Goldman's very practical suggestions be implemented? (It is a bit full on to expect matinees of Fri, Sat and Sunday - but Friday and Saturday would be worth it). 

Some of the writing is dazzling - the pieces on Judy Garland, A Day in the Life of Joe Egg, on the critics, Home Sweet Henry; as a critic, Goldman is endlessly astute - his views on popular theatre, musical comedy, Pinter, Neil Simon, etc are still relevant today. Sometimes he is not totally on the ball (while I agree Brendan Gill is one of the worst critics of the 60s, couldn't you argue that Gower Champion only came up with the idea of photographer for The Happy Time after seeing Blow Up because the photographer idea came along late in the piece), and sometimes he is a bit too mean, eg attacking Mike Nichols for receiving all this good press (it wasn't his fault, and who can blame him for occasionally being a bit big headed about it), saying Barbara Bel Geddes "could lose weight" (he could have made this point less nastily), and using the words "a flurry of fags". But this is what happens when you write a personal work, I guess. Magnificent.