Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

David Mamet

16:20 / 10.09.05

I thought I'd post a thread about Theatre, specifically Pulitzer-prize winning playwright David Mamet. Have people seen productions of his plays? Or film adaptations of them? (Glengarry Glen Ross amd Oleanna are the only film adaptations I know of, although he also wrote the script for The Untouchables, and the 1981 version of The Postman Always Rings Twice, among other things).

I saw an absolutely blistering production of Oleanna this year. One of the best pieces of student theatre I've seen (theatre full stop in fact). The acting was superb, delivery tight which is really important in this play, and it was in a tiny space, literally not much bigger than an office, so everything was right up in your face. I was genuinely shaken up when I left (the only play that's left me with a comparable feeling was Sarah Kane's Blasted, but she deserves a thread of her own).

I also thought the play itself was brilliant. It explores the power dynamics between a teacher and his student, culminating in an accusation of rape which may or may not be justified. I loved the way the balance shifts between them as the play progresses, especially the articulate anger of the student in the closing scenes and the teacher's helpless reaction. One of the most interesting things was listening to other people's responses as I left the theatre. Most people seemed to think the girl was *totally* unjustified, which seemed to me at least to reflect a complete misunderstanding of the play. I'd be interested to hear other people's interpretations and reactions.

I've also seen a production of Speed the Plough, which explores some of the same themes in the context of 80s Holywood. This wasn't quite as captivating, although that might of been because it was a weaker production.

So, any opinions?

09:56 / 12.09.05

I saw Matthew Perry and Hank Azaria in a London production of ‘Sexual Perversity in Chicago’ about 18 months ago, and there was an audible gasp from the audience when Perry started using fruity language. Not a bad play, but it didn’t quite capture my imagination as some other work by Mamet has.

I saw the film version of Oleanna and found it very powerful stuff; I remember seeing a review of a production of it which claimed it split the audience quite strictly on gender lines, which sounds rather different from your experience, nighthawk. If memory serves, the review I saw was in the short-lived revival of Punch magazine here in the UK , and used the phrase ‘goaded beyond endurance’, which I thought was a good description of the tutor’s actions.

I’d recommend Mamet’s book ‘Writing in Restaurants’, incidentally, if you want to know a bit more about his general approach.

He’s one of those writers whose stuff I invariably enjoy for some reason, but who I haven’t actively sought out … maybe I should change that.

Regrettable Juvenilia

10:08 / 12.09.05

I'm a big fan of some of Manet's work - Glengarry Glenn Ross, House of Games, The Spanish Prisoner... However, I bristle whenever critics praise something for daring to stick it to "political correctness", as has been said of both Oleanna and Romance. This may not be Mamet's fault - he's not responsible for drivel like this (that last paragraph!) - but it's still made me a little wary. In general, I like his more noirish, pulpy, plot-twisty work just fine. And obviously GGR has Stuff To Say about America and capitalism, but I'm not sure I'd want to put myself through seeing Mamet tackle sexual/gender politics head on...

10:10 / 12.09.05

Me and Xoc caught A Life In The Theatre earlier this year, with Jean-Luc Picard and Pacey Witter. It's Mamet juvenilia, really, and felt a little unformed as well as abbreviated. It's basically a two-hander, set in the backstage areas of theatres and focussing on the interaction between an up-and-coming young actor and a much older thesp on his uppers.

T'was my first experience, I think, of seeing Mamet's work onstage. It was funny, sad and quite homoerotic (apparently both leads attracted occasional wolf-whistles during the getting-changed scenes). It did feel slightly self-indulgent, though, and a bit dated.

11:00 / 12.09.05

i'll tell you where i'm from, i'm from the united states of kiss my ass!

can't be bad, can it? [he did the screenplay for 'hannibal' before i go nuts though.]

12:01 / 12.09.05

Don't have time to write properly now, but I never understand what people mean when they describe Mamet as 'sticking it to political correctness' etc. I'm not acquainted with all his work, but where does this come from? I'm particularly confused when its mentioned with reference to Oleanna. Unless its from people who think that the student is 'obviously wrong' and that her whole polemic is supposed to be a parody of political correctness.

I have to say that when I watched Oleanna I came down heavily on the side of the student. Which is why descriptions like this, from the Guardian article, seem so backwards to me:

It was the first production of Oleanna which provoked the loudest accusations of misogyny. It is true that it is not a good play to take a first date to, but it's terrific nevertheless. It is a classic tragedy about power, not merely a polemic about sexual harassment. Its two characters, Carol, a young student who wants her grade improved, and John, her professor, are two people with a lot to say to each other, with legitimate feelings for each other, but protecting their positions becomes more important than pursuing their own best interests. This leads them down a slippery slope until, at the end of the play, they 'tear each other's throats out'.

Everything the girl in Oleanna says about male power and privilege is correct - and Mamet believes it to be true. Each person's view is correct. Yet they end up destroying each other. There is no tidy moral here. It leaves you provoked and unsettled.

12:08 / 12.09.05

I'm a big fan of Mamet; in particular, I have a large soft-spot for his con-movies.

Mamet's con-movies are interesting because, in general, it's more a case of a repetition (and constant refinement) of a formula than a series of films. House of Games is, IIRC, his first real foray into the genre, and I do think that Heist is probably his most successful/bankable attempt at it. I certainly enjoyed it a great deal. The Spanish Prisoner, for me, never felt quite as successful, but I enjoyed it nontheless.

Out of his most recent movies, I have real fondness for Wag the Dog and especially State and Main. And then, of course, there's the whole issue of Mamet as script-doctor/writer-for-hire. His screenplay (especially in its original draft) for Ronin (under the pen-name JD Zeik) is a great rollercoaster of an action-thriller.

Mamet has a fantastic ear for the nuanace of the American accent, I find. I always felt that in Glengarry Glen Ross, the word cocksucker is used as much for its sound - those hard "ck"s in English disappearing into "gg"s in American. The more of his scripts I hear in production, the more I appreciate his ear for American vernacular.

23:27 / 12.09.05

Mamet has a fantastic ear for the nuanace of the American accent, I find

I think I might even go beyond this -- he has the most fantastic ear for dialogue full stop, which is why he has so many imitators, although none of them quite get the bark and bite of his words so well. He's kind of like a rougher, tougher Pinter in some ways, do you not think? although without so many ... ... ...[lame joke] pauses [/lame joke]

On Oleanna, I think it really depends which production you see as to where your sympathies lie. I saw a great one a couple of years ago, which somehow managed to be fairly sympathetic to both sides, and bring out the whole British higher education/ tuition fees thing at the same time. It was remarkably good - and kind of in the spirit of the guardian quote above. It is mutual destruction.

And, just to jolly things along -- what do people think of Neil La Bute, (who is, I suppose from the same kind of stable) and wrote In the Company of Men (plus other stuff, which has been a little less good. Is he Mamet's natural sucessor? Or is that a very trite thing to say?

23:53 / 12.09.05

Mamet has this amazing ability to replace certain words with others that have an even better impact. Case in point, the scene in Spartan where Val Kilmer and his British friend are about to rescue the girl (no spoilers), and the British fellow says, "You want to shoot, or you want to gossip?" (or something very similar to that) Gossip instead of perhaps, talk. Another good example is in State and Main in which Alec Baldwin gets into an accident and then quips, "Well, that happened." It's Mamet's verbal skills that make him interesting. I don't think his plots or characters are really that fascinating.

The best example is, of course, Alec Baldwin. "What's my name? What's my name? Fuck you, that's my name!"

threadrot
Aren't we all happy that Baldwin realized he was a better supporting actor than a lead? The only time I liked him as a leading man was in Malice? ("God complex? Let me tell you something, I am a God.")
/threadrot

00:59 / 13.09.05

The fact you can tear apart thirty years of sitcom moments and lines and make 'The Spanish Prisoner' is nothing short of brilliant. Absolutely divine and horrifying all at once... good movie, too.

But things like "What are you left with? Little lambs it ivy, that's what." Which result in a silly number of people decided 'little lamsydivy' must be some sort of tough-guy slang or something and one or three people per audience trapped with 'mares eat oats and...' stuck in the back of their heads.

06:26 / 13.09.05

On Oleanna, I think it really depends which production you see as to where your sympathies lie.

Yeah I think that's probably true too. I went to my library yesterday to try to find a copy of his plays, but they were all out. I did get a book of his prose called Some Freaks

10:39 / 01.10.05

I liked Spartan too, in spite of its bleakness.

18:20 / 01.10.05

He also published a sterling series of essays on film-direction, prodection, stage-setting. The guy's a freaking hero, and my favourite fact about him is that the cast of the film version of "Glengarry, Glenross" dubbed it "Death of a fuckin' Salesman" on account of the abundance of naughty slang...

02:44 / 12.11.05

(*bump*)

One of my good friends is a theatre major, and she has been forced to read a lot of Mamet's stage theory and she is under the impression that Mamet is crazy. He's completely anti-Strasberg, apparently. Mamet says that the job of the actor is to know the lines and that's about it. The strength of the character, he says, comes from the script and the writer, not from "method-acting" or tons of emoting.

I find this strange considering that legend has it that Mamet has his actors rehearse constantly and sometimes with a metronome. And, if he didn't really believe in actors, then why does he always use the same ones? Why doesn't he use the Kutch? Or Ryan Reynolds?

03:16 / 12.11.05

For the same reason you wouldn't hire Jack White to play Rodrigo's guitar concerto.

Now, Jack White can play him some guitar, after his fashion. But it would be beyond his chops and outside his discipline to play the Rodrigo concerto as written.

Mamet says, There is no character—there's just the words on the page. And a symphony is just notes on a page. Just play it as written.

Of course, symphony orchestras rehearse all the time—sometimes with metronomes—even though they've actually got the scores in front of them as they play. Funny, that. Maybe just playing as written is more complicated than it sounds.

And if the key to the character doesn't rely on perfect casting (i.e., getting the right actor), then why wouldn't Mamet keep using the same troupe of actors—who all understand his theories and methods—time after time? Why reinvent the wheel for every production?
The membership of an orchestra tends to be pretty static, too.

02:49 / 07.10.07

I just had the pleasure of watching The Heist. My girlfriend and I are on a little Mamet kick (this is coming on the heels of The Spanish Prisoner and Glengary Glenross) and although the setup is very familiar, it's just so well done that you couldn't possibly care less. The quadruple crossing gets a bit tiresome by the end, but the violence is all spot on, sharp and surprising. Clever, even.

Everything is so clever, clever. "What, you wanna hear my last words?"
"I just did."

I also loved that there were only two explosions in the movie, and both made it into the trailer.