Writing Things

Hey, remember that analysis of Outrageous Fortune I was going to write? And the essay on why Passing Strange is a completely brilliant show and you should all track down the DVD? Yeah, me too. I will. But here are some other things.

Apparently Anna D. Shapiro likes plays about families. In the fall she will be directing a revival of George S. Kaufman and Moss Hart's You Can't Take It With You on Broadway, the New York Times reports. The show is tentatively set for a month-long run at Boston's Huntington Theatre before starting previews on Broadway November 5th (with an opening set for the 14th) at a theatre to be determined.

I'm pleased at this news--I think it's really a wonderful play, and it's insane that it hasn't been seen on Broadway since 1983. It's also good that Shapiro will be back on Broadway--I'm faintly amazed that it will have taken her three years to end up back in New York. Not that I'm complaining--it's great to have her directing shows at a steady clip in Chicago. So congratulations, Anna, and I hope you'll help rescue the show from its reputation as a rather dull and sentimental staple of high schools, and show it for the subversive and very funny play it is.

Also, a few days back, the Oscar nominations were announced. It's not a terribly exciting list--2009 was widely agreed to be a pretty lackluster year, film-wise--but I was personally gratified to see multiple nominations for District 9, a very sharp and exciting science fiction movie/satire of apartheid, and Up, which had me crying like a baby. (I have not yet seen The Hurt Locker, Coraline, or In the Loop, but I imagine I'd be gratified by their inclusion as well.)

It was not a particularly strong year for theatre-related nominees. The film version of Nine did not receive the love many were expecting before it opened, but then it was hampered by sucking. Penelope Cruz was recognized for her work as Carla (Her work was impressive given how poorly she was directed, but it was hardly the best in the film. Unfortunately, Marion Cotillard would have been nominated as leading actress, a much more competitive category.), "Take It All" was nominated as best song (It's a passable piece made much better by Cotillard's brilliant work, and at least the best of the films new songs. I am so grateful that the wretched "Cinema Italiano" won't be on the broadcast.), John Myhre and Gordon Sim were nominated for Art Direction and Set Decoration and Colleen Atwood for costumes, and it was indeed a very attractive movie. Still, not quite the haul one might have expected for the followup to Chicago.

Amazingly, with the exception of Joel Coen, who has written a few plays, none of the screenwriters is known as a playwright. This is rather surprising--the past three years have generally seen at least one or two. Ditto with the directors, none of whom has done significant stage work. (That is, aside from Quentin Tarantino, who appeared in a revival of Wait Until Dark with Marisa Tomei in 1998. Yes, you read that right. Yes, it was as bad as you'd imagine.) The acting nominations have a somewhat better theatre presence: Morgan Freeman, from Invictus, Helen Mirren and Christopher Plummer in The Last Station (a drama about the last days of Leo Tolstoy that looks like fun for those of us who love British scenery chewing), Carey Mulligan, Nina in the acclaimed recent Broadway revival of The Seagull, for An Education, Meryl Streep, who still comes back to the stage once in a while, for Julie and Julia, Woody Harrelson (well, he's done two shows on Broadway) for The Messenger, and Stanley Tucci for The Lovely Bones. So 6 out of 20 nominated actors with significant theatre credits. It's not that many: last year had 8 by my count--Sean Penn (though it's been a while...), Frank Langella, Anne Hathaway, Streep again, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Chicago's own Michael Shannon, Viola Davis, and Marisa Tomei.

Anyhow, I'll probably watch, but don't expect any great interest on this end.

The Oscar Nominations

Theatre and film have a peculiar relationship--film is like a younger sibling or cousin that has gone on to much greater success, but still looks longingly for the older relative's approval. Film envies theatre's prestige and cachet, not to mention the ability to get people to pay huge amounts of money for tickets, while theatre envies the money to be made and the global reach of film. There is frequent traffic between the two--plays adapted into movies and movies into plays, theatre actors, directors, and playwrights working on films and movie talent coming to stage--but the results are not always successful. Film actors often seem underpowered on stage, stage actors sometimes are overblown on film. Adaptations between media frequently stumble, and only rarely are writers and directors powerhouses in both fields. Still, I think that the traffic between the two media is generally a good thing--it gives people a chance to work more and stretch themselves, and sometimes results in something wonderful. It's just better when the work is done with some creativity, rather than slavishly taking work from one medium and forcing it into another.

All of this is by way of saying that the Oscar nominations were announced this morning, and included several items of interest to theatre people. As a caveat, I have not seen most of the films nominated.

--Of greatest interest to Chicago theatre lovers is the nomination of Michael Shannon as best supporting actor for his role in Revolutionary Road. Shannon has a long history in Chicago, and is in the ensemble of A Red Orchid Theatre. He played the lead in their production of Bug, which moved to Off-Broadway and won him the lead in the film version. Looks like the local boy is making good!

--It was a good year for stage to film adaptations. Peter Morgan's Frost/Nixon a hit at London's Donmar Warehouse and then on Broadway, won nominations for Best Picture, Frank Langella's recreation of his Tony-winning role as Richard Nixon, Morgan's adaptation of his own play, Ron Howard's direction, and editing. Doubt, adapted from John Patrick Shanley's Pulitzer and Tony winning play, one of the few to make money and go on tour in recent years, failed to get a Best Picture nomination, but did pick up one for Shanley's adaptation of his own play. Also, all four principal actors were nominated for Oscars. Meryl Streep got her start on stage and still makes an occasional appearance, usually in brief runs for which it's impossible to get a seat, Philip Seymour Hoffman works with some frequency as both an actor and director, usually with Off-Broadway's LAByrinth Theatre Company, and Viola Davis won a Tony for her powerful work in August Wilson's King Hedley II. Amy Adams has yet to do prominent stage work, which is a shame, since she's delightful.

--Several other theatre people have nominations this year. Actors include Anne Hathaway, nominated for leading actress in Rachel Getting Married, who once appeared in Carnival! at Encores, and Marisa Tomei, nominated for supporting actress in The Wrestler, who has been making quite a career as a theatre actress, most recently in last season's Broadway revival of Top Girls. Stephen Daldry, nominated for directing The Reader also has a long resume onstage, mostly in Britain, with credits including a famed revival of An Inspector Calls and, more recently, the musical adaptation of Billy Elliott, one of his films. Two other playwrights received screenwriting nominations: David Hare, for The Reader, and the notorious Martin McDonagh for his feature debut, In Bruges. (He won an Oscar for live action short for Six Shooter a few years back.)

That's what I've noticed. Anything I missed? Any other thoughts on this year's nominations?