An undoubted highlight of the (sadly coronavirus-related truncated) Melbourne Queer Film Festival 2020, the rich emotionality of this astoundingly brilliantly written and acted movie far transcends some potentially intrusive and distracting storytelling devices (primarily the portrayal of the main character's ex-boyfriend by three actors, sometimes intercut and alternated within the same scene). The truly beautiful Tommy Heleringer as possibly *the gayest* character ever to grace a cinema screen is a stand-out performance amongst a plethora of perfection. Just an incredible and heartbreaking film.
Reviews
6 Reviews
Scratch that fumed oak surface, there are gems to be found
16 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Anthony Newley turns in an absolutely superb performance as downtrodden husband and father Henry Gow in this rare TV presentation of Noel Coward's 1930s "unpleasant comedy", playing opposite his real life ex-wife (and series star) Joan Collins as Doris. The wonderful Joan Sims appears as Henry's mother-in-law.
I write this review as both an appraisal of the TV production and as a series of thoughts, musings and guidelines for any actor fortunate enough - as I was - to perform in this wonderfully economical play. I played Henry in provincial amateur theater in Victoria, Australia in 1992, a year after the TV production... nowhere within coo-ee of the mastery of Newley, but gaining what I believe to be a sound understanding of the essence, and possible motivation, underlying the story.
The piece is set in a Clapham dining room in two 10-15 minute halves, the first at breakfast time, with the second that same night at around 7-8pm. Henry remains virtually mute at breakfast, while the three females of the household (grandmother, mother and daughter) either whine, snap, gossip, "wrangle" (to quote Henry) or high-horse. Coward's dialogue conjures utterly cringe-worthy realness, with the dramatic counterpoint of a male who is wordless throughout the whole ordeal.
In the second half, the revelations gradually unfold. Henry arrives home late (explained away initially as overtime) as the females prepare to head out to the pictures. It then transpires that the steadfastly dry Henry has 'had a couple' before returning home (it's hinted in the first half that he did this the previous night), sufficient Dutch courage now acquired to unveil to them all his shocking plans.
Henry as a character in a sense blooms and moves through various levels of intensity as the play progresses, but always with the utmost justification for his on stage actions and stated intentions which are perfectly expressed through Coward's careful rhythm and structure. An audience is left in no doubt as to his means and motivations, but is equally at ease with the fate that awaits the wife and daughter.
The play is in effect one big dramatic build up to a single and simple outcome - a man deserting his wife and daughter. But the intricacies and the underhandedness - on both sides - that have led to this are the true captivating elements of this play.
As a performer in rehearsal I was confronted by two main obstacles. A leading lady who hated her character so much that she could barely play her, and a total lack of understanding of the point of the play. With regard to the latter, my wonderful director Richard encouraged me to consider Henry in a different light.
His view was that Henry had found someone else and was running away to be with them. This is never elucidated in the play, not even as an accusation by Dorrie... which in itself makes this theory all the more plausible, particularly when the possibility is considered that the hypothetical love interest may in fact... be another man. The closer I examined the play the more clues I found. Henry has been out the night before with someone he sheepishly admits to being Charlie Henderson. He reveals has not only secretly stashed £572 over ten years, but has changed his name. He leaves the house at the end, with a ticket to sail in the morning, but to head where overnight? No hotel or room is mentioned. The omissions are telling. Coward's observational astuteness, the basis for many of his plays, is almost definitely in evidence here. It is not at all a stretch, particularly given the circles in which Coward moved, to imagine he would have known a homosexual man trapped into a loveless marriage and into spawning a child, to later desert his wife and simply disappear with no explanation in a cloud of mystery and speculation. In true Coward fashion, to then connect all the dots of the back story and make a play out of it is far from unlikely. And not just a play - a "how to" for any similarly placed audience members!
For anyone lucky enough to be cast as Henry... I urge you not to watch Newley in this role before formulating your own performance. His grasp of the role is daunting. Explore the quiet and barely masked rebellion welling within Henry, his personality so dulled and downtrodden over interminable miserable years that, even at the cusp of his freedom, he can barely even celebrate the extraordinary achievement of extricating himself from his horrendous home life.
The brilliantly allegorically titled Fumed Oak is from a time and a world that doesn't exist anymore, where desertion was criminal, homosexuality even more so. I truly believe Coward was celebrating the bravery of someone he knew, or at least knew of, and masterfully veiled the situation in this stunning and shocking little comedy.
I write this review as both an appraisal of the TV production and as a series of thoughts, musings and guidelines for any actor fortunate enough - as I was - to perform in this wonderfully economical play. I played Henry in provincial amateur theater in Victoria, Australia in 1992, a year after the TV production... nowhere within coo-ee of the mastery of Newley, but gaining what I believe to be a sound understanding of the essence, and possible motivation, underlying the story.
The piece is set in a Clapham dining room in two 10-15 minute halves, the first at breakfast time, with the second that same night at around 7-8pm. Henry remains virtually mute at breakfast, while the three females of the household (grandmother, mother and daughter) either whine, snap, gossip, "wrangle" (to quote Henry) or high-horse. Coward's dialogue conjures utterly cringe-worthy realness, with the dramatic counterpoint of a male who is wordless throughout the whole ordeal.
In the second half, the revelations gradually unfold. Henry arrives home late (explained away initially as overtime) as the females prepare to head out to the pictures. It then transpires that the steadfastly dry Henry has 'had a couple' before returning home (it's hinted in the first half that he did this the previous night), sufficient Dutch courage now acquired to unveil to them all his shocking plans.
Henry as a character in a sense blooms and moves through various levels of intensity as the play progresses, but always with the utmost justification for his on stage actions and stated intentions which are perfectly expressed through Coward's careful rhythm and structure. An audience is left in no doubt as to his means and motivations, but is equally at ease with the fate that awaits the wife and daughter.
The play is in effect one big dramatic build up to a single and simple outcome - a man deserting his wife and daughter. But the intricacies and the underhandedness - on both sides - that have led to this are the true captivating elements of this play.
As a performer in rehearsal I was confronted by two main obstacles. A leading lady who hated her character so much that she could barely play her, and a total lack of understanding of the point of the play. With regard to the latter, my wonderful director Richard encouraged me to consider Henry in a different light.
His view was that Henry had found someone else and was running away to be with them. This is never elucidated in the play, not even as an accusation by Dorrie... which in itself makes this theory all the more plausible, particularly when the possibility is considered that the hypothetical love interest may in fact... be another man. The closer I examined the play the more clues I found. Henry has been out the night before with someone he sheepishly admits to being Charlie Henderson. He reveals has not only secretly stashed £572 over ten years, but has changed his name. He leaves the house at the end, with a ticket to sail in the morning, but to head where overnight? No hotel or room is mentioned. The omissions are telling. Coward's observational astuteness, the basis for many of his plays, is almost definitely in evidence here. It is not at all a stretch, particularly given the circles in which Coward moved, to imagine he would have known a homosexual man trapped into a loveless marriage and into spawning a child, to later desert his wife and simply disappear with no explanation in a cloud of mystery and speculation. In true Coward fashion, to then connect all the dots of the back story and make a play out of it is far from unlikely. And not just a play - a "how to" for any similarly placed audience members!
For anyone lucky enough to be cast as Henry... I urge you not to watch Newley in this role before formulating your own performance. His grasp of the role is daunting. Explore the quiet and barely masked rebellion welling within Henry, his personality so dulled and downtrodden over interminable miserable years that, even at the cusp of his freedom, he can barely even celebrate the extraordinary achievement of extricating himself from his horrendous home life.
The brilliantly allegorically titled Fumed Oak is from a time and a world that doesn't exist anymore, where desertion was criminal, homosexuality even more so. I truly believe Coward was celebrating the bravery of someone he knew, or at least knew of, and masterfully veiled the situation in this stunning and shocking little comedy.
Away from It All
(1979)
Lost Python brilliance
5 November 2016
Now viewable on YouTube. Terry Jones seemed unaware almost of the existence of this film when asked in 2001 about its possible future inclusion as a Brian DVD extra. It would seem apparent that copyright clearances on the (most likely public domain) footage are the stumbling block to a legit release. A great shame, as its stature in Python lore is legendary, and almost everyone of a certain age who was there when it hit the cinemas will smile wryly if not guffaw loudly at the very mention of gondolas. The brilliant subtlety of the writing struck me as the unmistakable calling card of Chapman, so I'm surprised to see a Cleese/Taylor credit, but quite possibly the Cleese/Chapman partnership had dried up by then... despite Graham drying out.
Return to Green Acres
(1990 TV Movie)
Anyone with a copy?
14 July 2009
A friend is an enormous Green Acres fan, knows this telemovie was appallingly bad (she can clearly recall Eddie Albert actively telling the public not to watch it whilst appearing on the obligatory talk shows - he apparently signed on to do it before reading the script, then was threatened with legal action when he tried to get out of the contract whilst Eva Gabor was saying "oh, just take ze money darlink") but I think all this drama and talk of abysmal writing quality or anything resembling a decent plot has just made her more curious to see it (she never has). If anyone who has a copy in any quality could contact me I would really appreciate it, as it's highly unlikely to be commercially released any time soon. Thanks.
Fascinating portrait of a true musical genius
24 July 2006
Artie Shaw's legacy, his music, is the prime focus of this affectionate documentary. It's an impressive legacy by one of the true kings of Swing - a string of dynamic recordings that could not have come about without a strong personality at the helm. The various dramas, romantic and otherwise, in his life are mentioned in this film but not dwelt upon. But Berman's coup is engaging the services of the man himself, 75 and sharp as a tack, for some truly brilliant interview material. As a clarinetist, Shaw's inventiveness was undeniably the stuff of genius. In one unforgettable segment in this film, Artie puts stylus to vinyl and we watch him as he listens to his own 1937 recording of "The Blues", a live recording with the Paul Whiteman Orchestra which saw Artie faultlessly ad lib his way through a piece he hadn't had the opportunity to rehearse. Almost 50 years later he knows every note he played. This is a great piece of film-making which is crying out for a DVD release.
Second Serve
(1986 TV Movie)
You'll be hooked
28 February 2004
This is a telemovie, but make no mistake about its quality. There are better production and performance values here than in many big screen Hollywood flicks.
Get it if you can! I'm lucky enough to have found an ex-rental copy many years ago.
Vanessa Redgrave delivers a performance characteristic of her extraordinary body of work - stirring, believable, assured, compelling - in fact you will wonder where the 90 minutes went as she takes you on an incredible trip through the life of an extraordinary individual.
Redgrave is totally convincing as a man, and as the movie progresses she remains totally convincing as a woman who was once a man. She clearly has enormous empathy for the difficulties faced by Richard Radley in his long and arduous quest to live the life he wants, as Renee Richards.
There are some other fine performances in this film (Louise Fletcher, however, is surprisingly stilted) but it is Vanessa Redgrave's breathtaking portrayal that makes this movie unmissable, and will make you forgive the glib, all-too-convenient telemovie-style moments of plot development, of which there are mercifully few.
Get it if you can! I'm lucky enough to have found an ex-rental copy many years ago.
Vanessa Redgrave delivers a performance characteristic of her extraordinary body of work - stirring, believable, assured, compelling - in fact you will wonder where the 90 minutes went as she takes you on an incredible trip through the life of an extraordinary individual.
Redgrave is totally convincing as a man, and as the movie progresses she remains totally convincing as a woman who was once a man. She clearly has enormous empathy for the difficulties faced by Richard Radley in his long and arduous quest to live the life he wants, as Renee Richards.
There are some other fine performances in this film (Louise Fletcher, however, is surprisingly stilted) but it is Vanessa Redgrave's breathtaking portrayal that makes this movie unmissable, and will make you forgive the glib, all-too-convenient telemovie-style moments of plot development, of which there are mercifully few.
Tell Your Friends