Complicit
I never really thought much about Richard Dreyfuss – he was always just that bloke from Jaws and sap like Mr Holland’s Opus. But after last night I have new respect for him.
You see, last night I went to Complicit at the Old Vic theatre. Dreyfuss stars in this new play alongside David Suchet (aka Poirot, his albatross) and Elizabeth McGovern (who is unfairly known for material like She’s Having a Baby) and it is a brilliant piece of ensemble acting.
Complicit was written by Joe Sutton, a fan of ‘political’ pieces it would seem, and the play tells the story of an American journalist, played by Dreyfuss, who is facing a grand jury trial. He has written an exposé on the US governments use of torture and rendition after the 9/11 attacks and is now torturing himself about what to say to the prosecutors and whether he should reveal his sources.
Even though this was only the second night preview and came complete with a nervous and apologetic introduction from director Kevin Spacey, you felt that the three actors had put a lot of energy, thought, passion and soul into the play. For a three-hander with virtually no set it was pretty compelling and thought-provoking, although a bit confused in some places.
My new respect for Richard Dreyfuss though comes from not just his acting but his high pain threshold. Leaving the stage through the exit near us after the final scene, we heard a tremendous banging, clashing and the unmistakeable sound of someone or something falling painfully to the floor. When he emerged moments later to take his curtain call, Mr Dreyfuss was covered in nasty red, bleeding cuts. It must have hurt like hell. But did we hear a scream, a swear or a whimper? No. Impressive.
Tags: go see this
January 9th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
That’s great to hear. I’ve never really been a big fan of his. Not that I didn’t like him. I wouldn’t have gone see a movie just because he’s in it. He might be good in a movie I saw, but that was how I felt about him. That’s cool news to hear about this play.
January 10th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
That’s exactly how I felt Keith. I knew his name, but it would never draw me to anything. He is great in this though. Maybe theatre has more impact on you too – I mean, there he is right in front of you and you can’t help but respond!
January 12th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
I watched ‘Close Encounters’ a few weeks ago, not having seen it since it came out, and was really touched by his performance. He’s a really solid, unshowy character actor. Which is quite refreshing, really. Sounds like you had a great evening.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
I had forgotten that he was in ‘Close Encounters’. I haven’t seen that for a long time either.
I think it was the acting that made the show. I didn’t particularly like the character that Dreyfuss plays and the script certainly needs a bit of tightening, but yes, it was a good night out. Almost as good as the time that I saw Bill Clinton at the Old Vic – I think we both might have been seeing the theatre version of All About My Mother!
January 13th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Good Lord, Bill Clinton? That’s Top Trumps!!
January 13th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Yes, it’s the closest I’ll ever get to power and fame…
January 19th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
I also saw this in preview in the first week and thought it was brilliant. Both Dreyfuss and Suchet were outstanding. Dreyfuss gave his all and looked totally drained at the end, but it was one of the most satisfying performances I’ve seen in a long time (and I see a lot of plays). There have been some snide comments in the press about his not knowing his lines and needing an earpiece prompt; I saw the earpiece and thought that might be what it’s for, but I can’t imagine he used it much – the dialogue was fast and fluent and it’s hard to imagine he was using it much. Maybe after his bad experiences on stage he feels he needs it as a security blanket. Personally, I think Spacey should just have let him wear it. It certainly didn’t spoil the performance.
January 19th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Hello Anne, thanks for stopping by. I haven’t read any ‘official’ reviews of Complicit yet so wasn’t aware of any comments about Dreyfuss’s lines. Like you, although I noticed the prompt sitting in the front row, I didn’t feel it distracted at all. I thought that the dialogue was very fluid and I was certainly caught up in the play.
Like I mentioned above, I was really impressed by how much the performers put into this piece. They probably made it for me because I did find parts of the script a bit weak at times. Or maybe that’s just me not having any sympathy for morally confused journalists!
January 20th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Hi Cocktails
This is one of the pieces I was talking about. Very unfair in my view:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/drama/4272686/Richard-Dreyfuss-play-postponed.html
I didn’t think the play was so much interested in Dreyfuss’s own journalistic dilemma as in using him to stand for of all those people who effectively gave the the US government a green light to use torture and rendition – either because they encouraged the notion that “well maybe the rules have changed and we have to be less squeamish” or because they were simply silent and so complicit with what was being done in their name. All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing….etc…”
January 20th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Thanks for posting that Anne. It is harsh, although I can see their point – you would expect the cast to know their lines by now! Having said that, Dreyfuss seemed to know them anyway. It must be just lack of confidence.
Good point about the wider reading of the play. I had honestly never thought of it that way. I read Complicit as a story about an individual grappling with their conscience and questioning the concept of of journalistic ethics. I suppose the give-away is in the title!