Lindsay Lohan is in town.
She's trying to regain some acting cred by performing in the West End in a David Mamet play - Speed the Plow
For the record, I was willing to give this a pass but Bill really wanted to see how she would do. We loved Lindsay before she became another Hollywood child star gone wrong so we went into it hoping it was going to be a success.
The theater was lovely.
We had terrific seats - dead center in row K. And we got them half price at the last minute. That in itself doesn't bode well.
Ok, I realize that none of you care about the theater or where we sat. You all want to know if it (she) was any good.
Bill and I were discussing our review on the way home and we decided we could sum it up with one sentence:
Lindsay wore some great shoes.
First I want to say that the play felt dated and actually didn't make a whole lot of sense. There is no reason ever given for why the Lindsay character would care whether or not a certain book was made into a movie. Other than the fact that she supposedly really liked the book - which makes her actions a little extreme. So if she has nothing at stake, her whole character doesn't really make sense.
The Hollywood producer characters were just complete cliches - maybe they weren't when the play was written, but by now the fact that they called themselves whores and were in show biz to make money is so old hat that we could have taken out 90% of their dialogue and still completely understood their roles.
I personally found Lindsay awkward and stiff. She used her hands the way kids do in a high school play (a gesture that I can't explain but I can show you when I see you). In the second (middle) act she has one vocal tone for 20 minutes. Imagine someone trying to convince another person of something really ardently - the voice is higher pitched and a bit loud and fast…that is where she starts and that is where she ends and there is NO inflection in between. Maybe this was what the director wanted. I mean, he must have seen this over and over again, right? So someone must be happy about it.
(Bill, for example, was not as put out as I was…he thinks this assessment of her is a little harsh .)
The play was super short (yay!) and had two breaks between three brief acts. At least two couples around us left at the first intermission. Despite being fairly full there was no one seated in front or behind us from the very beginning so this isn't a successful run. But I was really surprised that people left - - what were they expecting? It wasn't so bad that I felt I had to flee.
Bill was defending Lindsay as I launched into my critique but when push came to plow he only gave the show 1 star out of 4. I might have gone to 2 just based on the acting of the other two guys.
Meanwhile, the Guardian review calls Lindsay a "minor revelation". Maybe…if she were acting in a high school production...in North Dakota…for the hearing impaired….
2 comments:
The way this post starts reminds me of when my mother returns from a Match.com date...
Me: "how was the date?"
Her: "the dinner was good"
You guys: "the theater was lovely"
i.e. - the date and the play were both rubbish!
btw - this is why we refer to Match.com as Dinner.com in our household. :)
A day later I'm still thinking about Lindsay Lohan. My wife was tough in her critique of Lindsay. Here is an alternative view point.
Lindsay Lohan is 28 years old. She has lived her life in the spotlight and has made some horrific decisions. Her parents seem like parents only in the biological sense.
If I were to give Lindsay some guidance on how to resurrect herself this play is just the type of thing she should be doing. Get away from LA. Take a nice little part in a Mamet play in London. Learn how to act and how to be an adult, away from her dirty role models in the U.S.
She was not great in this role. But she has presence. And at the end of the play she seemed genuinely happy with herself... big grin, cute little wave to the crowd.
Good luck, Lindsay. I'm rooting for you.
Post a Comment