• All the pleasures of the Garden

ALL THE PLEASURES OF THE GARDEN

~ What is ordinary to some is extraordinary to others

ALL THE PLEASURES OF THE GARDEN

Category Archives: SHAKESPEARE

THE RISE OF THE AUSTRALIAN ACTOR: 2. GEORGE COPPIN (1819-1906)

17 Saturday Feb 2018

Posted by APHK PHOTOGRAPHY in 19TH CENTURY ART, ACTING, ACTORS, Adelaide, ADELAIDE THEATRE, Australia, AUSTRALIAN ACTORS, Australian Art, AUSTRALIAN THEATRE, BRITISH DRAMA, DIRECTORS, DRAMA, ENGLISH DRAMA, ENGLISH HISTORY, ENGLISH THEATRE, HISTORY, PEOPLE, PLAYS, SHAKESPEARE, South Australia, THEATRE, Uncategorized, UNITED KINGDOM, USA

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

19TH CENTURY DRAMA, ACTORS, Australia, AUSTRALIAN ACTORS, DRAMA, EENGLISH ACTORS, THEATRE, USA

THE RISE OF THE AUSTRALIAN ACTOR: George Coppin (1819-1906)

images-2George Selth Coppin (1819-1906) has been called “the father of Australian theatre” (Comedy Theatre, Melbourne, 1939). Whilst this may be disputed, nonetheless, George Coppin was one of the prime movers in establishing a professional theatre in Australia in the mid-colonial period. In many ways, he could be called 19th Century Australia’s ‘greatest showman’. As Sally O’Neill states, ‘Undoubtedly his enterprise was irrepressible; the business of entertainment suited his talents but, more important, he had an ingrained love of the theatre. He acted to make money but he found a stage in many other spheres.’ (Australian Dictionary of Biography).

George Coppin was born 8 April 1819 in Steyning, Sussex, England. His father, George Selth Coppin, was the son of a clergyman who gave up his medical studies to become an actor, and subsequently was disowned by his family. Hence, George Coppin was born into a theatrical family and started performing (with his sister) from the age of six. From 1835 he was working in the English provinces and at the Abbey Theatre in Dublin, where he established himself as ‘first low comedian’. It was also in Dublin he met Maria Watkins Burroughs, nine years his senior, and they lived together from 1842-1848, Maria accompanying Coppin on first adventures overseas.

In 1842 George and Maria decided to leave the UK, with a choice between the USA and Australia. On a toss of a coin, they decided on Australia and arrived in Sydney 10 March 1843. From this point and for the next fifty years Coppin’s fortunes were like a rollercoaster, going from ‘boom’ to ‘bust’ several times. He worked in Sydney, Hobart, Melbourne, and Adelaide, either as an actor-manager, or hotel owner. He created a number of theatres and hotels, including the Queen’s Theatre, Adelaide, and the Semaphore Hotel, which gave the Adelaide suburb its name. It was also in Adelaide, in 1848, that Maria died.

download-4
65f76c584bfc42f5982ee78d2cba0b95
94911fe6-43a9-4b4f-bc33-b674200b26d3
b4502

In 1851, after going ‘bust’ again, he left for the Victorian goldfields, and whilst he did not find gold, nonetheless, he earned a considerable amount performing for the gold diggers. In 1853 he returned to Adelaide, paid off his creditors, and returned to England. He worked successfully in London and the provinces, and it was whilst working in Birmingham he met Gustavus Brooke (1818-1866), one of the leading British tragedians of the time. He engaged Brooke for an Australian tour and had a pre-fabricated ‘Iron Theatre’, specially built for the tour. In a way, Coppin’s ‘Iron Theatre’ prefigured popular ‘pop-up’ theatres in the 21st Century.

92718_Melbournes-Olympic-Iron-Pot-Theatre
download-5
download-6

This marks the beginning of ‘international’ actors touring Australia. Whilst there had been a number of English and American actors touring Australia, the Coppin-Brooke partnership truly marks the successful touring of Australia by internationally renowned actors. These included Gustavus Brooke, Joseph Jefferson, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Kean, and Maggie Moore and J. C. Williamson.

A030226_246x550
220px-Charles_Kean_as_Macbeth_1858
Joseph-Jefferson-Dis-Von.jpeg
page3_blog_entry0_1
MMJCW

From 1858 Coppin also established a political career that lasted off-and-on until 1895. Time and space does not allow for any elaboration on Coppin’s political career, other than stating that it was relatively successful and he was a valued member of the respective Victorian parliaments and legislative committees on which he sat. It is, however, in his ‘off’ political years that Coppin furthered Australian theatre. This included acquiring the Theatre Royal, Melbourne, which unfortunately was burnt to the ground in 1872. As the Theatre Royal was uninsured Coppin went ‘bust’ again. Nonetheless, he formed a committee and rebuilt the Theatre Royal. It was in this period that he also performed in the USA where he met J.C. Williamson and Maggie Moore, and in 1881 engaged them to perform in Australia.

Suffering from gout from 1868, Coppin announced his retirement from the stage; an announcement he kept making for next twenty-odd years. He embarked on numerous ‘farewell’ tours in Australia and other British colonies but did not give up the theatre until the mid-1880s. His later years were mainly concerned with his political career, as well as developing the Victorian seaside suburb of Sorrento, where he lived with his family. In 1855 Coppin had married Harriet Hilsden, Gustavus Brooke’s widowed sister-in-law. Harriet died in 1859, and subsequently, Coppin married one of her daughters from her first marriage, Lucy Hilsden, in 1861. Coppin had three children from his first marriage, three daughters, and seven children from his second marriage, two sons and five daughters. Except for one daughter from his first marriage, Lucy and the other children survived him when Coppin died in 1906.

download-2
images
download
images-3

This brief sketch doesn’t really do justice to the incredible life of George Coppin. As an actor, he specialized in ‘low comedy’, but was also successful in ‘classical’ works, such as Sir Peter Teazle in Sheridan’s The School for Scandal, Bob Acres in Sheridan’s The Rivals, Tony Lumpkin in Goldsmith’s She Stoops To Conquer. Launcelot Gobbo in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. The contemporary Australian critic James Smith described Coppin’s talent and ability to successfully portray “the ponderous stolidity and impenetrable stupidity of certain types of humanity—the voice, the gait, the movements, the expression of the actor’s features, were all in perfect harmony with the mental and moral idiosyncrasies of the person he represented, so that the man himself stood before you a living reality”. This suggests that there was an acute sense of observation of real life, and a kind of early ‘naturalism’ in Coppin’s characters, albeit in essentially heightened comic roles. This is complemented by his theatre-manager-director insistence on ‘correct costuming’ for his characters and productions (Australian Dictionary of Biography).

As well as building theatres, including the Princess Theatre, Melbourne, establishing new download-7methods of advertising shows, and bringing international artists to Australia, Coppin also helped to establish copyright legislation for playwrights in Australia and was one of the first to advocate for a ‘school of acting to develop Australian acting’ (Australian Dictionary of Biography).

Coppin also advocated and brought camels to explore the interior Australia, some of the camels that Coppin imported were on the disastrous Burke and Wills expedition (1860-61). Whilst owner and manager of the Cremorne Gardens, Melbourne, he arranged for the first aerial balloon ascent over Melbourne and helped to introduce English thrushes and white swans to Australia. This is just the ‘tip of the iceberg’ of the truly remarkable George Coppin.

theatre 1885
interior-of-princess-theatre
images-4
images-2

TONY KNIGHT

THE RISE OF THE AUSTRALIAN ACTOR.1 – Eliza Winstanley (1818-1892)

28 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by APHK PHOTOGRAPHY in 19TH CENTURY ART, ACTING, ACTORS, Australia, AUSTRALIAN ACTORS, AUSTRALIAN THEATRE, BRITISH DRAMA, BROADWAY, Classical Theatre, DRAMA, Elizabethan Drama, ENGLISH DRAMA, ENGLISH HISTORY, ENGLISH THEATRE, HISTORY, LITERATURE, LONDON, PEOPLE, PLAYS, SHAKESPEARE, THEATRE, Uncategorized, UNITED KINGDOM, WEST END, LONDON

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

ACTING, ACTORS, Australia, AUSTRALIAN ACTORS, AUSTRALIAN THEATRE, DRAMA, THEATRE

411+LTLIBiL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_
a-midsummer-nights-dream-set-design-for-palace-of-theseus-finale-princess-theatre-london-1856-1179
914a893182bbb8ee69b294d6200a40496aa48fd2

INTRODUCTION

This series of post is about the identity of the Australian actor. It is partly based on recent public lectures I recently delivered at the National Portrait Gallery and the National Film & Sound Archive, Canberra.

Currently, many Australian actors enjoy considerable national and international acclaim and success; however, whilst generally unknown and unacknowledged this has always been the case, from the colonial period to present day. Former posts have been about The Genesis of the Australian Actor, focusing on the convict performance of George Farquhar’s The Recruiting Officer in 1789, and how many features of that performance have their resonance in the modern world and instrumental in the formulation of the character and identity of the Australian actor. This series is focused on highlighting some of the most exceptional 19th and early 20th Century Australian actors who achieved national and international success and played a significant part in the forming of the Australian actor. Due to time and space, this is highly selective and only gives a hint at the diverse and extraordinary range of Australian actors and their respective careers.

Shakespeare wrote that actors enact the abstract and brief chronicles of the times (Hamlet). Whilst this is true it also relates to other crucial aspects about actors and acting. Relatively, no actor is remembered beyond his and her own times, unless they achieve an iconic status that reaches beyond a particular career. This series is partly designed to draw attention to the great but now largely forgotten Australian actors of the past. Why should we care? T. S. Eliot was once challenged by a young student with this question – Why should we study people from the past when we know so much more than they did? ‘Exactly,’ replied Eliot,’ and they are what we know.’

ARTISTIC IDENTITY

Acting is a highly emotional art form, attracting and triggering strong responses. We often talk about actors in highly emotional terms – “I love that actor” – “I hate that actor” etc. Whilst there may be a number of reasons for responses, one is that a particular actor triggers and sparks an individuals imagination and others do not. This involves the appeal (or not) of a particular on-stage (or on-screen) persona, their unique artistic identity. This can be defined by examining three particular areas:

  1. TALENT
  2. TECHNIQUE
  3. TEMPERAMENT

TALENT – is what the actor is blessed with. It can be very difficult to define, as Constantine Stanislavsky stated, but we know it when we see it. Generalizing, an actor may have a great talent for comedy, or drama, and if particularly talented can do both. The most versatile actor is what in Musical Theatre terms is called the triple threat. This is the actor who can Sing, Dance and Act – such as Hugh Jackman. What is remarkable about the Australian actor is that many of them, past and current, enjoy this particular talent.

TECHNIQUE – is associated with skills. Just as there are many different types of actors, so too are there numerous techniques that assist the actor to unlock creativity when inspiration fails. In the US the so-called ‘method’ and its derivatives are naturalistically based and is something in which the American actor excels. All the contemporary Australian actors who have found success in the US and UK essentially have a technique and skills that complement this.

TEMPERAMENT – this is associated with particular stories and characters in which the particular actor is interested and excels, and in which complements their unique talent and technique. Subsequently, it is closely associated with a public persona – on-stage and off-stage – and is what we generally come to expect from a particular actor. This may be ‘personality’ based, in that it is essentially just one persona, or is ‘transformational’ and has radical variations. In US terms, is the actor a ‘movie star’ or an ‘actor’? They can also be both – such as Nicole Kidman. The question is – does the actor remain within a particular genre or ‘personality’, or does the actor work in numerous genres, aiming for ‘transformation’ – like Nicole Kidman.

As previously stated time and Space does not permit for me to go into great detail about the great Australian acting pioneers. There are, however, a number that I wish to highlight,  who in many ways encapsulate and represent the evolution of the Australian actor throughout the 19th Century and early 20th Century. These are – Eliza Winstanley, George Coppin, J. C. Williamson, Maggie Moore, Nellie Stewart and Oscar Ashe. All these actors were triple threats (and more), and all enjoyed national and international acclaim and success.

ELIZA WINSTANLEY [O’FLAHERTY] (1818-1892)

Eliza Winstanley has the distinction of being the first Australian actor to achieve international success. She was the first Australian actress to appear and have a successful career in the UK and USA.

Eliza Winstanley was born in England in 1818 and emigrated with her family to Australia in 1833. Her father, William Winstanley, was a scene painter and decorator at Barnett Levey’s Theatre Royal, the first successful professional theatre in Sydney, and it was here that she made her professional debut in 1834. She married the actor-musician-writer Henry Charles O’Flaherty in 1841 and henceforward acted under her married name – Mrs. Eliza O’Flaherty. With her husband, she also worked as a theatre manager, primarily at the Olympic Theatre in Sydney. Along with another female Australian theatre pioneer, Anne Clarke (c. 1806-1847), Eliza Winstanley brought a new level of respectability and social acceptance of actors into the growing cities of Sydney, Melbourne, and Hobart.

914a893182bbb8ee69b294d6200a40496aa48fd2
download
4) Dress circle boxes, Queens Theatre, Melbourne, 1853, 1880 watercolour SLV

Despite beginning in the operatic and musical theatre it soon became apparent that her particular talent and skills lay in the world of classical theatre and popular melodrama.The melodramas were of the blood-soaked horror kind, such as Madeline the Maniac, the title suggestive of the extreme emotional characters in which she excelled. She was the first to appear on the Australian stage as Shakespeare’s Desdemona in Othello, Rosalind in As You Like It, and Mistress Quickly in The Merry Wives of Windsor, as well as scoring considerable success as Juliet in Romeo and Juliet. 

Hal Porter in his Stars of Australian Stage and Screen (1965) cites critical responses to ‘this tall, dark-eyed, lively, comely, and intelligent girl. With her “agreeable form”, “rich voice”, “graceful deportment”, and countenance susceptible to strong expression”, she quickly became Sydney’s favourite actress.’ She also attracted negative responses – ‘Miss Winstanley is too affected and making improper use of the letter “h” ‘, and “if she had not displayed such a wish to be in heroics she would have succeeded better’.

Eliza Winstanley’s bold theatrical and personal temperament is suggested by two incidents. In 1840, whilst she and her sister Anne were walking home after performing they were accosted by a group of young men who wore ‘cabbage tree hats’ as a symbol that they were ‘native’ born. The Winstanley girls were regarded as English and not ‘native’ born, and subsequently were seen as inferior. Previously they had been heckled numerous times with profanities whilst performing on-stage. This night a young teenager called Charles Davis threw his ‘cabbage tree hat’ at Anne Winstanley’s feet, which Eliza Winstanley then kicked out of the way. Davis then threatened to kick them cabbage-tree hat Powerhouse Museum Sydney‘for attempting to tread on the cabbage tree’. When this came before the authorities Davis changed his story, stating that he would have kicked them ‘if they were not women’. This incident was reported in the Sydney Monitor (1 January 1841) and was also dramatized for the Sydney stage by Henry Charles O’Flaherty, in a number of sketches – Thespis in Austalia: or The Stage in Danger – in which O’Flaherty appeared as ‘Knight of the Fiddle, and Champion of the fair Eliza’, stroking ‘the place where his beard should be’ and claiming that he received a black-eye in the incident. This was followed by a poem The Battle of the Cabbage Tree, which was a satiric parody of Byron’s Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage. It is possible that these dramatic pieces were part of O’Flaherty’s wooing of Eliza Winstanley as they were married the following month on 6 February 1841. (Australian Plays for the Colonies 1834-1899. Ed. Richard Fotheringham. University of Queensland Press. 2006. 49-50).

Another example of her independent spirit and temperament is the minor scandal she caused in 1842 when she appeared as Richard III in Shakespeare’s Richard III. Whilst it was not uncommon for women to play male roles in the early Australian theatre, mainly out of necessity, nonetheless, for many contemporaries, this was far too audacious for the times.

In 1846 she and her husband went to England, and after appearing with a number of provincial theatre companies she made her successful London debut at the Princess Theatre, London. In 1848 she also successfully toured the USA. She was the first Australian actress to appear and achieve success in the London and New York theatre. Back in London in 1850 she played leading roles with Charles Kean’s company at the Princess Theatre, establishing herself as one of London’s most popular and successful actresses of the time.

2011FB3506
download-3
a-midsummer-nights-dream-set-design-for-palace-of-theseus-finale-princess-theatre-london-1856-1179
c535485c264e321f1387508a705e7fac
the-winters-tale-charles-kean-company-1856-1995

This success was due not only to her particular talent, skill, and temperament but also to the changing theatre scene in London. After considerable pressure, the 1843 Theatre Act dissolved the previous 200 years old monopoly of Covent Garden, Drury Lane, and the Haymarket theatres, subsequently allowing for more than 20 new theatres in London. One of these was Charles Kean’s Princess Theatre. Furthermore, the young Queen Victoria and her husband Prince Albert loved Kean’s epic productions of Shakespeare so much that they had a permanent box at the Princess Theatre. As Hal Porter states, Kean’s productions were ‘tastefully opulent, archaeologically correct to the minutest detail, with hundreds of supernumeraries including horses and hounds, spectacular scenery, and hand-picked casts in which Eliza Winstanley shone’. (Porter. 25).

download-5
Queen-Victoria-679201
download-4
victoria-and-albert

In 1848 Queen Victoria revived the staging of a Royal Command Performance at Windsor Castle by invited companies. For Eliza Winstanley this led to another ‘Australian first’. Eliza Winstanley was the first Australian actress to take part in a Royal Command Performance; playing for the benefit of the young Queen Victoria and the royal family the role of Mrs. Malaprop in Sheridan’s The Rivals. She subsequently appeared in many other Royal Command performances; as well as touring extensively throughout the UK and the rest of the world. As Hal Porter states, ‘Possessed of inexhaustible vitality, without which no actress in that age of body-breaking stage labour and grisly traveling facilities could survive, she toured widely: Melbourne, Hobart, Launceston – playing the Cape as she came out, and Canada as she returned – France, Germany, Italy, and even Russia. enacting the Shakespearian roles by which she had earned her fame.’ (Porter. 25).

In 1865, at the age of 47 years old, she retired from the stage and took up writing, successfully publishing over the next 15 years 33 novels, as well as her own autobiography Shifting Scenes in Theatrical Life (1864). Significantly, most of her novels were set in Australia, including For Her Natural Life: A Tale of 1830 (1876), which was her ‘proto-feminist’ re-working of Marcus Clarke’s popular convict novel For the Term of His Natural Life (1870-72). 

9781144099051
411+LTLIBiL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_

In 1880 Eliza Winstanely (O’Flaherty) she returned to Australia. After initially staying with her sister Anne in Geelong, she moved to Sydney, where she died of ‘diabetes and exhaustion’ in a house on Clarence Street December 2, 1882. She is buried in Waverly Cemetery, right next to Henry Lawson.

Eliza Winstanley [O’Flaherty] was quite an extraordinary actress, person, and pioneer. What is significant is not only her wide and diverse and internationally successful career but also what her artistic identity represents in regard to the character of the Australian actress. Independent, intelligent, strong, determined, expressive, bold, and, as Hal Porter stated, possessed of an inexhaustible vitality. Such characteristics could equally apply to many, and many of those are modern Australian actresses – but Eliza Winstanley was the first.

TONY KNIGHT

THE GENESIS OF THE AUSTRALIAN ACTOR – George Farquhar’s THE RECRUITING OFFICER – 4. The Actors

27 Saturday Jan 2018

Posted by APHK PHOTOGRAPHY in 18TH CENTURY ART, ACTING, ACTORS, Australia, AUSTRALIAN ACTORS, Australian Art, AUSTRALIAN THEATRE, BRITISH DRAMA, Classical Theatre, DRAMA, ENGLISH DRAMA, ENGLISH HISTORY, ENGLISH THEATRE, HISTORY, LITERATURE, PLAYS, RESTORATION DRAMA, SHAKESPEARE, THEATRE, Uncategorized, UNITED KINGDOM

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

ACTING, ACTORS, Australia, AUSTRALIAN ACTORS, AUSTRALIAN THEATRE, DRAMA, EVENTS, FILMS, THEATRE

 

images
Sweet-Poll

INTRODUCTION

On June 4, 1789, in the middle of a Sydney winter and less than 18 months since ‘First Settlement’, the first piece of ‘Western’ theatre was produced in the new colony – The Recruiting Officer by George Farquhar. This first theatrical production in the new colony was mounted in honour of King George III’s birthday, performed by a group of unknown convicts, to an elite audience of about 60 people, including Governor Arthur Phillip, the Marine Corps officers and their wives, as well as the few ‘free settlers’, and was performed in a ramshackle convict hut. Other than this not much is known about this first theatrical production, nonetheless, there are a number of factors that remain as considerable influences on the character of the contemporary Australian actor. These include – the Play, the ‘Performing Space’, the ‘Event’, and the Actors. This series of posts will look at each of these factors and how they relate to modern Australian theatre, film, and television practice in forming the character of the Australian actor. This post concerns ‘The Actors’.

FemaleConvicts
Govt_jail_gang_sm

4. The Actors

We do not know the names of the convict actors who performed The Recruiting Officer. What we do know is that ‘some of the actors acquitted themselves with great spirit, and received the praise of the audience’ (Watkin Tench, A Complete Account of the Settlement at Port Jackson, in New South Wales. London. 1793. 25). Furthermore, they had no higher aim than ‘humbly to excite a smile’ (David Collins. An Account of the English Colony in New South Wales. London. 1798). It may, however, be assumed that they were amongst the few who could read, and possibly write. It may also be reasonably assumed that they may have seen in England a production of The Recruiting Officer.

Subsequently, whilst speculation, they may have modeled their performances on the current style of the acting in the English theatre in the late-18th Century. This is exemplified by such actors as David Garrick (1717-1779), Sarah Siddons (1755-1831), John Phillip Kemble (1757-1823), and Dora Jordan (1761-1816). It is quite possible that the convict actors may have seen these popular actors, particularly Dora Jordan who was the leading comic actress of the time.

78984b6ca2117ebc43ec4248804d104c--dora-as-you-like-it
download-2
download-4
images-4
images-3
images-2
images-1
download-3
download-1

The acting style may have been illustrative and demonstrative, complementing the relatively ‘romantic’ and ‘sentimentality’ of contemporary popular tastes. However, in regards to these convict actors’ performance, any excessive gesturing may have been somewhat restrained due to the intimate ‘One-Room’ performance space of a small convict hut. One over-excited hand wave may have knocked over a candle and the whole place would have gone up in a blaze

What also can be assumed is that the convicts were an ensemble of ‘amateur’ actors.

In modern Australia ‘amateur theatre’ is the largest and most diverse of theatrical activity and engagement in the country. Furthermore, whether it be in a high school or university production or with a local amateur theatre company, this is where most Australian actors begin.

images-5
images-6
images-7
images-8
images-9
Beenleigh Theatre Group WOx2 (January 2017)-300x400
download-5

‘THE PLAYMAKER’, ‘OUR COUNTRY’S GOOD’ & ROBERT SIDAWAY

Thomas Keneally’s novel The Playmaker (1987), and Timberlake Wertenbaker’s stage adaptation Our Country’s Good (1988) is about this convict production of The Recruiting Officer. Timberlake Wertenbaker’s play has been successfully staged throughout the world, is still being produced, and is particularly popular with drama schools.

playmaker
images-13
images-12
images-11
country0224
download-6
images-10

 In Keneally’s novel and Wertenbaker’s play, the convict actor Robert Sidaway (1758-1809) is a member of the cast for The Recruiting Officer. There is no proof that this was the case, nonetheless, despite speculation, it is quite possible as Robert Sidaway has the distinction of being amongst the first of recorded Australian actors.

Robert Sidaway was born in London in 1758. By 1782 he had been identified as a notorious thief, was convicted of ‘grand larceny’, and sentenced to death. This was commuted to transportation, and hence Sidaway found himself as part of the ‘First Fleet’ on the ship Friendship.

Sidaway was a ‘trickster’. During the voyage to Port Jackson, his name was recorded by Lt. Ralph Clark on two occasions and was put in ‘irons’ for ‘impertinence’. Whilst it is unknown whether or not he was a member of the convict cast of The Recruiting Officer, nonetheless, his name reappears in 1789, being involved with the hanging of Ann Davis, the first woman to be executed (for theft) in the new colony. In 1792 Sidaway received a conditional pardon and a full pardon in 1794, with a contract to be a baker for the resident troops.

In 1796 he opened a 120 seat theatre in Bell Row (now Bligh Street), Sydney, with the permission of Governor John Hunter. He put on Nicholas Rowe’s The Tragedy of Jane Shore, which was followed by other, including a revival of The Recruiting Officer. Unfortunately, Sidaway’s theatre was closed in 1800, being regarded as exerting a ‘corrupting influence’ on the fledgling town of Sydney.

download-7
The-Recriting-Officer
playbill-henry-iv

During the brief period in which Sidaway’s theatre operated, he produced an adaptation of Shakespeare’s Henry IV, which was the first of Shakespeare’s plays to be staged in Australia. Like other contemporary adaptions of Henry IV it is reasonable to assume that this adaptation focused primarily on the popular character of Falstaff.

David Malouf in his 1998 Boyer Lecture – A Spirit of Play: The Making of Australian Consciousness contends that Shakespeare’s Falstaff is the one that best encapsulates the nature of the Australian character. Similar to Sergeant Kite in The Recruiting Officer Falstaff is a clever, witty, and mercurial ‘trickster’. It is possible that these roles, and their perceived relative popularity, mark the beginning of the Australian ‘larrikin’ character. Furthermore, dramatic ‘trickster’ characters are notorious for their mercurial characteristic and qualities, being able to adapt and exist in multiple worlds, high and low. As will be later discussed in future posts, this mercurial, anti-authoritarian, ‘trickster’, ‘larrikin’ character will become a major feature of the Australian actor, nationally and internationally, as exemplified by such Australian actors as Snowy Baker, Errol Flynn, Mel Gibson, and Hugh Jackman.

This concludes this series on The Genesis of the Australian Actor. To re-cap – these are the elements regarding the convict production of The Recruiting Officer that still have an influence today:

  1. Modern satiric comedy that is relevant, particularly reveling in ‘trickster’ characters.
  2. The Event – that festivals complement the highest and most diverse theatrical activity in modern Australia.
  3. ‘One-Room’ Theatre – that intimate performing spaces are the most common throughout Australia, producing a cultural habit and expectation in regards to Australian acting that is intensely physically and emotionally immediate and intimate.
  4. Amateur Theatre – that the unknown convicts who performed in The Recruiting Officer in 1789 were amateur actors, and that amateur theatre is the largest and most diverse form of theatrical activity in modern Australia, and is where most professional Australian actors begin their respective careers. 

This may the ‘Genesis’ of the Australian actor – but there is so much more – which will be explored in future posts.

TONY KNIGHT

 

 

GREAT ACTORS: Olivia de Havilland

19 Tuesday Sep 2017

Posted by APHK PHOTOGRAPHY in 20TH CENTURY ART, 21st CENTURY ART, ACTING, ACTORS, AMERICAN DRAMA, AMERICAN FILM AND CINEMA, BROADWAY, CINEMA, DIRECTORS, DRAMA, ENGLISH THEATRE, FILM, Film Noir, HISTORY, Hollywood, LITERATURE, MOVIES, MUSICALS, PEOPLE, PLAYS, SHAKESPEARE, THEATRE, Uncategorized, USA

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1930S, 1940S, 1950s, Academy Awards, ACTORS, ART, BROADWAY, CINEMA, DRAMA, FILM, Film Noir, Hollywood, MOVIES, Olivia de Havilland, Oscars, PLAYS, THEATRE, USA

Olivia_De_Haviland_1933DAME OLIVIA DE HAVILLAND was born 1 July, 1916, in Tokyo and at the grand age of 101 she is still alive and well and living in Paris. Whilst her parents were British, nonetheless she and her younger sister Joan (later known as Joan Fontaine) was raised in Saratoga, California by their mother. She made her acting debut in an amateur production of Alice in Wonderland. What follows in this rather lengthy article is essentially a tribute to Olivia de Havilland’s brilliant career. In my respective acting classes I am often citing past great actors and films, of which my young (and not so young) students are often completely unaware. Many have not even seen or even know about Gone With The Wind, which is perhaps the film that most would identify with Olivia de Havilland. However, there is so much more to this extraordinary actress and 20th and 21st Century woman.

Nmidnight_1935In 1934 she played the role of Puck in a local production of A Midsummer Night’s Dream. That summer the legendary director Max Reinhardt came to Los Angeles to direct a production of The Dream at the Hollywood Bowl. One of Reinhardt’s assistants saw Olivia de Havilland in the Saratoga production. Due to this assistant’s praise Reinhardt offered de Havilland the second understudy for the role of Hermia. One week before the production opened Gloria Stuart (Titanic), who was playing Hermia, and the first understudy left the production and Olivia de Havilland went on. Reinhardt A_Midsummer_Night's_Dream_1935was so impressed with the then 18 years old Olivia de Havilland that he subsequently cast her as Hermia in his lavish 1935 film version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream. She appeared with alongside other Hollywood legends including James Cagney, Dick Powell and a very young Mickey Rooney. Also in the cast was Australian actress Jean Muir who played Helena.

Following A Midsummer Night’s Dream she then appeared in Captain Blood (1935) with Errol Flynn. This hugely popular film, Olivia de Havilland’s ‘break-out’ film, led to more films in which she starred with Errol Flynn – Four’s A Crowd (1938), Dodge City (1939), The Charge of the Light Brigade (1936), The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938), The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex (1939), Santa Fe Trail (1940), They Died With Their Boots On (1941).

220px-The_Private_Lives_of_Elizabeth_and_Essex_Poster
220px-Dodge_City_1939_Poster
Thechargeofthelightbrigade1936
Captain_Blood.jpeg
Foursacrowd1938
Diedbootson
Robin_hood_movieposter
Santa_Fe_Trail_(film)_poster

Olivia_de_Havilland_and_Errol_Flynn_in_Captain_Blood_trailerThe 8 films that Olivia de Havilland did with Errol Flynn’s is a classic example of the successful on-screen romantic couple. Born from the Hollywood Studio system, as well as the classical theatre, many have tried to emulate this very specific but elusive kind of movie magic, but only a few have ever been as successful as the de Havilland-Flynn pairing. This includes, Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy, and Doris Day and Rock Hudson. In modern cinema the films of Drew Barrymore and Adam Sandler are the only on-screen pairing that comes close, although I would also argue that the pairing of Kiera Knightly and Orlando Bloom in the Pirates of the Caribbean film series captures this special type of movie magic.

It'sLoveI'mAfterPosterIn the 1930s as well as the films she made with Errol Flynn she also appeared in a few films with Bette Davis, my favourite being It’s Love I’m After (1937). This marked the beginning of a life-long friendship between Olivia de Havilland and Bette Davis, which is an aspect of de Havilland’s current plans to sue the producer’s of the TV series Feud that deals with the relationship between Davis and Joan Crawford, and in which Catherine Zeta-Jones appears as Olivia de Havilland. One delightful little story about Olivia de Havilland’s relationship with Bette Davis can be found in the This Is Your Life: Bette Davis episode in which Olivia de Havilland makes a surprise appearance. She talks about her relationship with Bette Davis, who is sitting right next to her, and they laugh about how prior to The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex de Havilland was Flynn’s leading lady, but in Elizabeth and Essex she now was Bette Davis’ maid! Haha!

00aOlivia de Havilland also appeared in such ‘big budget’ epics such as Anthony Adverse (1936), but then came the biggest of them all – Gone With The Wind (1939).220px-Poster_-_Gone_With_the_Wind_01 I love Gone With The Wind, in which Olivia de Havilland played ‘mealy-mouthed’ Melanie Wilkes. She, like the rest of the film, is simply wonderful. I am fully aware that it now attracts some severe criticism in regards to its depiction of slavery and African-American stereotypes. Whilst there may be some validity in these censures, nonetheless, it is still a great film – for many reasons. Olivia de Havilland was amongst the first to congratulate Academy Award co-Best Supporting Actress nominee Hattie McDaniel when McDaniel won the award – the first African-American actress to do so. I love Hattie McDaniel’s quip when she was criticized as subscribing to so-called ‘Uncle Tom’ black stereotypes for her fabulous and memorable performance of Mammy: “I’d rather make seven hundred dollars playing a maid than seven dollars being one’.

images-1Despite being somewhat overshadowed by Vivien Leigh, with whom Olivia de Havilland enjoyed a great friendship and working relationship, nonetheless, de Havilland’s Melanie also displays a wonderful ‘cool charm’ and ability to successfully lie and deceive. This ‘cool charm’ is particularly apparent in the second half of the film, in the Atlanta section, involving the deception of the army in regards to her wounded husband, Ashley (Leslie Howard). Olivia de Havilland is also at her best in all her scenes with Vivien Leigh (and there are a lot) including the final ‘death of Melanie’ scene. She is also wonderful in her scenes with Clark Gable, comforting him after the death of Bonnie, and before that her one scene with the terrific Ona Mason as Belle Watling.

imagesOne terrific example of superb screen acting is the sequence in which Melanie recognizes from afar the returning battle scarred Ashley (Leslie Howard); in this short sequence there are no words spoken, and the range of emotions that go across Olivia de Havilland’s face is wonderful and extraordinary – from concern, intrigue, disbelieve, realization and finally rapturous joy. I love Gone With The Wind and have watched it many many times, and always find it delightful and discovering something new about it.

downloadOlivia de Havilland made 16 films during the 1940s. The best of these in the e 40s are Santa Fe Trail (1940), The Strawberry Blonde (1941), Hold Back the Dawn (1941) and The Died with their Boots On (1941). During WW2 Olivia de Havilland was an active member of the Hollywood Canteen, dancing and entertaining troops. This is somewhat reflected in the film images copyThank Your Lucky Stars (1943), in which she appears in a comic song ‘The Dreamer’ with Ida Lupino and George Tobias. Olivia de Havilland also bravely visited front-line troops on islands and other places in the Pacific war zone.

From 1943 to 1945 Olivia de Havilland was engaged in a legal battle with Warner Brothers to whom she was contracted. This was a battle for artistic freedom. A number of others, including Bette Davis, had challenged the fixed and rigid control the respective studios had over their contract players and failed. Not Olivia de Havilland. Her landmark victory meant that in future contract players were able to negotiate their artistic freedom and work with other studios. It went into law as the ‘De Havilland Law’. Even her estranged sister, Joan Fontaine, acknowledged her victory, stating, “Hollywood owes Olivia a great deal”. Subsequently, however, due to Warner Brothers’ influence, and the respective studios ganging together, Olivia de Havilland was ‘blacklisted’ and did not work for two years.

220px-ToeachhisownPOSTERIn 1945 she signed a two-picture deal with Paramount Pictures and subsequently made To Each His Own (1946), for which she received her first Academy Award for Best Actress.What To Each His Own exemplifies is Olivia de Havilland’s artistic need and desire to play characters that go through a considerable transformation, physically as well as psychologically. In To Each His Own Olivia de Havilland beautifully plays an unwed mother who has to give up her child. In this highly romantic drama the character she plays, Jody, ages from a young innocent American girl to an old woman in WW2 London. Whilst it is perhaps easy today to dismiss this sentimental drama, nonetheless, for its time it was covering controversial ground. Furthermore, To Each His Own marked the beginning of a new period in Olivia de Havilland’s career that saw her make films which what are possible her most impressive in regards to acting performances.

220px-The_dark_mirror_vhs_coverThis includes the complex ‘film noir’ psychological thriller The Dark Mirror (1946), in which she plays the dual role of twins battling each other in a torturous love triangle. This fascinating film, written by Nunnally Johnson and directed by Robert Siodmak has been regarded as a precursor to Johnson’s The Three Faces of Eve (1957). Olivia de Havilland was experimenting with the so-called ‘method acting’ technique, and did an enormous amount of research into the psychology of twins. It is speculative as to whether or not she also drew on her own problematic relationship with her sister, Joan Fontaine.

What is definite is that her work in The Dark Mirror in a way prepares Olivia de Havilland for her next two films that are in many ways the highlights of her career – Anatole Litvak’s The Snake Pit (1948), and William Wyler’s The Heiress (1949) for which Olivia de Havilland received her second Academy Award as well as a Golden Globe Award and the New York Film Critics Award for Best Actress. Olivia de Havilland is simply marvelous in both The Snake Pit and The Heiress. There is an extraordinary and truly fascinating depth and complexity in the respective characters that she plays in these films. 220px-Snakepit1948_62862n

The Snake Pit is a harrowing and profoundly moving story about madness and the insane. One is completely seduced by Olivia de Havilland’s character, Virginia – is she insane or isn’t she? Just as effective as Russell Crowe in Ron Howard’s A Beautiful Mind (2001) one is drawn into the world of Olivia de Havilland’s Virginia – a woman who finds herself in an insane asylum, but doesn’t know how she got there.  Heiress_wylerThe Heiress is based on Henry James classic novella Washington Square, and the play adaptation by Ruth and Augustus Goetz. It is a story about deliberate cruelty. A young woman, a wealthy heiress called Catherine Sloper who is cruelly treated by her father, brilliantly played by Ralph Richardson. She falls in love with a young man, Morris Townsend, played by the irresistible Montgomery Cliff, who deserts her after being offered financial remuneration by her father. Years later, after her father has died and Catherine has inherited her fortune, Morris returns in the hope that Catherine will forgive him and that now they can be married. Catherine goes along with Morris’ plans until the devastating ending. When challenged by her Aunt Lavinia (Miriam Hopkins) as to how Catherine can be so cruel, Catherine replies, “I was taught by experts”. This is a great story, complex and intriguing and Olivia de Havilland is simply brilliant, especially in the final scenes. Once again – as with The Snake Pit, and her other films in this period, one is seduced by her seeming innocence, unaware of the serpent that lies beneath until the end. Well worth watching.

220px-Rachel_moviepDue to family commitments and various theatre engagements in New York, which included playing Juliet in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet and Candida in George Bernard Shaw’s Candida, Olivia de Havilland did not make another film until 1952. When she did it was the mystery romance, My Cousin Rachel (1952), which was Richard Burton’s first US film. This was followed by Not as a Stranger (1955), which was Stanley Kramer’s debut film, and also featured Frank Sinatra. Her marriage to French journalist Marcus Goodrich meant that she relocated to live in Paris. She returned to Hollywood to make Michael Curtiz’s western The Proud Rebel with Alan Ladd, and 1959 she was in the British courtroom drama Libel (1959), directed by Anthony Asquith with Dirk Bogarde.

download
download copy
Libel_-_1959-_poster

220px-The_Light_in_the_Piazza_posterHer marriage to Marcus Goodrich ended in 1962, but they continued to TheLightInThePiazzacohabitate in the same house in Paris. In that same year Olivia de Havilland scored her greatest stage success, appearing with Henry Fonda on Broadway in Garson Kanin’s A Gift of Time. She also appeared in Guy Green’s film Light in the Piazza (1962) that many years later became the basis for Craig Lucas’ and Adam Guettel’s magnificent musical The Light in the Piazza (2005). In 1962 Olivia de Havilland published her semi-autobiographical book, Every Frenchman Has One, about her life in Paris, which subsequently became a bestseller.

220px-Lady_in_a_Cage_-_1964-_poster-1In 1964 Olivia de Havilland made two rather extraordinary psychological horror films. The first was Walter Grauman’s Lady in a Cage (1964), which featured a young James Cann. This is really odd 1960s film – and it is stylishly very 1960s, almost psychedelic at times, with the addition of a doco-drama element. The other film was Robert Aldrich’s Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964) with Bette Davis, as well as other ‘old Hollywood’ actors, Joseph Cotton, Agnes Morehead, Mary Astor, and Australian actor Cecil Kellaway. Olivia de Havilland took over the role that Joan Crawford was playing when Crawford became too ill and had to withdraw. This film also features the young Bruce Dern.220px-Hush_Hush_Sweet_Charlotte_Poster Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte is Robert Aldrich’s follow-up to his What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962). As Bette Davis told me (yes – me) Baby Jane was the better of the two films due its script superiority. Still – Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte is a highly entertaining film, with the seemingly innocent Olivia de Havilland being actually as ruthless and cold-blooded as she was at the end of The Heiress.

 The 1970s was the decade that saw the final major film works of Olivia de Havilland. None of them are particularly good or memorable, although Airport ’77 (1977) is the best of the series that followed the success of Airport (1970); and the disaster film The Swarm (1978) is rated as one of the ‘worst films ever made’, and one of the ‘100 Most Enjoyably Bad Movies Ever Made’. Her final film was forgettable The Fifth Musketeer (1979).

220px-Airport_77_movie_poster
220px-The_Swarm-1

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s Olivia de Havilland was in a number of TV movies and mini-series. This included playing the Queen Mother in The Royal Romance of Charles and Diana (1982). Her best TV performance was as the Dowager Empress Maria in Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna (1986), for which she won a Golden Globe Award as Best Supporting Actress in a TV Series.

As the above indicates it is a phenomenal and highly diverse career.

She has been honoured many times, most recently being made a Dame of the British Empire the day before her 101th birthday on 31 June, 2017.

As previously mentioned, she is now back in the limelight due to her objections and legal battle with the makers of Feud: Bette and Joan (2017), in which Catherine Zetta-Jones plays Olivia de Havilland. Time will see how this all plays out. However, Time is not on Olivia de Havilland’s side. It is hoped that due to this incredible woman’s deserved status, as well as longevity and age, that no matter what she request that the respective producers will yield to her demands, and apologize for any offense. What does it really matter if Feud is shelved and unavailable for a few years. It has already been screened, and will soon fade into obscurity. We now are all fully aware that being a ‘celluloid hero’ doesn’t mean immortality; the ‘stars’ and films of yesteryear are now largely forgotten and unwatched. However, Olivia de Havilland is still with us. Olivia de Havilland now is really the only person left from the so called ‘Golden Years of Hollywood’. A wonderful actress, and a trailblazer, not only in terms of career but also in enabling other Hollywood artists to work freely. A LEGEND. Thank you Olivia de Havilland.

images-2

TONY KNIGHT.

 

 

 

 

 

GREAT ACTORS: ‘Sir Henry Irving & “The Bells” by Edward Gordon Craig.

13 Wednesday Sep 2017

Posted by APHK PHOTOGRAPHY in 19TH CENTURY ART, ACTING, ACTORS, DIRECTORS, DRAMA, ENGLISH HISTORY, ENGLISH THEATRE, FASHION, HISTORY, LITERATURE, PLAYS, SHAKESPEARE, THEATRE, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

19TH CENTURY MELODRAMA, ACTORS, ART, Australia, DRAMA, EDWARD GORDON CRAIG, ENGLISH THEATRE, FASHION, HENRY IRVING, PLAYS, THE BELLS, THEATRE

download-2SIR HENRY IRVING (1838-1905) was the greatest English actor of the late 19th Century. Sadly, however, very few now know anything about Irving. Yet his legacy lives on in London, primarily due the still operating Lyceum Theatre. This was Irving’s theatre – a grand proscenium arch theatre in which he performed his greatest roles, and to which the world came to be awed, entertained and shocked. Irving excelled at Shakespeare, yet his most famous role was Mathias in Leopold Davis Lewis’ The Bells (1871). download-3

This play is an English Gothic melodrama and was an extremely popular, rivaling other significant plays of the late-19th Century, including those by Boucicault, Ibsen and Wilde. It has been called the first ‘modern horror’ play, a label that is not without justification and truth. It is perhaps difficult to grasp nearly 150 years since The Bells was first performed how radically different and innovative it was at the time. In the biography Henry Irving: The Actor and his Times (1951), written by Irving’s son. Laurence Irving, there are details about the opening night performance on 27 November, 1871. It was performed to a relatively small house, who steadily became more and more intensely fascinated with the play. One woman fainted, and at the end the audience was in a state of stunned silence. In a modern edition of the play, Henry Irving and ‘The Bells’: Irving’s personal script of the play (1980), editor Eric Jones-Evans wrote,  ‘The play left the first-nighters a little dazed. Old fashioned playgoers did not know what to make of it as a form of entertainment. But when the final curtain fell the audience, after a gasp or two, realised that they had witnessed the most masterly form of tragic acting that the British stage had seen for many a long day, and there was a storm of cheers. Then, still pale, still haggard, still haunted, as it were, by the terror he had so perfectly counterfeited, the actor came forward with the sort of smile that did not destroy the character of the Dracula1stBurgomaster or dispel the illusion of the stage’. Irving was immediately catapulted to the forefront of English theatre, where he remained, often reviving ‘The Bells’, until his death in 1905. Not only was he extremely influential in regards to the art and evolution of acting, he also influenced the creation and evolution of the ‘horror’ genre. This is not just due to The Bells, but also because he was the primary source of inspiration for Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1897). Bram Stoker was the business manager of the Lyceum Theatre, as well as operating as Irving’s personal manager/agent and friend.

imageI’m fully aware that some may be a little perplexed as to why I would even bother to write about the now largely forgotten Irving. However, I have just re-read The Bells, partly because the edition I found in O’Connell’s Secondhand Bookshop in Adelaide had as its preface a wonderful piece by Edward Gordon Craig (1872-1966) titled Irving’s Masterpiece – “The Bells”. I don’t wish to dwell too much on Edward Gordon Craig, although there is much to relate and discuss. Suffice to state at that Craig is one of the grandfathers of modern theatre design. Craig knew Irving well, personally and professionally. He saw Irving perform in The Bells over 30 times, and this preface is extremely enlightening as it gives a glimpse of what Irving was actually like on stage in The Bells. 

downloadCraig writes of Irving’s ‘deep and human beauty which he lets you see’. In regard to Irving’s entrance in The Bells, following an ensemble scene of about 15 minutes, Craig provides a kind of challenging definition of true ensemble acting that runs contrary to modern assumptions and practice – ‘On his (Irving’s) appearance, they one and all fell back into their places, since to obtrude would have been out of the question.  Ensemble was achieved, but there was something to achieve it for, something for which it can lend support; ensemble supporting itself, is it not rather a ridiculous spectacle? That’ democratic acting if you like – “for we are jolly good fellows…which none of us will deny.” For Craig, true ensemble acting is non-democratic; it only exists when there is something, or someone, to achieve it for –  focus and a goal.

downloadWhat Craig isolates is the power of the ‘star’ actor. When Irving entered he was greeted with a thunderous round of applause. Ordinarily, as stated by Craig, and referencing Stanislavsky, such applause was an annoying ‘interruption’. However, in the case of Irving, and other ‘star’ actors, such ‘hurricane of applause’ is not an interruption. “It is no boisterous greeting by an excitable race, for a blustering actor – it was something which can only be described as part and parcel of the whole, as right as rain…Power responded to power…It was necessary to them – not him’. This is very particular type of cathartic release that is necessary for the audience ‘to take in what he was about to give them’. Curious. I’ve only ever experienced such a release on the commercial West End and Broadway stage, as well as the Kabuki theatre in Japan; in egalitarian ‘democratic’ Australia it never happens. Is this why we tend not to see and rate our actors as great? Because we, the judicious ‘democratic’ orientated audience, won’t allow it?

Henry_Irving_Vanity_FairCraig then references the classical Noh theatre of Japan; how an entrance of a great actor is preceded by ‘suspense’, followed by a ‘surprise’. In regard to Irving, as well as Edmund Kean, ‘an entrance was something to experience’ – ‘The manner of coming on made it extraordinary with great actors – it was this manner of timing the appearance – measuring its speed and direction – which created a rhythm that was irresistible’. Whist most actors do not possess the talent and skill to be ‘great’, nonetheless, the lesson here is in detail and timing, which is something that all good actors can concentrate on and achieve through thorough and precise preparation. The rhythm of entrances is also not just confined to the theatre but is a vital aspect of film – ‘suspense’ then ‘surprise’. The reward for such detail being, as Craig observes in regard to Irving, is the intense focus of attention of the audience on the actor – ‘now watch what he will do – better still, how will he do it – best of all, watch his face and figure, and follow what it is these are hinting at’.

download-4Close attention to detail and the subtlety of psychological gestures is not something that is generally associated with 19th Century English acting, and yet it would seem that Henry Irving, as well as Ellen Terry, was a master at such insightful depth. Craig exemplifies Irving’s attention to detail, psychological gesture, and depth in how Irving as Mathias in The Bells removes his boots after entering, listening acutely to what is being said: ‘It was, in every gesture, every half move, in the play of his shoulders, legs, head and arms, mesmeric in the highest degree – slowly we were drawn to watch every inch of his work as we are drawn to read and linger on every syllable of a strangely fine writer. It was perfect craftsmanship’.

download-1Craig clearly captures a hint of what made Henry Irving a ‘great actor’, not only as Mathias in The Bells but also in Hamlet, Macbeth, Faust and many other roles: ‘The thing Irving set out to do was to show us the sorrow which slowly and remorsely beat him down. As, no matter who the human being may be, and what his crime, the sorrow which he suffers must appeal to our hearts, so Irving set out to wring our hearts, not to give us a clever exhibition of antics such as a murderer would be likely to go through. He does not appeal to any silly sentimentality in you – he merely states the case by showing you that quite obviously here is a strong human being, through a moment of weakness, falls into error and becomes for two hours a criminal – does what he knows he is doing – acts deliberately – but (here is Irving) acts automatically, as though impelled by an immense force, against which no resistance is possible.’

What is stated above has become of crucial importance in modern acting; not just here in Adelaide but elsewhere I have taught and experienced so-called ‘modern’ and ‘innovative’ theatre. The attention to detail is one thing – and many of you have heard me exclaim – ‘Acting is detail‘. The other thing is deliberate simplicity rather than indulge in sentimentality (generalised passive-aggressive bleating and ‘playing the victim’). Acting is a deliberate process of creative and imaginative detailed choices; characters act deliberately and consciously, good and bad, and it should be automatic to make it seem as if it is spontaneaous, ‘in the moment’, as if experienced for the first timei, ‘as though impelled by an immense force, against which no resistance is possible’. Too often this is not the case; there is no sense of deliberate action, only sentimental and demonstrative re-action, usually of the bleating kind, complemented by face pulling and excessive and ridiculous gesturing that has no meaning, except registering an actor’s discomfort and not insight re the character.

Whilst by no means the whole story, nonetheless, Edward Gordon Craig’s short essay on Henry Irving in The Bells does complement many of the things I hold dear and teach – part of an essential Acting Manifesto. Many will, and have, dismiss and ignore such sensible and practical advice, preferring the histrionics and ‘theatricalism’ currently demanded by the modern theatre of despair and deconstruction. Stanislavsky also loathed and criticized overt ‘theatricalism’. However, like everything, this too will pass – even though so-called ‘innovative’ deconstructive theatre has dominated our stages for the past 30-odd years. I’m not sure our current 30-something and 40-something ‘bright young things’ can do anything else. They certainly show a reluctance to embrace and challenge themselves with any different ‘style’, and certainly become resentful and pouty when challenged in regard to their relatively limited vision and expression. I don’t mind being labelled ‘classical’, and have and will continue to challenge myself with as many different theatrical styles as possible. ‘Innovation’, an over-used word I have come to loath, is too often merely ‘distortion’ – leading to bad acting. I believe, like Craig and Irving, that the actor should follow and aim for ‘the most ancient and unshakable tradition, which says the Dramatist (not the director) is to take the audience into his confidence. The actor who fails to do this (via sentimentality, demonstration, and imposed generalised emotional bleating) fails as an actor’.

As a final postscript to this rather lengthy article, there is something else about Irving and The Bells that is worth mentioning in regard to great acting. After the opening night, Irving was returning home with his wife, Florence, in a carriage. They had just reached Hyde Park corner when Florence ridiculed Irving, stating – ‘Are you going to make a fool of yourself like this all your life?’ Where upon Irving stopped the carriage, got down, and walked away, and never saw Florence again. One thing that all truly great actors have, and in a way must possess, is an almost obessional  dynamic energy in which the love of the art of acting is first and foremost. This may appear as completely selfish and ego driven to some, to many, but it is really once again this compelling ‘irresistible force’. It requires and demands great bravery, sacrifice, dedication and determination – even in the face of complete failure, ruin and ostracism. Whatever happens on a personal and professional front the ‘great actor’ never ever stops creating. Take that as you will. Laurence Olivier was once asked ‘Why do you act?’, Olivier responded with ‘Why do I breathe?’ – and that about sums it up – there actually isn’t a choice. This must have been what Irving experienced, a kind of epiphany, after his huge success on opening night of The Bells. Ironic in a way; that at roughly the same time that Ibsen wrote The Doll’s House (1872), the most controversial play of the 19th Century due to woman leaving husband, children, home and security, Henry Irving did the masculine version of the same thing.He walked out of his marriage for his own art. Of course he felt guilt – but he couldn’t live with this kind of negative judgment; the ‘irresistible force’ demanded he embrace his new identity – judge as you may.

TONY KNIGHT

FILM REVIEW: War for the the Planet of the Apes

25 Tuesday Jul 2017

Posted by APHK PHOTOGRAPHY in ACTING, ACTORS, Classical Greek Drama, DRAMA, FILM, MOVIES, PLAYS, SHAKESPEARE, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

ACTING, CINEMA, FILM, MOVIES, PLANET OF THE APES, SCEINCE-FICTION

 

War-for-the-Planet-of-the-Apes-Movie-Poster

War for the Planet of the Apes is the third and probably final film in the recent re-imagining of this science-fiction apocalypse fantasy that commenced with publication of Pierre Boulle’s 1963 novel La Planete des Singes (Planet of the Apes). LaPlanèteDesSinges

The first film series started with Planet of the Apes (1968), directed by Franklin J. Schaffner with a screenplay by Rod Serling and Michael Wilson, and was a relatively loose adaptation of Boulle’s novel. It was a popular and critical success, seizing the imagination of a world-wide audience and subsequently spawning four other films between 1970 and 1973.

220px-PlanetoftheapesPosterOne reason for the success of this film series was the strong support and commitment given by the respective actors involved, including Charlton Heston, Kim Hunter, Maurice Evans, and in particular Roddy McDowell. Frankly, except for the first and third film, Escape from the Planet of the Apes (1971) the rest are rather forgettable and not at the same standard as those just cited, which have a psychological complexity and depth beyond the normal science fiction film.

Nearly thirty years later after the final film, Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973) came Planet-of-the-Apes-2001Tim Burton’s dark and thrilling Planet of the Apes (2001), which was essentially a re-imagining of the original 1968 film. Burton’s film was a popular and critical success, however, it was not until 2011 that the first film in this current series, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, directed by Rupert Wyatt with a screenplay by Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver, was released. The success of this film led to the second film, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014), and finally War for the Planet of the Apes (2017), both directed by Matt Reeves with screenplays by Jaffa, Silver, and Mark Bomback, and Reeves and Bomback, respectively. This new trilogy of films was inspired by Pierre Boulle’s novel, as well as the previous six films (and the 1974 television series), but is completely new take on the original concept of a planet in which apes speak and are roughly equivalent, and subsequently a challenge, to mankind.

movieposter
Dawn_of_the_Planet_of_the_Apes
War_for_the_Planet_of_the_Apes_poster

What also makes this latest trilogy of films different from previous works is not just the new storyline and given circumstances of the plot, but the art of movie-making in the 21st Century, and in particular ‘performance capture’ and the work of the actors involved who play the apes in the respective films. ‘Performance capture’ is a relatively new form in the art of acting, highly technical, extremely physically, and demanding considerable trust by the actor and director in the collaborative process. The acknowledged ‘master’ in this new form of acting is the English actor, Andy Serkis, whose roles include Gollum in Peter Jackson’s film trilogy Lord of the Rings (2001-03) and The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012),  Kong in Jackson’s King Kong (2005), Captain Haddock in Steven Spielberg’s The Adventures of Tintin (2011), Supreme Leader Snoke in J. J. Abrams Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015), and Caesar, the revolutionary ape leader in this new Planet of the Apes series. Serkis’ extraordinary performance, along with the other actors involved, plus the stunning art direction and visual effects by Weta Digital, makes War for the Planet of the Apes an extremely pleasurable and rewarding experience – on the big screen; a significant reductive experience if watched on a small screen (although, sadly, many will watch this film on such – it is not the same experience, nor the intention of the film-makers).

download-2
images-1
images-2
images-3
images

In conversations I had subsequent to watching the South Australian premiere of the film last night it became immediately apparent that many of the influences, openly acknowledged by the respective film makers, were completely missed. In creating the film Matt Reeves and Mark Bomback watched and were inspired by numerous films, including Cecil B. DeMille’s The Ten Commandments (1956), David Lean’s The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957), William Wyler’s Ben-Hur (1959), John Sturges’ The Great Escape (1963), Clint Eastwood’s The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976), and Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now (1979). All these influences (and more) are discernable to the judicious and informed movie-goer eye. Such film cross-referencing is not uncommon in the history of film,  adding to the enjoyment as well as depth of films such as War for the Planet of the Apes. One example is Woody Harrelson’s wonderful performance of Caesar’s nemesis The Colonel, inspired by Marlon Brando’s Colonel Kurtz in Coppola’s Apocalypse Now. This is no mere imitation but a respectful homage and inspirational decision. How many actually pick up on this, however, is questionable – at least in my immediate circumstances. I can only encourage you to watch these film masterpieces in order to enhance the pleasure of watching War for the Planet of the Apes; they also happen to be extraordinary films in their own right.

An even larger question is why we are fascinated, to the point of obsession, with imaginings of our own demise. This is evident as far back as The Bible with Noah and the Ark, as well as numerous classical Greek and Roman myths and dramas, exemplified by Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex (c. 429 BCE). As with Oedipus Rex there is fear of contamination and plague in War for the Planet of the Apes, which complements a similar concern in the previous two films. This fear is characteristic of numerous films, particularly those from the USA, in the 21st Century, post ‘9/11’, exemplified by the multiple zombie films and television series, such as The Walking Dead. It is as if the respective film makers, consciously or not, have tapped into a world-wide fear, and subsequently allowing for a kind of contemporary cathartic release in experiencing such dramas, guaranteeing popular and critical success and appeal at this time in the history of mankind. Why apes in this particular case is curious. However, considering our fascination and concern with our closest animal relatives, orangutans, gorillas and chimpanzees, this only adds to the complexity, depth and credibility of the entire Planet of the Apes series. We would like to communicate with them, recognising their all-too human traits – but what if they really do start behaving like human beings? It would be, at least according to these films as well Boulle’s original novel, regarded as a threat. Furthermore, War for the Planet of the Apes taps into issues of destructive and obsessive anger, and the desire for revenge; a consistent theme in world-wide human dramatic literature, exemplified by Shakespeare’s Hamlet (c.1601) and Othello (c.1603), as well as the more recent television miniseries The Night Manager (2016).

Despite the fun in recognising these influences and world-wide-web connection with other dramatic works, nonetheless, my only criticism of War for the Planet of the Apes is its length. Running at 140 minutes the film drags itself out towards the end with multiple potential endings. Subsequently, with the final film reference to de Mille’s The Ten Commandments, Caesar being like the Biblical character of Moses, denied entrance to the ‘Promised Land’, seemed a bit laboured and sentimental. This is, however, a minor point in what is overall a highly enjoyable film; although I would suggest a visit to the toilet prior to watching this film.

TONY KNIGHT

 

 

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • January 2020
  • August 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • August 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015

Categories

  • 16th CENTURY ART
  • 17TH CENTURY ART
  • 18TH CENTURY ART
  • 19TH CENTURY ART
  • 20TH CENTURY ART
  • 21st CENTURY ART
  • abstracts
  • ACTING
  • ACTORS
  • Adelaide
    • ADELAIDE FESTIVAL CENTRE
  • ADELAIDE THEATRE
  • AMERICAN DRAMA
  • AMERICAN DRAMA IN THE 1950S
  • AMERICAN FILM AND CINEMA
  • AMERICAN HISTORY
  • AMERICAN POLITICS
  • ANIMALS
  • ART
  • ART GALLERIES
  • ART GALLERY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
  • ASIAN ART
  • ASIAN CINEMA
  • ASIAN THEATRE
  • Australia
  • AUSTRALIAN ACTORS
  • Australian Art
  • AUSTRALIAN FILM
  • AUSTRALIAN HISTORY
  • AUSTRALIAN THEATRE
  • BEACHES
  • BLACK & WHITES
  • BRITISH DRAMA
  • BROADWAY
  • CHINESE CINEMA
  • CINEMA
  • Classical Greek Drama
  • Classical Theatre
  • DIRECTORS
  • DRAMA
  • Elizabethan Drama
  • ENGLISH DRAMA
  • ENGLISH HISTORY
  • ENGLISH THEATRE
  • Euripides
  • FAMOUS TRIALS
  • FASHION
  • festivals
  • FILM
  • Film Noir
  • FRENCH DRAMA
  • FRENCH THEATRE
  • HAROLD PINTER
  • Helen of Troy
  • HISTORY
  • Hollywood
  • IMPRESSIONISM
  • LITERATURE
  • LONDON
  • MOVIES
  • MUSICALS
  • MYANMAR
  • oedipus rex
  • OZ-ASIA
  • PARKS & GARDENS
  • PEOPLE
  • PHOTOGRAPHY
  • PLAYS
  • POLITICS
  • PUBLIC ART
  • RESTORATION DRAMA
  • SALA
  • SHAKESPEARE
  • SINGAPORE
  • Sophocles
  • South Australia
  • SOUTH AUSTRALIAN ART GALLERY
  • SOUTH KOREA
  • STATUES
  • STREET ART
  • The Trojan War
  • THEATRE
  • TONY'S TOURS – Travel Journal
  • TRAVEL
  • TRAVEL JOURNEY
  • TRAVELING IN AUSTRALIA
  • TRAVELING IN INDIA
  • TREES
  • Uncategorized
  • UNITED KINGDOM
  • USA
  • VINEYARDS
  • WEST END, LONDON

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel

 
Loading Comments...
Comment
    ×