When I read Ben Brantley's review, this morning, of the Delacorte's "King Lear," I wanted to smack him across the face! Every time I said this to someone, so far, it was suggested I was not alone.
You have to wonder about Brantley's position at the Times. After all, Jill Abramson was fired because the good ole straight boys at the Times felt she was castrating them by the balls. Maybe they needed to be! Brantley certainly does not fit that straight boy mold--are you kidding????--not to mention he is plug ugly, just one step up from Rondo Hatton as "The Creeper."
So, what is he doing, saying Annette Bening's delivery as Goneril is "like a high school valedictorian at a poetry reading competition?" And referring to Jessica Hecht as a finely nuanced actress,(which she is!!!!!!) but not here????????????? John Lithgow is the only one who comes off well here; who would dare criticize the magnificent work he does as Lear? And Jessica Collins' Cordelia does have some spine,as I said, so don't be fooled by Brantley's musings.
Which brings me back to the question of what he is doing at The Times. He is their one sign of political correctness--that they can be PC enough to hire a gay drama critic. Even if he is in the closet????? A gay drama critic? Wow, what a novelty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is nothing novel about that, just like there is nothing novel about Brantley's remarks, which are more withering than pithy. Not to mention displaying a lack of insight or awareness about this work, which, as I have said, is not only the foundation of family dynamics, but is the cornerstone for all family drama to follow.
Why doesn't Brantley get a face lift, like Joan Rivers? Or, better yet, put a paper bag over his head??????????
For what this production REALLY is, go back to my earlier post on the show.
Lear says, famously, "How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is, to have a thankless child." Let me revise that to "How useless for The New York Times to have so unworthy a drama
critic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Go to 'Lear,' girls! At once!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh. My. GOD!
ReplyDeleteRQ, you never cease to amaze me with your references: I truly thought I was the only one in Brooklyn who knew from "The Creeper"!
What a little gem of a thriller that was: compact, perfectly cast and atmospheric as hell. It haunted my dreams as a kid, having sneak-watched it on the Late Late Show (yes, I've been a nite owl from birth).
Years later I was saddened to learn of Rondo Hatton's short, unfortunate life- but at least he got to leave a memorable legacy of unique villains on film.
Which is a lot more than that queen Brantley will leave behind: he'll be forgotten ten minutes after he's gone. FFS, nobody cares about him NOW: as Bill Maher would say, "Paint watches him dry."
The Times has been on a slow slide into irrelevancy for years. At the rate Sulzberger has been greasing the skids lately, that slide is approaching warp speed.
ReplyDeleteRodno Hatton had acromegaly, which was unfortunate for him, personally, but made his career. Brantley doesn't have that compassionate excuse, and he will leave no legacy behind.
I could not be more in agreement about the Times. They turned down a piece I sent them when I was twenty--because it proved them wrong! In a way, this blog is sort of my vengeance for that slight!