Plays
about the movie picture biz have a tendency to center on Hollywood or, to be
more precise, the corrupting influence that Hollywood has on the artiste. From
Kaufman and Hart's Once in a Lifetime to David Mamet's Speed-the-Plow along with his film, State
and Main the
ground is covered pretty well, unless you want to also add in the late Robert
Altman's film The Player. All of the above satirize a place that would almost seem to be
beyond satirizing.
So
what is left for Jim Millan to say in his own placid satire about filmmaking in
Canada? Well, the joke here is how sad it is that Canadians want to make
Canadian films that will make it in Hollywood! In Millan's play, Director's
Cut, he presents
us with a young director named Jeff MacBride (Gord Rand) who is hell bent on making a
gangster picture with Canadian stars (Kiefer Sutherland, Sarah Polley and Paul
Gross still count as Canadian don't they?) but with people like Forrest Whittaker
too, so the film will get noticed at the Toronto International Film Festival.
As the project begins to morph into something else entirely (an international
intrigue plot-line that has a wicked virus being released that could destroy
the Internet) - so does the young director's scruples and artistic principles.
The
play doesn't quite make the grade mainly because - dare I say it? - the stakes
are so low. Note that even back in 1929, Kaufman and Hart had latched their
satire on to something momentous in the Hollywood film industry - the
introduction of "talking" moving pictures. Al Jolson's success with The
Jazz Singer had
changed the industry forever and a couple of washed up vaudevillians were going
to head West and cash in on the action.
Similarly,
in David Mamet's modest three hander, a middle aged hack has just received a
promotion to become head of production for a major studio. This means he can
"green light", on his own authority, a project that doesn't exceed a
budget of 10 million. His old friend brings him a project with a major star
attached to it. The two contemplate wealth and fame. The beautiful receptionist
who works in the office also has an idea for the head of production. Soon
sparks fly and this update on Sammy Glick's moral dilemma has the production
head trying to decide on which is better, getting laid or getting paid?
The
sexual element is also present in Director's Cut and Amy Rutherford as the Hollywood sex goddess,
ditzy blonde type, Miranda Baker, is perfect in the role. She pours her
heartfelt emotion into a prosaic film script and when she encounters resistance
from the director on some of her good ideas, she simply signals the possibility
of sexual gratification and all is well. Michelle Latimer in the somewhat thankless role
of her supporting actor, Sarah Jane Spillman, is written as second banana and
has little character arch. So, too, is the case for Chris Earle as Derek Krantz, the film
editor. He acts mainly as director MacBride's moral compass but with no real
gravitas to offer guidance backed by substance. This is too bad, because as
Earle proved so well in his big hit Fringe Theatre piece two years ago, Democrats
Abroad - giving
advice on resolving moral quandaries is something he does very well.
Rand
clearly carries the show in his efforts to contain all of the pressures and
egomania of the movie business. His overbearing producer (Ron White) and the junkie villain of the
movie (played by Ryan McVittie) are the double crosses that he bears. Rand's sincerity
at the beginning of the play and his deeply depressed resignation at the end
speak poignantly to a young artist who checked his integrity at the door before
he signed the contract. Perhaps this is all to say that director/writer, Jim
Millan has had similar reservations and found it necessary to strike back. The
director, who has been around the lot a few times himself, began his career
with edgy scripts like Brad Fraser's Unidentified Human Remains and the True
Nature of Love
but has become most widely identified with the touring kids show, Scooby Doo
in Stage Fright.