Spare the Rod and Spoil the Pitch

by Jack Craib, New Rep Reviewer

Mamet. Hollywood. Power. Ruthlessness. Moral decay. Male bonding. Serial Swearing. Staccato dialogue. Got it.

New Rep’s current offering of David Mamet’s “Speed-the-Plow” comes with some interesting Broadway baggage. Both the original 1988 production and the recent 2008 version are famous, or infamous, for their casting choices, Madonna in the former (almost universally panned) and Jeremy Piven in the latter (supposedly done in by some suspect sushi). The star of most Mamet works, however, is Mamet, with his idiosyncratic rhythm of speech. This time around, with some three dozen screenplays to his credit, he has the street cred to write about turf he knows all too well. His title comes from an old saying that work produces wealth, therefore may God speed the proverbial plow for a swift and profitable harvest. How his characters plan to cultivate proposed movie projects is the crux of the play.

This short work features three characters in three scenes. Bobby Gould (Robert Pemberton), head of production at a film studio, and Charlie Fox (Gabriel Kuttner), a producer, have been friends since their days in the mail room. Charlie, a self-described whore, in the best-written and most complex role (Ron Silver won a Tony in the original and Raul Esparza was nominated in the revival), views movies as a business and believes in success at all costs. It is his pitch for a screenplay he temporarily represents that initiates conflict, and he repeatedly notes that he could easily have “crossed the street” (that is, pitched to another studio) with his project. Bobby, also a self-described whore, states that money isn’t everything; he wants to make a difference in the world. Karen (Aimee Doherty) is the literal whore willing to do whatever it takes to be a player, in the least interesting role. This is nothing new for Mamet, whose focus in previous works such as “American Buffalo“ and the Pulitzer-winning “Glengarry Glen Ross” is clearly the issue of male friendships and bromance; his female characters are often marginalized or objectified.

This cast nails the pace and the cynicism neatly. Kuttner gets the lion’s share of the best lines and makes the most of them, while Pemberton’s reactions are priceless. The problem is the character of Karen, and, while Doherty does about as well as one could with the role, it’s as shallow as the character she plays. Her biggest scene lacks the pacing of the rest of the work and spends way too much time getting to a point that is telegraphed much earlier; it’s almost as though it’s from another play. It’s not the fault of the actors, but of Mamet, who doesn’t acknowledge that a woman might be the verbal equal of the men. This may have been credible in 1988, but in today’s Hollywood, with several female studio heads, it’s a bit dated. Nonetheless, Director Robert Walsh does a splendid job of verbal choreography. On the technical side, the set works very well and the costumes are spot on (Bobby rumpled, Charlie buttoned-down, Karen chameleon-like), but the lighting too often puts the actors literally in the dark.

Art and idealism may not triumph over commerce, but the process provides a great deal of hysterically funny writing. Mamet surely doesn’t spare the rod in portraying the movie culture. As Charlie puts it, “They’re only words unless they’re true”.