My thoughts on NOVEMBER (with spoilers)

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 6:54pm

There's only one person to blame for the failure of David Mamet's NOVEMBER, and that person is David Mamet. Hit-or-miss director Joe Mantello (who delivers solid work - not as good as Blackbird, nowhere near his failure with Odd Couple) has assembled a top-notch, spitfire cast and wonderful design team. So it's all Mamet's fault that his one-note absurdist political satire goes absolutely nowhere.

President Charles Smith (Nathan Lane at his very best) is about to finish his first term in office and, since the entire American public hates him, he's also about to finish his only term in office. What Smith wants is a legacy - a library, but there's no money in the budget - and will do anything to get it. Enter Turkey Guy (Ethan Philips), who will give Smith a sum of money in exchange for the pardoning of two turkeys. Smith wants $200 million, and the number eventually gets up there. Meanwhile, he insults a MicMac Indian (Michael Nichols), who goes beserk in the second act. Smith's top aide, Archer (Dylan Baker), is of absolutely no help, and his lesbian speechwriter (Laurie Metcalf), busily working on his concession speech, may or may not have Avian Flu after a trip to adopt a baby girl from China. And no members of the Secret Service can be found.

The play crackles with Mamet's trademark dialogue-style, and, as usual, has more f-words than any given episode of The Sopranos. NOVEMBER is, essentially, what would happen if "Glengarry's" Ricky Roma got elected President. The only problem is that it's not nearly as well written as "Glengarry," or even "American Buffalo." Despite a number of funny lines, the play just goes nowhere.
The dramatic question is whether or not Smith will win reelection. He leaves you guessing, but in the end, unlike a "leave-you-guessing" play like DOUBT, there's no case for your caring. You can easily see why the American people hate the corrupt, moronic President.

Each act is 45 minutes long, and the endings are a bit too abrupt - especially before the final blackout.

But that isn't the fault of the actors, who do their very best. That you can hate Charles Smith so much is a testament to how convincing Nathan Lane is. As I've said, NOVEMBER is Lane at his best, in top form. He doesn't rely on his usual shtick, quite surprising in a role that could have so easily have gone that way. He delivers Mamet's dialogue with aplomb, his facial expressions are as priceless as ever, and there's nothing like hearing him say the f-word with his New Yawk accent.

Laurie Metcalf and Dylan Baker deliver very solid work and are perfect opposition and foils for Lane. Metcalf plays the "lesbian" without a hint of stereotype, and actually gives the character a heart. I figured that, knowing Mamet, Clarice Bernstein would have been a typical Doc Martin and armyboots dyke. I was very surprised that the character was an actual woman. Too bad it's so thankless that any actor with some training can do it in their sleep.

Lane and Baker's back-and-forth is quite strong and humorous, and it's good to see that Baker has more to do than in Mametian-wannabe MAURITUS.

Ethan Philips and Michael Nichols are fine, as well, in roles that can only be called "fine," at best.

Scott Pask's Oval Office recreation is gorgeous, and Paul Gallo's lighting is perfect. Laura Bauer's costumes are piece-appropriate. No sound designer - no music whatsoever, and it seems there are no microphones, either, as the entire first act seemed to echo through the Oval wall. Joe Mantello's direction is swift and to the point.

If you're a fan of Nathan Lane, NOVEMBER is the show for you. It's an entertaining exercise in political satire, and there are a few lines that are gems, but it's ultimately so slight that it just can't get my vote.



Updated On: 12/23/07 at 06:54 PM

[neddyfrank2]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 7:04pm

No set designer - no music whatsoever

Huh?

I thought Scott Pask was set designer?

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 7:12pm

I meant sound.

Noted.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 7:58pm

I'm really suprised shows on the Broadway calibar don't use sound designers. You'd think there'd be some sort of music for the beginings and endings of each Act.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 9:03pm

bump

[jordangirl]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 11:30pm

I just got in from seeing it. (Thanks yankeefan007 for the tip about the 46.50 rear mezz seats. I was able to move to the front mezz at intermission.) I enjoyed it...and I'm not particularly a Nathan Lane fan, but I found it enjoyable. The non-native English speaking tourists near me were completely lost, however.

Since you have "with spoilers" ~ question. When you saw it did Laurie trip over her dress one of the times she was going out the door backwards? She did tonight, and I couldn't tell if it was supposed to happen or if it was an accident. The facial expressions all around seemed a little surprised, but I wasn't sure...

[mc1227]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 11:36pm

The non-natives probably thought it was going to be a musical because of Nathan. Or they were the only tickets they could get at this time of year. I am going next week and am looking forward to it.

[jordangirl]

Posted: 12/22/07 at 11:45pm

Probably. Though almost everything was up on tkts (Young Frankenstein and The Little Mermaid being the two exceptions naturally) But I think the other part of the lostness was the sheer pace of the show. I even almost got lost in the dialogue a couple of times. Not quite, but almost.

And I did enjoy it. :)

Updated On: 12/22/07 at 11:45 PM

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 8:39am

No, I don't think her tripping was part of the show.

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 8:51am

Yankee, I couldnt agree more. I'll post my thoughts after the holiday, but I thought it was pretty much a stinker. I love how the critics called Mauritius out on being a rip off on Mamet's American Buffalo. I'd take Mauritius, which at least made sense to me and knew where it wanted to go and what it wanted to say over this Mamet comedy any day!

Lane does do nice work here, you're right. The shame is the play is so stupid. Especially when you have Laurie Metcalf and Dylan Baker as the foils. Both are good in their roles, but you'd expect them to be when their roles are both so completely underdeveloped. What a waste all the way around!
Updated On: 12/23/07 at 08:51 AM

[SamIAm]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 4:12pm

RentBoy, this show does have a sound designer. As for music, it is up to the production team to decide whether music is helpful or distracting. Butley had music to play the show on and off the stage and for second act curtain but that definitely set the mood. Mantello must have felt that music was not in order for this one.

As for out-of-town or foreign audiences not following this show, it reminds me that in Boston and NY there were native Americans who could not follow the dialogue in Butley because of the English accents and the references to English literature. Funny how some audience members just don't have the focus to concentrate on things any more. They have become so used to the dumbing down of entertainment that they find it hard to use their noodle. I have gone to plays where people actually walk out complaining about "too many words". Hmmm.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 5:43pm

So do the lights just dim and there's an announcement, and then the curtain goes up?

[jordangirl]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 7:18pm

The lights just dim. And the curtain goes up. No announcement. They tell you when you come in to turn off your phones. We'll see how long THAT lasts.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 8:57pm

I didn't notice any "non-natives" at the performance I attended. The overwhelming consensus was pretty positive, though I overheard a number of people saying "this won't last, even with Nathan."

And there's no sound designer listed in the program.

[jordangirl]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 9:03pm

By "non-native" I meant foreign tourists. There was a big group of them at the Saturday evening performance scattered all over the mezz. It'll be interesting to see how it ends up playing out.

Maybe it was just the extremely serious plays I'd seen lately, but I enjoyed it a lot. Was it high drama? No. But I thought it was fun.

[April Saul]

Posted: 12/24/07 at 12:08am

Thanks for the review, Yankee, there were lots of folks laughing like mad in the theater when I saw November Friday night, but I really thought it was just too dumb and didn't go anywhere...and like you, I didn't think it was the fault of the actors who did their best, but in the material. In some of the postings on the other board I got the sense that a couple of people were saying that if you didn't like this show, maybe you weren't liberal enough, but that sure wasn't the case with me! I just plain didn't think it worked.

[jordangirl]

Posted: 12/24/07 at 12:53am

Maybe that's it. I didn't think it HAD to go anywhere ~ it didn't seem like the kind of play that was any kind of journey other than just a funky day in the office.

Ah well. Chocolate and vanilla.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/24/07 at 7:40am

Yeah, April, I've read comments on ATC that had the idea "if you don't like it you're not liberal enough." They obviously didn't see the bumper stickers on my car. (And there were many lines that made me laugh my head off, especially when delivered by Lane.)

Political background makes no difference when the play is slight and contrived.

[baddadnpa]

Posted: 12/24/07 at 8:24am

I disliked it and was glad I only paid $25 through TDF - saw it last night.

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 12/24/07 at 10:09am

I did TDF too. Thought it was funny, but mostly because Nathan Lane is THAT good. The play is kinda pointless.

[NuggetMonkeys]

Posted: 12/24/07 at 11:35pm

I saw the invited dress, so who knows what has been changed since I saw it, but it was not earth-shattering, and I put the blame MOSTLY on Mantello.
If the play is trivial and thin, it is consistent in its light, farcical tone and structure.
However, the play does not run that way. It, under Mantello's direction, takes itself too seriously. It is not a perfect play, that's for sure. But a director fighting on the side of the text would have helped.

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 12/25/07 at 9:03am

I thought it was entertaining with some witty dialogue and one-liners, but so much of it felt like Lewis Black's stand-up act... from last year.