Official "A Streetcar Named Desire" Review Thread — Page 2

USA Today is Positive (Three Stars):

"However beleaguered or vulnerable her characters — among them Zelda Fitzgerald, Patty Hearst and Cabaret's Sally Bowles — Richardson has rarely given the impression of being either a pathological narcissist or fragile beyond repair.

But in Streetcar, which opened Tuesday at Broadway's Studio 54, she seems stripped of all vestiges of earthiness, empathy and common sense. Showing up at her sister Stella's house, emotionally and financially broken, this Blanche is a fluttering, preening mess — but purposefully so. Mining all the pathos and humor with which Williams painted his hopeless heroine, Richardson makes us feel for her without trying too hard to make us feel sorry for her. It's a brave, often funny and ultimately moving interpretation.

The performance likely to generate the most controversy, though, is John C. Reilly's as Blanche's brother-in-law and tormentor. As immortalized on stage and screen by the young Marlon Brando, Stanley Kowalski was a coarse, menacing hunk of brute male sensuality. Reilly's Stanley, in contrast, is ... well, coarse, but not quite so menacing — and certainly no hunk.

Yet Reilly's lack of conventional sex appeal and the gee-whiz folksiness he conveys in calmer moments don't make him an unconvincing foil for the mannered, repressed Blanche. And his scenes with rising trouper Amy Ryan, who delivers another pitch-perfect performance as the much-put-upon Stella, offer a gritty naturalism that counters Blanche's frazzled fantasy world.

Director Edward Hall further emphasizes Blanche's inability to adapt to her surroundings by showing us Streetcar's New Orleans in all its grimy glory. Fans turn languidly, booze and cigarettes are in plentiful supply and bawdy-looking women with blaring gospel voices wail between scenes, lest we forget that the play isn't set in a Scandinavian monastery.

Granted, Williams' material generally isn't known to inspire subtle approaches. And artful nuances are provided by the actors under Hall's guidance, among them Chris Bauer, who lends some relief from all the tempestuous doings as the seemingly benign loser who courts Blanche.

In the end, of course, Streetcar is Blanche's vehicle — and fortunately, it's in capable hands."

http://www.usatoday.com/life/theater/reviews/2005-04-26-streetcar-desire_x.htm

---

Brantley says this about Amy Ryan:

"The capricious gods of casting have not been kind to Tennessee Williams of late. This "Streetcar" follows last spring's production, at the Kennedy Center in Washington, which was most memorable for the perversely witty wiliness of its Blanche, played by Patricia Clarkson, and the matter-of-fact sensuality of Amy Ryan, who portrayed Stella, Blanche's sensible sister. Happily, Ms. Ryan is on hand for this production, too, and she again lends the show an anchor of authenticity that keeps it from drifting altogether into the clouds of unbelievability.

Yet for all her admirable efforts, Ms. Ryan's Stella has problems connecting with her hunk of meat of a husband, Stanley, and her fey sister. (This is not, for the record, Ms. Ryan's fault.) Worse, there's not a flicker of that destructive chemistry that is supposed to flare when the hoity-toity Blanche, who grew up on a grand Mississippi estate, drops in on Stella and Stanley's slovenly digs for an extended stay. Since "Streetcar" is all about what happens when worlds and psyches collide, this lack of emotional contact leaves the audience dry when it should be wet with anxious sweat and tears."

Certainly nice for her, but I wouldn't call it "love letter" territory.

---

I'm not irritated. Just saying that even though he calls her performance the most fully integrated in the production, he still says she has trouble connecting with Reilly's Stanley. And while it's a good notice for her, I felt it's short of "love letter" territory, which is usually characterized by unqualified praise.

---

Actually, he says that Ryan has trouble connecting with Reilly's Stanley - this is true, but then he goes on to say that his is of no fault of Ryan. That doesn't detract from her nice comments, it's more of a dig to Reilly.

---

Pretty nice review in the Hartford Courant
Hartford Courant

---

I think its very ugly of Brantley to suggest that Patricia Clarkson should have brought the role to Broadway.

I love Patricia Clarkson's film work to death, and I would have DIED to see her perform Streetcar.

But I feel the same way about Ms. Richardson, and I was so pleased with her performance, that I could wait another 25 years to see someone else tackle the great Blanche DuBois.

Even if he didn't care for her interpretation, its a low-blow to suggest that another actress should have been cast.

Some more reviews this morning

New York Post is positive
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04272005/entertainment/45469.htm

Daily News is positive
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/story/303801p-260015c.html

Star-Ledger is positive
http://www.nj.com/entertainment/ledger/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-0/111458222697640.xml

Washington Post is negative
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/26/AR2005042601447.html

Variety is mixed-negative, though good for Richardson
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117926904?categoryid=33&cs=1

Journal News is negative
http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050427/LIFESTYLE01/504270365/1031

---

Updated On: 4/27/05 at 08:34 AM

Superb points, Robbie. And on that score: Richardson's Blanche actually looks rather put-off by the Ryan Stella's waxing on about what happens between "a man and a woman in the dark." The 'chemistry' is very one-side, about a man who has a very proprietary attitude toward all women. He is child-like screaming for Stella, and sees her as chattel. When he rapes Blanche and destroys her, it almost feels is with a twisted sense of entitlement. That is the interpretation they have gone for, and it is consistently applied.

And, as per Robbie's remarks about the interpretation, never, ever has Blanche's aria about Stanley being a caveman landed with such specificity! (And one might say, accuracy.) THIS Blanche is not using the speech to distract from her own attraction fo Stanley; on the contrary, she finally lets loose with words to describe her own REVULSION. As Robbie says, love or hate it, this is very much supported by Williams' text, and is a viable way to go. Does anyone think a woman of Richardson's experience, education (and lineage!) would not know what she was aiming for?

---

Updated On: 4/27/05 at 11:23 AM

Note -- Roma Torre also gave Streetcar a very positive review on NY1

Totally agree with the points above. Most reviews weren't critiquing the interpretation of the play that was on the stage in front of them, they were simply whining about how this production isn't exactly like the movie and so therefore it must be all wrong. Most of them couldn't get past their own preconceived notions of the play and how, to them, the roles MUST be cast in order to work, which points up yet another deficiency of most of these reviewers. They simply lack the training and skill to be able to evaluate a production on its own merits.

I, too, have see the film version many times, but you know what? In case you haven't heard, Brando's dead, as are Leigh (and Tandy), Hunter and Kazan (bless Karl Malden for still being around). They aren't coming back anytime soon and even if they could, they would play these same roles the same way in 2005. Must every Streetcar production be cursed with the ghosts of the film (since few people around now saw the stage production)? Shouldn't talented artists be allowed to find their own way into this material without being panned for not being enough like the movie?

---

Updated On: 4/27/05 at 02:00 PM

"And Ms. Richardson's uncannily fresh face does not bear the marks of suffering."

Ugh.

Once again not thinking, are you Mr. Brantley?

Who said the scars of suffering are external?

I don't either and it's a major undercurrent to the characterization.

And as for "external scars" while Leigh had certainly seen better days at the time of the filming, all the photos I've ever seen of Tandy in the original stage production make her seem as much a radiant porcelain beauty as Richardson is here.

I'm gonna pull out my tape of the Lange/Baldwin production and double-check some of the interpretive choices made there.

---

'Shouldn't talented artists be allowed to find their own way into this material without being panned for not being enough like the movie?'

If you really think that statement is rubbish, then you have no knowledge, love or respect for the theatre.

Honestly.

---