OFF-BROADWAY REVIEW
Deep Truth Nobody
wants to be caught watching a pornographic movie even in the privacy of
one’s own room. But what if you were seen leaving a movie theater after
watching a sexually-explicit movie which was the subject of an
obscenity case? And what if you also happened to be the former First
Lady of the United States? The documentary film, Inside Deep Throat (2005),
reveals tabloid photographs of a former First Lady outside a theater in
midtown Manhattan after reportedly walking out from a screening of the
sexually-explicit Swedish film, I Am Curious Yellow (1967). However, this distinction was later shattered by the most famous (or infamous) pornographic film in history, Deep Throat (1972),
as there were newspaper reports which named not just one, but numerous
equally famous people (i.e., highly-respected TV news anchor,
Oscar-winning film director, A-list movie stars, literary writers,
society people, European diplomats, etc.) who trooped to the World
Theater on Times Square to see Deep Throat. (Yes,
people still flock to the movie theater before the age of blu-ray and
VOD.) Even The New York Times talked about the film, calling it chic
porn, which somehow gave Deep Throat mainstream legitimacy. Carl Bernstein, who would later be involved with Watergate’s own Deep Throat, noted that the film, Deep Throat, took porn out of the realm of the forbidden. To illustrate Deep Throat’s phenomenal success, consider that the Brian Grazer-produced documentary film, Inside Deep Throat, had a reported budget of $2 million and a gross receipt of only $691,880 while the feature film, Deep Throat, had a budget of $25,000 and a gross receipt of over $600 million. What
really lured people, peaking at 1,700 a day, into braving the curious
stares of wide-eyed passersby as they joined the queue stretching
several blocks outside the World Theater for a screening of Deep Throat during
the early 70s? Was it the cinematic depiction of sexual taboos? Was it
the government’s reaction towards the film? Was it the ensuing court
trial? Was it sheer curiosity? Playwright David Bertolino’s The Deep Throat Sex Scandal
which plays at 45 Bleecker Theatre attempts to provide the answer by
bringing its audience deeper into the making of the film and its
subsequent investigation. Bertolino’s play takes a crack at the deep
truth behind Deep Throat. The story is told as a series of flashbacks from the point of view of Deep Throat’s
lead actor, Harry Reems (enthusiastically played by Malcolm Madera),
whose subsequent court trial caught the world’s attention, including
such Hollywood icons as Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty. However, while
Bertolino’s play arouses (no pun intended) one’s initial curiosity at
getting a closer look at the story behind Deep Throat,
the excitement dies down fast with the way Bertolino approached his
otherwise rich and exciting material. The play is episodic with a flat
plot as the playwright seems to be merely chronicling events, not truly
“dramatizing” them. This resulted in the playwright’s reliance on Reems’
oral (no pun intended) recounting of the events to link the scenes
together. The short scenes also rob the storytelling of its dramatic
steam, thus softening the impact of an otherwise strong narrative.
Because of the use of many short episodic scenes to depict the actual
events, The Deep Throat Sex Scandal plays more like a movie. The
play’s principal characters, Harry Reems and Linda Lovelace
(convincingly played by Lori Gardner), appear to be too passive. Reems
does not seem to be actively doing anything to rise above his situation.
During the investigation, Reems merely allows things happen to him. He
just reacts to events, making the play less engaging. It is even more
puzzling that when Lovelace finally does something truly significant,
the playwright did not show it. While the playwright showed short scenes
which could have otherwise been mere incidental lines in some major
scenes, he failed to dramatize an important event which represents
Lovelace’s epiphany. This is Lovelace’s confrontation with her husband,
Chuck, and her subsequent decision to finally leave him. This should
have been an obligatory scene because this establishes Lovelace’s
character. Sadly, this scene is only mentioned by Lovelace but never
shown. It
seems that the playwright is too excited to tell his audience about the
real events surrounding the making of the film and the resulting court
trial that he forgot to breathe sufficient life into his characters who,
ironically, are actual, living, pulsating, throbbing (no pun intended)
individuals and not mere figments of the playwright’s imagination. The
playwright is in a hurry to tell its audience almost every detail of the
actual events that the emotion and heart of the characters are
relegated to the sideline. The characters are not fully fleshed out
which makes it difficult to connect and sympathize with them. The
actors’ highly competent portrayals could have been more deeply (no pun
intended) felt if their characters were fully developed. This is rather
unfortunate because Director Jerry Douglas has assembled a truly
remarkable cast. The
strength of this production indeed lies in its brilliant actors who all
give memorable performances. Each actor plays a multitude of roles,
with one character highly distinct from another. Notable among the
actors is John-Charles Kelly who is pitch-perfect as porn film director
Gerard Damiano. Rita Rehn is one true chameleon as she slips
convincingly from one role to another with amazing dexterity. As Linda
Lovelace, the fragile-looking Lori Gardner effectively evokes naiveté
and fear. Malcolm Madera serves as the play’s bridge to the audience as
he gives life to Harry Reems with extraordinary conviction. Gifted actor
Graham Stuart Allen shows great versatility in his mixed bag of roles.
As Lovelace’s oppressive husband, Zach Wegner is sometimes over-the-top
although he shines in his quieter roles, particularly in his court scene
as Tony Bill. Stephen Hope is also competent in an assortment of roles.
After playing the Make-up Man convincingly, Frank Blocker breaks the
house down with his excellent comedic timing as prosecutor Larry
Parrish. Playwright
Bertolino should also be credited for some fine aspects of his play,
such as his characters’ witty repartee and funny one-liners. Another
nice touch is the stage reenactment of the scene in the film when Reems
examines Lovelace in the doctor’s office while the same scene from the
actual movie plays on three screens, with the onstage pair of Madera and
Gardner literally in perfect sync with every word uttered by the
onscreen Reems and Lovelace. Initially,
the bare stage has nothing but life-size statues of a naked man and
woman, each suspended on two columns facing each other on opposite sides
of the stage. With several locations to contend with, Josh Iacovelli
aptly chose a highly portable and simple stage design. The props that he
used also enhance the 70s look: period lounge chairs, rotary
telephones, etc. In
order to fulfill the play’s demand for several locations (e.g., Supreme
Court building, Howard Johnson’s lobby, Reem’s apartment, park,
swimming pool, etc.), screen projections (both still images and videos)
are put to good use as they open up the stage without being distracting.
A2K Productions’ creative projection design enhances the production in
an economical yet most effective way. However, it would have boosted the
suspension of disbelief if the projected locations extend down to the
stage floor. Some pieces of furniture could have also been projected in
the right proportion. Jeffrey
Wallach’s costume design is reminiscent of the period. Malcolm Madera
looks as if he has just been ejected from a Sony Betamax machine: every
inch like a 70s porn stud with his thick moustache, extended sideburns
and slender frame wrapped in circa-70s polyester shirt. The women’s
dress, boots and jewelry are also unmistakably retro-70s. Every piece of
costume looks like they were rummaged from Antique Roadshow Special
Edition, featuring hauls from the 70s. While Wallach successfully
recreates the fashion of the period, his fine attention to detail is
also on full display here. For example, in Damiano’s beauty parlor
scene, the use of matching designs which extends from the couch, throw
pillows, parlor seat, picture frame (projected) all the way to Damiano’s
shirt (with his name on it) is undeniably very 70s. Noticeable also is
the 1971 edition of Life magazine being read by the parlor customer as
well as the beach towel’s vintage-70s design in the poolside scene.
Wallach even faithfully recreates the actual costumes from the film,
from Lovelace’s blue and white floor-length dress to her rust-colored
swimsuit. Graham
Kindred’s lighting of the scenes is appropriate. Philip Rudy’s sound
design complements the scenes, and his incidental music brings back the
sound of the late 60s/early 70s: The Doors, Terry Jacks, Starland Vocal
Band, etc. Director
Jerry Douglas somehow succeeds in orchestrating the various elements of
Bertolino’s play despite its limitations. It is also to Douglas’ credit
that he manages to effectively convey the play’s multiple locations,
notwithstanding the fact that it also meant that his actors have to
awkwardly carry an assortment of rotary telephones (Yes, not the iPhone
variety) around the stage in several scenes. If Bertolino’s real intention is to relay the events the way they happened, the documentary film, Inside Deep Throat,
has already done a good job at it. While Bertolino’s play succeeds in
helping the audience understand the public and political frenzy created
by Deep Throat, the play fails to provide its audience with new insights from what has been previously espoused by the more comprehensive Inside Deep Throat. In fact, if one takes away the celebrity testimonials from Grazer’s Inside Deep Throat, it would appear that Bertolino’s play merely echoes the text of Grazer’s documentary film. The
play concludes with a crusade-like postscript which makes one wonder if
a similar public and political maelstrom could have erupted again had
Linda Lovelace’s daughter, Lindsay, accepted the reported offer for her
to do Deep Throat 7. One probably also wonders if Jackie would have watched Deep Throat if it went by its originally-suggested title, The Sword Swallower. Well, no one will ever know the deep truth behind these now.
REVIEW OF OFF-BROADWAY'S THE DEEP THROAT SEX SCANDAL.
Reviewed by Ron S. Covar
Published 2010-10-12
Click here to buy group tickets.
