A Man's Man

[leah2359]

I read A Man's Man last night, all the way through in one sitting. I couldn't have stopped had I wanted to, I was hooked from page one.

This is one that's definitely going to "stay" with me for a few days, the intensity of it was much more than I could have imagined, although I had an idea of what it was like just from reading the descriptions of it over time. But, wow. Wow.

I felt like I was sitting in the audience watching the play, probably from a combination of knowing how intense Dwight could be when acting dramatically, seeing photos of the set and of him and Josephine Hutchinson in costume/character. All my time as a Dwight fan (15 years now) this was in my top two of Broadway shows I wished I could have seen him in, and in a way I now feel like I have. As I was reading I kept thinking to myself, "Dwight was born to play Mel." Like how I feel he was born to play Renfield.

If you've not read A Man's Man I highly suggest asking Mrs V for the file. It is an experience. ;D

[Luna]

Wow Leah thanks for the amazing review! I have recieved the file from Mrs. V and plan on reading very soon. It sounds incredible and like you this was definitely one of the plays that I would have wanted to see Dwight in on stage.

[Mrs Vindecco]

Fingers crossed i get to read it this week because the bits I read while I was copying it were fantastic and very Dwight

[leah2359]

I don't think I even did it justice in my review, I was still shell shocked.

Seriously, it blew my mind and I'm still not "over" it two days later. I've read it again since. It was actually so powerful and got to me so much I busted out an x-rated Dwight fic in like four hours yesterday after months of not being able to write. (I'd post the fic here, but it's a definite no-no because of the rating...) Yep, it was THAT good.

There are two scenes that really stand out, but I don't want to give too much away... Basically there's sloppy drunk Dwight (which must have been AWESOME) and enraged Dwight when he finds out Edie has been unfaithful.

[Monk's Moll]

I read it too, and it is an amazing play! One can just see Dwight going through all the emotions in this character. If it is this stirring in the reading, imagine what it was like to see it on stage!

[Mrs Vindecco]

OK, I am not sure if I can type coherently as I have just finished reading A Man's Man for the first time and am quite giddy. As already stated it truly is an amazing play and you have no idea what I would give to see Dwight star as Melville on the stage. He must have broken many a heart with his tear-jerking performance.

In many respects, this play is a head of it's time and reminds me of the "kitchen sink/ grim up North" dramas' that were hugely popular in Britain in the 1950's. Dwight said the play was hugely popular because it was based on "real folks" and I really can see it as both Mel and Edie are at the bottom rung of the social ladder, desperately trying to work their way up and despite everything they go through, are broken but not necessarily any more wiser by the end of the play.

It is more realistic in many respects than the cinema of the period because of the language (the slang and cursing) and the fact taboos such as drinking (in the era of prohibition) and infidelity are evident makes it surprisingly modern and very entertaining. If you haven't read it, I really would suggest that you do because this is the kind of role that demonstrates how fantastic Dwight must have been on stage.

If anyone wants the play just PM and I'll happily send it. I don't know what else to say about it right now, just that I loved it and Josephine Hutchison might not liked Dwight that much but I think there are one or two women that would loved to be in her shoes, when it comes to kissing and hugging our man.

[leah2359]

Didn't it just totally blow your mind?

[Mrs Vindecco]

That's putting it mildly. It made me even more furious at Hollywood, surely someone would see he had more potential than what he ended up doing. At least Broadway loved Dwight for a while.

[leah2359]

Same here. I compared this role to what he was offered in Hollywood and the only thing that comes remotely close is Renfield, and I mean that in how he was able to display many different emotions and be creative with the role.

This must have been DYNAMITE. I mean just imagining the play, not even actually seeing it with my own eyes, threw me for a loop for days.

I like the point you brought up too, about how Broadway let actors get away with more than Hollywood, what with the swearing, drinking during prohibition, infidelity, etc. MUCH more realistic.

[Mrs Vindecco]

Jul 28, 2011 17:55:36 GMT leah2359 said:

I like the point you brought up too, about how Broadway let actors get away with more than Hollywood, what with the swearing, drinking during prohibition, infidelity, etc. MUCH more realistic.

It's no wonder why so many actors were so disparaging of the Hollywood in this period. I think the Hays Code stifled a lot of potential writing talent but then one could argue the restrictions meant writers had to be a bit more creative.

[Luna]

I tend to take a middle of the road sort of view. I do believe that the restrictions encouraged writers to be more creative, to find new and different ways of expressing what they wanted to say. However, I do think that they restricted writers a little too much, and they should have been given more freedom. Hayes didn't actually take effect until the mid to late 1930's I believe, there was still some restrictions but the full force of the code wasn't being felt yet. At that time I think that Hollywood could have really given Dwight a lot more to do, but they chose not to sadly.

I have yet to read "A man's man" but the reviews here have all been excellent and I cannot wait to get to it. My sincere apologies to Mrs. V because I SO wanted to be a part of the play reading group and it seems as if I haven't been active with it at all. Life has been hectic for me, I can't promise but I do hope that things will calm down a bit more soon so that I can concentrate more on this forum.

[Mrs Vindecco]

It's ok Luna. It took me a while to get around to reading it and that was only because I had a rare couple of hours off to get around to it. When you do read it, I KNOW you'll love it though.

[leah2359]

I think it was both the code and just the social mores of the time pre-code that made a difference. Some silent films of the 20's were way more graphic than the early 30's ones were. I think a lot of things happened in the 20's that made Hollywood clam up, even before the code. After the Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle scandal, the murder of William Desmond Taylor, and a few drug-related deaths Hollywood got the reputation of being a really evil place and I think the studio heads tried to clean stuff up to save their reputations.

[Luna]

Thanks for being so understanding Mrs V:)

Oh yeah. The code wasn't in full force yet, but after the Roscoe trial and a lot of other incidents, Hollywood's reputation really took a nose dive and they were way more careful than they had been in the twenties and teens. Still, as I said, it was a bit more open pre code, and Dwight could have potentially been offered more than he was at this time. It would have been great to see "A man's man" turned into a film- actually it was, but it was drastically changed from the play and of course Dwight wasn't involved at all.

[leah2359]

"It would have been great to see "A man' man" turned into a film- actually it was, but it was drastically changed from the play and of course Dwight wasn't involved at all."

Which SUCKS. What a shame...