Although best known as an actor, for extensive
work on the London stage and for Hollywood endeavors such as his spectacular
performance as Captain Quint in Jaws
(1975), the late Robert Shaw was also a novelist and playwright. His most
famous literary endeavor was the 1967 novel The
Man in the Glass Booth, which he adapted into a 1968 play of the same
name. Set in modern-day New York, the story concerns Arthur Goldman, a wealthy
Holocaust survivor who spends his days haranguing employees with outlandish
opinions about Judaism even as he seems to teeter on the brink of a nervous
breakdown. One day, Israeli secret agents break into his home and reveal that
Goldman is actually a Nazi war criminal living under an assumed identity. Next,
Goldman is illicitly extradited to the Middle East for prosecution. (During the court action, he’s placed in the titular glass booth for his own
protection.) All through the trial, Goldman proudly wears his SS uniform and
outrageously lectures the Israeli audience with justifications murdering Jews. The story ends with a bizarre twist that raises as
many questions as it answers.
Although the play of The Man in the Glass Booth was presented in New York with an
acclaimed production directed by Harold Pinter and starring Donald Pleasence,
changes were made after the piece was selected for production by the American
Film Theatre, a short-lived production company that filmed plays for limited
movie-theater exhibition. The project got a new director (Arthur Hiller), a new
star (Maximilian Schell), and a new script (by Edward Anhalt). Shaw was
sufficiently displeased with the alterations that he removed his
name from the film’s credits. Setting aside the matter of fealty to its source
material, the movie version of The Man in the Glass Booth
is a strange experience. Hiller does an okay job of opening up cinematic
potential, using intricate sets to create separate spaces and thereby divide long
scenes into smaller sequences; similarly, he also employs close-ups to
accentuate the weird rhythms of Goldman’s euphoric monologues.
And if Hiller’s
filming is lively, Schell’s performance is positively supercharged—though not
necessarily in a good way. Flamboyant, loud, and sensual, Schell’s interpretation
borders on camp. One can make a strong argument that Schell chews scenery in
proper proportion to the way his character does, but it gets suffocating after
a while to watch the actor cackle and gesticulate and scream. Still, many found
his work impressive, since he got Golden Globe and Oscar nominations. The real
challenge of The Man in the Glass Booth,
however, relates to the story’s ending, which won’t be spoiled here—suffice to
say, the denouement is such a surprise, and such a head-scratcher, that it
retroactively colors every preceding scene. Nonetheless, The Man in the Glass Booth offers a unique combination of ideology,
philosophy, provocation, and wit—so even at its most questionable, the movie is
arresting and sophisticated.
The
Man in the Glass Booth: GROOVY
No comments:
Post a Comment