Anger and darkness aren’t
the first things that come to mind upon hearing the name “Neil Simon,” but it’s
useful to remember an aphorism that was likely coined by TV funnyman Steve
Allen: “Comedy is tragedy plus time.” In other words, misfortune is so integral
to the soul of humor that exploring the grim subject matter permeating The Prisoner of Second Avenue really
wasn’t such a leap for the guy behind such bittersweet classics as The Odd Couple. Where The Prisoner of Second Avenue represents
a break from Simon’s usual style, however, is that the writer doesn’t hide pain
behind pratfalls. Although the movie, based on Simon’s 1971 play of the same
name, has plenty of the writer’s signature rat-a-tat dialogue as well as a
steady stream of visual gags, it’s not designed as a laugh riot, per se.
Rather, it’s a bitterly satirical exploration of the myriad ways the modern
world can drive people insane.
Jack Lemmon and Anne Bancroft, both perfectly
cast, star as Mel and Edna Edison, residents of Manhattan’s Upper East Side.
During a heat wave that’s compounded by a garbage strike and periodic power
outages, Mel spirals toward a nervous breakdown that’s triggered by hassles
with neighbors, the loss of a job, a robbery, and other traumas. And when Mel
finally decides to fight back at the unjust universe, he manages to pick the
wrong target, mistaking a young man (Sylvester Stallone) for a mugger and then
chasing the poor guy through Central Park and seizing his wallet, which Mel
believes to be his own. Upon discovering his mistake, Mel reports to Edna, “I
mugged some kid in the street.” Proving she’s reached her limit, as well, she
replies, “How much did we get?”
That wild sequence, which Simon
characteristically nails with a perfect comic grace note, is indicative of The Prisoner of Second Avenue’s vibe. In
many ways, this is a serious picture about troubling topics, and yet it’s
presented flippantly. Not only does the wiseass humor suit the milieu, but it
reveals one aspect of Simon’s genius—using jokes to make the exploration of
pathos palatable to people who might normally avoid, say, the work of Arthur
Miller or Eugene O’Neill. To be clear, neither The Prisoner of Second Avenue nor, for that matter, any of Simon’s
stories should be mistaken for titanic literary achievements. Simon writes
trifles, and some of them have more nutritional value than others. For
instance, the takeaway from The Prisoner
of Second Avenue has something to do with gaining perspective and not
letting the pressures of daily life metastasize into full-on neuroticism. Simon
services these themes well, dramatizing that some of Mel’s problems are of his
own making.
Lemmon, who previously appeared in the screen version of Simon’s The Odd Couple (1968) and the
Simon screen original The Out-of-Towners
(1970), is an ideal vessel for the writer’s laments about obnoxious
neighbors, overbearing relatives, and unfeeling corporations. Meanwhile,
Bancroft is an excellent foil, playing early scenes straight but then echoing
Lemmon’s character with a downward spiral of her own. So, even if
producer-director Melvin Frank’s execution is little more than serviceable, the
material and the performances are winning. Additionally, The Prisoner of Second Avenue captures a particular time, that being the bad old days when New York City was poised on the edge of
oblivion thanks to financial problems, rampant crime, and ubiquitous cynicism.
The Prisoner of Second Avenue: GROOVY
The play on Broadway was directed by Mike Nichols and starred Peter Falk and Lee Grant. The tone was comic and almost vaudevillian in the way the banter was handled. The mood of despair was somehow charming and fun. I found the film to be ugly and nagging and while the play took place in the pristine Upper East Side high rise, the film left that safe area and showed New York at its ugliest. On it's own terms, the film strikes me as a time capsule, but as one of those with fond memories of the play, I found it to be a misfire.
ReplyDeleteThey live on upper east side, not west. hence, 2nd ave.
ReplyDelete