The new TV film "Page Eight" by playwright David Hare is such a feast of phenomenal acting, it's a shame Hare's politics trump his skills as a storyteller.
A Masterpiece Contemporary presentation on PBS, the BBC film, also directed by Hare, is blessed with some of England's top talent: Bill Nighy, Rachel Weisz, and Michael Gambon. Aussie Judy Davis is also in top form, as is Ralph Fiennes playing Prime Minister. The setting is the M15 British intelligence organization in present day London.
Nighy and Gambon are not only best mates, but Gambon married his BFF's ex-wife. A suspiciously casual meeting in their shared hallway sparks a relationship between Nighy and Weisz, whose innocent brother was murdered in the West Bank. The film's plot kicks into action when Gambon's ailing chief exposes evidence of British complicity in American torture operations at Guantanamo Bay.
The writing is spare and tight, and the actors all bring their top game. The central conflict of M15's knowledge of US torture is sufficiently rich and contemporary to fill up a good film or three. Why then does Hare feel compelled to introduce the element of Israel's similarly controversial role in the ongoing struggles in the West Bank?
Hare is an accomplished writer and director, yet his political zeal interferes with his abilities as a crack storyteller. Condemnation of the US in its role in the torture of prisoners of war is still a relatively inspired topic for drama, especially when the topic is explored in such intriguing, dramatic shading as it is here. The West Bank plot development thus feels forced and strident, neither an organic outgrowth of the story, nor a topic that is presented in any sort of new light. Obviously, the war on terror did little more than embolden critics of the US government, of which Britain has its share.
The US is allies with Israel, a point which can curdle US critics into a particularly potent sort of adversary. With Britain's longstanding support of the Palestinians, it is no surprise that a noted, politically engaged British playwright would be compelled to affirm his position on matters of US and Israeli corruption. Hell, he sets the story among a coverup of his own country's implication in such misbehavior. The difference is he gives a complex human face to his countrymen, yet gives us neither US or Israeli characters. Clearly, Hare is indebted to Pinter, but his predecessor was an artist first, activist second. By rehashing familiar themes on two popular subjects, particularly the West Bank, he winds up muddling what is otherwise a gripping story. The characters are wonderfully ambiguous, yet Hare's politics are not.
That aside, the writing is crisp and astute, and the acting and directing just right. Nighy is always engrossing to watch, and Weisz is marvelous too. Maybe Hare might consider handing over the reigns for his next script, or better yet, hire a writer with more of a story to tell, less of a political agenda to propagate. For, if the playwright is dedicated more to their political ideology than to their characters and audience, an essay and not a play may be the more suitable venue for their ideas.
No comments:
Post a Comment