8

 

by Dustin Lance Black. Produced by L.A. Theatre Works. Directed by Rob Reiner

Library Loan

 

 

 

Publisher's Summary

 

An unconstitutional proposition.

An unprecedented decision.

An all-star cast.

Starring George Clooney, Brad Pitt, and Martin Sheen, 8 is written by Academy Award winning screenwriter Dustin Lance Black (Milk, J. Edgar) and directed by acclaimed actor and director Rob Reiner.

 

The play is a powerful account of the case filed by the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) in the U.S. District Court in 2010 to overturn Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that eliminated the rights of same-sex couples to marry in the state of California. Framed around the trial's historic closing arguments in June 2010, 8 provides an intimate look what unfolded when the issue of same-sex marriage was on trial.

 

A full-cast performance featuring:

George Clooney as David Boies 

Brad Pitt as Chief Judge Vaughn Walker 

Martin Sheen as Theodore B. Olson 

Kevin Bacon as Charles Cooper 

Jamie Lee Curtis as Sandy Stier 

Christine Lahti as Kris Perry

 

 

 

I was looking for an amuse bouche, something short and sweet.

 

Oh my goodness, what a disaster of a play. I put this in my TBR because I wanted to see if Clooney, Pitt and Sheen were any good on stage -- and where else are you going to see all three of them on the same stage.  I finally picked it up because I was looking for something short and palate-cleansing.

 

This is so obviously a piece of political propaganda that, in spite of its all-star involvement, is some of the worst writing, directing and acting I have ever heard. My issue is with the art, not the politics. It feels like this whole thing was thrown together in a weekend.

 

The writing sucks. Take back the man's Oscar. Instead of writing a fresh new piece, he took the transcript of the trial and reenacted the key portions: a couple of the memorable witnesses and parts of the summations. There are many plays out there that have been "issue' plays, plays that we still talk about, plays that are still performed. They survive because the work transcends the specific issue it was designed to address by finding a universal kernel of truth that will speak to all ages. This play doesn't find that universal. It tried to but it was so obvious that all anyone cared about was staging the crucial moments of the prosecution and the embarrassing moments for the defense of the trial verbatim. The damned thing only made sense if you were familiar with the trial and the issues. 

 

From there is was down hill. Reiner failed to direct; maybe he was just trying to herd cats. Sheen was completely disappointing in his role. I had the highest hopes for him. He turned in a bloviating, one note performance -- sounded like Pres. Bartlett giving a speech at a campaign rally, not a lawyer giving his closing arguments in front of a judge and jury. John C. Reilly stole the show; he had the hardest part to do well. He played a bumbling expert witness who could not defend his own testimony. He was like a deer in the crosshairs; getting the pauses and the half-finished words just right wasn't easy. Finally, even though it was performed as a radio-play (no staging), it should not have been recorded in front of live audience because after a while it seem obvious that they were only there to laugh at the defendants.

 

From all this nitpicking on low points, you might think that I should have just DNFed the whole thing. The truth is that even if it was a terrible play, what was being said was interesting from an historic point of view. So I ignored all the geegaws that were stuck onto it to try to make it a play and paid attention to the court record.