The Mindblasting Ethan Hawke and Paul Dano Cave to Primal Hatreds and Private Desolations in Sam Shepard’s ‘True West’
True West by Sam Shepard is a tour de force which easily reveals actors’ talents or their infelicities. Indeed, it may be a devastating on-stage nightmare if the actors’ skills do not resonate with a fluid “moment-to-moment” dynamic that sits precariously on the knife-edge of emotional chaos and crisis. This is especially so in Act II of Shepard’s True West which is currently in revival at the American Airlines Theatre on 42nd Street, starring the consummate Ethan Hawke and Paul Dano. Both actors rise to the pinnacle of their skills surfing their own moment-to-moment impulses in this sense-memory tearing, emotional slug-fest of a play about siblings. This is a glorious, shattering production thanks to Hawke and Dano who once more prove to be among the great actors of their generation. If Shepard is apprised of this production in another realm of consciousness, surely he is thrilled.
The arc of True West‘s development reveals Shepard’s acute examination of brothers Lee and Austin who wrangle and rage against each other to finally emerge from the emotional and familial folkways they’ve spun into their own self-fabricated prisons. The second act especially (the first act is more expositional and slower paced) screams with the taut, granular impact of subtly shifting, increasingly augmenting collisions of the mind, will and emotions of the older, social outcast and thief Lee (portrayed with dark tension, authenticity, humanity by Ethan Hawke) and the younger, ambitious, middle class Austin (the “mild-mannered” Dano seethes with fury and sub rosa angst that simmers to a boil). As these two attempt to reconnect after an estrangement, they thinly reconcile, negotiating confrontation and abrasion, while they attempt to deal with personal dissatisfaction. During their reunion, they discover that too far is never far enough to unleash the emotional convolutions, chaos and conundrums of their relationship.
Of course, Shepard’s searing, dark humor and sardonic irony resides in Lee’s and Austin’s attempt to achieve an inner and outer expurgation. Interestingly, they use each other’s “being” as a battering ram against themselves and their complex, twisted “brotherhood.” And as they pummel and propel themselves “forward” through the charged, electrified atmosphere between them, they disintegrate their inner soul rot and misery. By the conclusion of the play, they have reached their own TRUE WEST. This is brilliantly symbolized and effected by Jane Cox’s Lighting Design, Mimi Lien’s Set Design and Bray Poor’s Original Music and Sound Design.
In the last moments between life, death and resurrection, Lee and Austin stand on the edge of a precipice eyeballing each other with uncertain respect and caution as they assess who they are and what they have wrought together. We realize that they have sought this desert of their creation. That they, by primal impulses, destroyed and trashed everything around them including some of their mother’s prized possessions to get there, is unfathomable to us. It is incomprehensible unless we examine our own self-destructive behaviors. However, their behavior is an achievement necessary to get to who they are. At the least they’ve shed pretense. They are raw creature/creations like the the yapping coyotes that lure pets, grab them and chow down for supper. However, where these characters go from this still point remains uncertain. But the hope is that it will result in a new identity for each, away from the annihilation and alienation of the parents who raised them.
Though Shepard’s play is set in the distant past, the themes and relationship that Hawke and Dano establish is vital, energetic, heart-breaking, mind-blowing, current. Each actor has brought so much of his own grist to Lee and Austin and responds with such familiarity and raw honesty to the other, it is absolutely breathtaking. It remains impossible not to watch both and be in awe of their craft. One is utterly engaged in the suspense of where the brothers’ impulses will take them as they scrape and claw at each other’s nerve endings to create bleeding wounds.
Thanks go to James Macdonald’s direction and staging to facilitate Dano’s and Hawke’s memorable portrayals. With extraordinary performances like theirs, we are compelled to consider the characters, and determine how and why they are smashing each other’s personal boundaries to reveal inner resentments, hurts, and the chaotic forces that have swamped each of them in the most particular ways. The ties that bind them run so deep these two are oxymorons. They have identical twin souls, though they are externally antithetical. Why they clash is because they are like minded: raging, though controlled. Their emotions, like subterranean lava flows wait for the precise moment to explode and change the landscape around them. Lee is the more mature volcano; but his earthquakes create the chain reaction that stirs Austin’s. No smoke and mirrors here; just raw power.
As a perfect foil to spur the play’s development Gary Wilmes portrays Saul Kimmer, the producer hack who smarmes his way into Austin’s heart, then dumps him because he will not exact a devil’s bargain which Austin refuses to accept. Austin’s rejection of the “bargain,” enragese Lee. Wilmes is appropriately diffuse and opaque. Where does he really stand? What happened to make him turn on a dime regarding hiring Austin who has invested sweat equity and emotional integrity in a project Kimmer professed interest in? Wilmes is both authentic and the Hollywood “type,” to drive Lee and Austin against each other.
Likewise, as a foil, Marylouise Burke is LOL hysterical but frightening as their quirky mother. Her responses to their behavior are hyperbolic in the reverse and they speak volumes about how this family “functioned” in the past. She, too, helps to engine the suspense as Austin takes his power over Lee and she remains sanguine. All of the audience who are parents and especially those who have avoided the role are screaming silently in horror as the two “have at one another.” The situation and their confrontation is insane and humorous. Burke is perfect in the role as non-mediator. And Macdonald has done a magnificent job of balancing the tone and tenor of the last scene. As a result, Burke, Hawke, Dano deliver the lightening blow that helps us to realize the brothers’ intentions and the result of where they find themselves at the finale.
So much of the production resides in these incredible portrayals, of Lee and Austin’s devolution into the abyss to come to an epiphany. Caught up with that, one may overlook the artistic design. But it is so integral for it reveals the family and reflects the dynamic interactions. Superb, for example are the sound effects which augment in intensity, the frame of lights contrasting the stage into darkness for set changes, the homely, well-ordered kitchen and alcove writing area, the lovely plants and their “growth” (a field-day for symbolists), and the props. The toasting scene is just fabulous. Kudos go to Mimi Lien (Set Design) Kaye Voyce (Costume Design) Jane Cox (Lighting Design) Bray Poor (Original Music & Sound Design) Tom Watson (Hair & Wig Design) Thomas Shall (Fight Choreographer).
Sam Shepard’s play is a powerful revelation of brotherly love and hate, its design and usefulness. At the heart of our global issues resides familial relationships. To what impact on the whole is the sum of its parts? To what extent do families foment their own hatred upon themselves and the culture to exacerbate the issues? Likewise, what of families who love each other? The interplay between families and society is present but understanding it remains elusive and opaque. Shepard attempts clarity. Certainly, Lee points out that family relationships are high stakes and sometimes the warring relatives kill each other. Certainly, Austin points out that he and Lee will not kill each other over a film script. But he underestimates how far he or Lee are willing to go. How far are any of us willing to go if pushed by a relative?
Life’s uncertainty, as in the best of plays is all about surprise and not knowing what will happen in the next moments. This production of True West lives onstage because the actors are immersed in the genius of acting uncertainty that is always present. Most probably, their performance is different daily because the actors have dared to breathe out the characters whose souls they have elicited. Just W.O.W! (wild, obstreperous, wonderful)
Stockholm, written and directed by Robert Budreau and starring Ethan Hawke as the American who intends to swap millions and a friend for the largest Swedish banks’ hostages is a humorous thrill ride which almost has you rooting for the “wild and crazy” poseur Lars Nystrom/Kaj Hansson that Hawke assiduously portrays. The World Premiere slated as a Spotlight Narrative Film at Tribeca Film Festival 2018 is based on the incredible true story of how a charismatic criminal lures his victims to not only allow him to hold them hostage, but also elicits their help as he attempts to escape from the circumstances which irrevocably close in on him.
Ethan Hawke in a long haired wig, cowboy hat and dark sunglasses (for the film’s beginning) is perfect for the role as the maniac “Lars” whose bravado and energy take over the mild-mannered male and female clerks as he predatorizes their emotions, yet entertains them with his singing. Generally, he is an outrageous and likeable character and is more terrorized himself when he has to browbeat them into corners and submission with a gun.
When the minutes turn into hours with no resolution in sight, an incredible situation unfolds. Himself cornered by police and bank officials who refuse to give him the money he wants and other items for his escape,, Lars depends upon the support of teller Bianca Lind (the fine Noomi Rapace) and others. Lind becomes enthralled and even swept up and attracted to him. Lars negotiates a key point, in getting law enforcement to bring over Gunnar Sorensson (Mark Strong) a former friend whom Lars intends to free as a condition of releasing the hostages. To create conflict, Budreau portrays Gunnar as more menacing, though in real life, he was released and not charged possibly because he helped law enforcement catch “Lars” who was sentenced to ten years for this escapade.
With changes in name and characterizations, the film is primarily based on the true events which happened in 1973 in Stockholm, Sweden known as the Norrmalmstorg robbery. It was this robbery when Jan-Erik Olsson took hostages and their response to the situation originated the clinical symptoms known as “Stockholm Syndrome.” Specifically, the syndrome occurs when the alleged victims of a criminal predator identify with him, feel sorry for him and actually aid and abet his escape and/or commit criminal acts with him. Whether this is a survival mechanism response to fear is opaque. But the syndrome has been the subject of debate as other hostage crises have gained notoriety, For example in the sensational Patty Hearst case which occurred a year later than the Norrmalmstorg robbery, in 1974, Hearst was kidnapped by the wacked Symbionese Liberation Front who forced her to participate in a bank robbery which was filmed on camera. Hearst’s emotions became compromised to protect herself and mislead her captors. Nevertheless, her identification with criminals is not easily understood.
Budreau’s film gives rise to a number of psychological questions which he raises and attempts to answer. First, why does the attractive Bianca Lind go along with Lars and not resist him? Is it because he is not dangerous or because she is frozen in fear? Lind is the fictional character perhaps most similar to real life Kristin Enmark. Enmark in a conversation with officials said she believed the two hostage takers to be less dangerous than the police who were trigger happy. Likewise, in the film Lind cites the quote which Budreau included about the police being more likely to injure and kill the hostages in a fire fight, because civilian lives are less important than “getting the criminals” or preserving the banks funds.
Why does Lind passively go along with Lars to the point of assisting him? Surely, he is more hot air than serious killer as Hawke superbly portrays him to be. The longer the hostages and he remain together, the more they believe he has their interests at heart, while the bank is more interested in safeguarding their money. Interestingly, the manager and negotiators do not take “Lars” seriously. Only when the hostages help him with a plan and he pretends to injure Bianca is there some movement regarding giving him what he wants.
For her part Rapace’s Lind reveals a character who is more passive female than fiesty rebel. However, when we see her relate to her husband and family, Budreau offers up a tantalizing possibility. In the brief conversation she has with her husband, she appears steady and unemotional. Does she not want to upset him? Couldn’t she emotionally cry and manipulate her husband to more forcefully pressure the bank into settling with the bank robber? Instead, Budreau offers another look into a marriage and home life that may indeed be unsatisfactory and banal. Certainly, this interlude with the exciting and dangerous Lars stimulates another part of her seemingly untouched by her married life with the rather cold husband as portrayed by Thorbjørn Harr.
Budreau’s take on the “Syndrome” in the titular film Stockholm is varied and reveals elements that we may not have considered before because we are unfamiliar with the fascinating events that coined the phrase “stockholm syndrome” based on the symbiotic relationship between predators and their hostages. The film engages primarily due to the pacing, the tight, authentic revamping of the events in a believable way, and the fine performances, especially the high-flying wildness of Hawke and his exchanges and counter-play with Lind.
directed and written by Robert Budreau. Produced by Nicholas Tabarrok, Robert Budreau, Jonathan Bronfman. (Canada, Sweden, USA) – World Premiere. In 1973, an unhinged American outlaw walked into a bank in Sweden demanding millions in cash in exchange for his hostages. The events that followed would capture the attention of the world and ultimately give a name to a new psychological phenomenon: Stockholm syndrome. With Ethan Hawke, Noomi Rapace, Mark Strong, Christopher Heyerdahl, Bea Santos, Thorbjorn Harr.