With Oscar buzz filling the air and moviegoers recounting the year’s most thought-provoking films, the play “Speed-the-Plow” focuses its audience instead on the more unscrupulous pursuits underlying the film business.
These pursuits, namely money and power, define the lives of Hollywood producers Charlie Fox (Greg Germann) and Bobby Gould (Jon Tenney). Both men gain the chance to strike it rich with the upcoming signing to a Doug Brown film, a name synonymous with big blockbuster. Never mind the fact that Gould eagerly poises to sign without even hearing the film’s plot.
Gould’s temporary secretary, Karen (Alicia Silverstone, of “Clueless” fame), complicates their plan for box office gold, asking naively, “Is it a good film?”
Gould, with a scoffing look of disbelief, responds, “It’s a commodity,” and proceeds to explain the commonly known principle that producers define a good movie by its box office sales. Fox contributes by offering Karen helpful work advice: “Bob takes his coffee like he makes his movies: with nothing in them.”
Such is the world that playwright David Mamet paints for audiences in a mocking comedy casting a harsh spotlight on the inner workings of Hollywood, an industry where business conquers art and producers base a movie’s worth on the clever catch-prase it can supply for the TV guide.
Gould and Fox’s chance at movie success falters after Karen prompts Gould to greenlight a complex, idealistic novel for production in place of the Doug Brown flick. With a story Karen claims moved her soul, the venture promises a tale of love, purity and empowerment, along with absolutely no commercial appeal.
Gould’s dilemma between a meaningful project and greater wealth leads to a deeper questioning of his life, as his growing doubts effect his partnership with Fox, who accuses Gould of simply succumbing to lust for Karen.
The larger questions Gould and Karen raise correspond to the entire play, as “Speed-the-Plow” quickly emerges as a cutting and bitter satire of Hollywood greed and corruption.
The play supplies a steady stream of humor, with constant banter and biting retorts bursting forth between Gould and Fox, who play off each other with perfect comedic timing.
Fox steals his scenes through his mannerisms; whether pacing the floor or practically toppling off his chair, his inability to remain still matches his neurotic nature and the chaotic nature of Hollywood itself while not stretching the act too far.
Karen’s naive, stumbling demeanor early in the play at first functions more as a platform from which the two men launch their jokes. But the second scene brings a complexity to her character as she introduces the possibility of a more lofty approach to the business and brings important criticisms to Gould’s hardened cynicism.
Gould’s skepticism, transformed to a confusion and internal turmoil, gains the audience’s sympathy, despite his shark-like persona.
Although the ending comes abruptly and proves rather unsettling, the audience should expect its forceful realism as the only fitting close to the satiric, darker nature of the play.