Review: Final Reunion
Whitefire Theatre, 13500 Ventura Blvd., Sherman Oaks, 818-990-2324
by Jim Berg
I often ask myself, why pay $12 to $18 to go to the theatre when I can pay $8 and see a movie, or pay nothing and stay at home and watch TV? Sometimes as I look around at other audience members, I wonder how many of them are friends of the actors, or in some other way connected to the production, and came to see the play because of that connection? I wonder how many in the audience are here because they feel some sort of cultural obligation to support the theatre? I wonder if I would be there if I hadn’t been comped in to review the show? The real question is, how much of the audience is there because theatre is a relevant and important part of their life; how many are there to experience the artistic expression—the commentary?
Theatre has got to be more than entertainment if it is going to survive. There are too many entertainment choices out there to compete with. Live theatre must be art if it is going to exist in any significant form. The next question is, what is art if it’s not entertainment? Too often art is lumped in with entertainment and no distinction is made between the two.
Art engages its audience, it doesn’t pander to it. Art makes demands of its audience and challenges the audience. Art is commentary, a point of view, a perspective. Art provokes more questions than it answers.
Final Reunion playing at the Whitefire Theatre is an example of theatre art. It is what takes place when four men are brought together by one of their party for the purpose of blackmail. For twenty-five years, each has been carrying a burden of guilt for the death of a fellow fraternity member during hazing. Three have enjoyed considerable success as a doctor, a newspaper editor, and a congressman, respectively. The fourth, however, has not enjoyed success and is resorting to blackmail. Each character takes a position in response to the blackmail and their conflict points up a moral dilemma that has everyone in the audience asking themselves, “what would I do?”
William Cheyney (Joseph Gallison) is a ruthless politician driven purely by ambition, for whom the solution is clear and uncluttered by conscience. His position is wonderfully crafted by writer Mel Bloom and equally executed by Joseph Gallison. The combination of excellent writing and acting gives us a character that demands we recognize him in ourselves. We understand his position and perhaps agree that the reality of society is that there are winners and losers, and winners do what it takes to win.
It is made very clear that their dilemma is not about what happened twenty-five years ago; their dilemma lies in today, in protecting what each has achieved—wealth, status, power. What are they willing to do to protect their lifestyle? Cheyney says, “Life is lifestyle” and he is prepared to defend his lifestyle as if he were defending his life.
Opposite Cheyney is Buddy Ferguson (James Reynolds), the big city newspaper editor. As clear and determined as Cheyney is on the exigencies, Ferguson is equally determined on the matters of conscience and honor. Reynolds proves himself and his position equal to Cheyney, thanks mainly to a powerful and convincing performance. It is also brilliant casting an African-American in this role. I could go on about the implications, but just one is the idea of a black man representing conscience to white men, who have either repressed or forgotten their own. Could this be a metaphor for class relations in this city? Like I said, I could go on and on.
The conflict of Cheyney and Ferguson is the crux of this play, and credit goes to director James Luisi for recognizing and crafting the pace of the conflict. Cheyney has the best lines and it shows a clear artistic vision and discipline not to let him run away with the show. The result is that the audience goes away from the show with something to think about.
Also noteworthy are the performances of Steve Dougherty as Bobo Simpson—the blackmailer, and Stephen Landis as milquetoast Charles Webber. Kudos to set designer Gary Wissman for a job well done. The only flaw in the production was the passing firetruck sound effect that was too long and its symbolism too obvious.♦