Camelot (2023) (Broadway)

Camelot has some issues with the book, in that there's too much book and not enough songs. All the songs are nice and pretty but there aren't that many of them and they don't really advance the plot. They sing about the weather (Camelot) and months (The Lusty Month of May) and seasons (If Ever I Should Leave You), which is weather and months combined. Also they cut Follow Me, and the whole character of Nimue. It could use more ensemble numbers. The end of Act I and the beginning of Act II need songs. Philippa Soo is excellent as Guenevere (totally robbed by the Tonys committee). Her voice is so crisp and pure. Just too much talking scenes. Jordan Donica is good too but not as extraordinary as he was in My Fair Lady though he rightfully is Tony nominated. I think If Ever I Should Leave You isn't as perfect for his voice as On the Street Where You Live. We unfortunately didn't see Andrew Burnap as Arthur, but his understudy was pretty good. I know it's mostly straight acting but Arthur has a couple songs and the understudy probably had more musicality anyways considering Burnap has never done a musical. The set and costumes are wonderful. It feels like you're really transported to Camelot. They make use of projections on the back wall and on the cathedral-shaped eaves.  

Plot wise I could see why Aaron Sorkin wanted to do this. It's about a benevolent leader trying to create his idealized world where people are good. And everyone wants him to fail. Everyone doubts him, and they ultimately bring about his downfall because they can't accept the goodness of people. That's how Arthur loses his war against human nature. Is it foolhardy? Or righteous? Act 2 is much darker as Camelot crumbles from the inside. Act 2 introduces critical new characters that I did not care for: Mordred and Morgan Le Fay (a scientist and Mordred's scorned mother in this production who tells Arthur it can't last). The changes are not all sensible as they're often arguing about nothing.

I think you also can't talk about Camelot without mentioning Jackie Kennedy. She may have made it all up. I, for one, kind of find it hard to believe that JFK liked to listen to the soundtrack. It's a nice story. For one brief shining moment, there was this ideal society. Reality of course is that JFK never achieved that. And if anyone really believed he would they were kidding themselves--maybe I'm the cynical knights. Maybe she was trying to say something about adulterers being burned at the stake.

Molly's Game (2017)

Aaron Sorkin's directorial debut is very Aaron Sorkin. It runs 140 minutes, and that's with Sorkin-speed speech. Acting in a Sorkin film requires skill. You must memorize your lines by heart so you can spit them back at rapid speed without thinking. That's acting. And it's never easy dialogue. It's brainy. There are unfamiliar words. You gotta become familiar with poker terms and American law. Even for a generally educated person, it can be a little difficult to follow at that pace. But that's what's so great about Aaron Sorkin. He doesn't talk down to you. He pulls you up. He's a smart guy that makes the audience keep up with him. The narrative structure in this movie is a little weird, with Chastain narrating her story in her book being read by her lawyer preparing for court. But it works. Jessica Chastain and Idris Elba are both great Sorkin-actors. Everything comes around full circle. Nothing is forgotten, everything is deliberate. I appreciate that Elba is cast as her lawyer, an smart and articulate and influential black man--the only black man in a story almost exclusively populated by powerful white men. It's tight writing about a strong female lead that doesn't require sex to tell an interesting and intense story. I have a feeling Sorkin will be doing more directing in the future.

Steve Jobs (2015)

This biopic is excellent, thanks to an incredible vision by Danny Boyle, a great script by Aaron Sorkin, and some phenomenal acting from Kate Winslet, as well as Michael Fassbender and Seth Rogen.  This movie shines where the other Jobs biopic from a couple years ago failed.  Danny Boyle made a movie that is the Apple of biopics--it is sleek and gorgeous.

The structure of the film is brilliant.  The biopic is not over ambitious, it does not seek to cover an entire life.  Rather it focuses on just three major product launches in 1984 (Macintosh), 1988 (NeXT) and 1998 (iMac), the ones that Steve Jobs was so famous for.  But what is so brilliant is the pacing of the movie.  It is not about the launch itself, but actually the half hour before each launch when Jobs was preparing for his presentations.  Anticipation and excitement builds until the point we've all been waiting for as if we were at these product launches, and then Danny Boyle skips the presentation itself. This allows for a huge release, letting the audience take a deep breath to prepare for two more product launches.

Each product launch is split into four parts.  At each launch, Jobs has encounters with his daughter Lisa, co-founder Steve Wozniak, CEO of Apple John Sculley and Andy Hertzfeld from the original Mac team.  Lisa gives us a window into Jobs's personal life outside of work at three points in his life.  And the film actually ends with Lisa, humanizing Steve Jobs as a person with a family, not just the visionary businessman.  Jobs's confrontations with Wozniak highlight the interesting dynamics of one of the most important partnerships of the twentieth century.  Through Jobs's conversations with Sculley, we learn about Jobs's background as an adopted child and Jobs at Apple.  The film opens with Hertzfeld being berated by Jobs in an excellent scene dictated by an exhilarating rhythmic beat moving in the background.  And throughout the film, Kate Winslet's Joanna Hoffman is always there at his side with a leading-amount of screen time and she is phenomenal. 

Boyle does not shy away from painting a portrait of a controversial albeit legendary figure, who was allegedly very difficult to work with.  Boyle mentions (with some snark) all of the criticisms of Apple computers as Jobs's doing.  While it was clear that Jobs did not have the spirit of an engineer, he was a businessman and an artist.  Perhaps the most direct criticism came from Wozniak who says "What do you do?"  Wozniak was the tech genius but Jobs had the vision, he was the "conductor."

I got to see an advanced screening of this movie at the AMC Lincoln Square!