Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PICNIC

(Columbia) A Cert. A SUMMER romance is what William Inge ¢alled his play Picnic, but as you might expect of the author of Come Back, Little Sheba, it’s something more than a "romantic" story as generally understood. Superficially about a holiday outing and its aftermath, the more interesting intention of this study of American small-town life is to tell the story of a pretty girl called Madge and of the values that struggle to possess her. Is she to marry Alan, son of a wealthy capitalist, who apparently adores her? Her mother, who foresees a short season for a pretty face and doesn’t let Madge forget it, thinks she should and explains why in one of the film’s most significant scenes-a plea for "successful" marriage on the one hand, and on the other all the misery of a girl tired of being merely pretty. Does she love Alan? she wonders. She’s even less sure after an encounter that night with Hal, an old college friend of Alan (and a bit of a vagabond with a bit of a past), who has just climbed off a freight train. Better to marry for love? But then is Hal’s violent physical attraction love? Whatever it is, Kim Novak as Madge and William Holden as Hal play some electrifying scenes. Mr. Holden we rather take for granted; Miss Novak, who impressed me in a _ sophisticated role in Pushover, gets wonderfully (and surprisingly) well inside self-conscious early womanhood. Lighting the central situation from other angles are Madge’s younger, plainer, but more intelligent sister (very well played by Susan Strasberg), and a middle-aged spinster who lives with them. In the play a character who stirs our compassion, the spinster is overplayed so outrageously by Rosalind Russell that her impact is most often broadly comic. Could this be the fault of Joshua Logan, who directs Picnic after a long spell in the theatre? Anyway, this defect mars the film. Tailored for a wider audience than the play, the script also cuts or amends important lines and includes new scenes which, very good in their way, nevertheless obscure the significance of the essential story. What's left is still very interesting-but just slightly disappointing if you know the play. People inter4

ested in the theatre, by the way, will want to know "that Jo Mielziner had a hand in the fine settings.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.I whakaputaina aunoatia ēnei kuputuhi tuhinga, e kitea ai pea ētahi hapa i roto. Tirohia te whārangi katoa kia kitea te āhuatanga taketake o te tuhinga.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/periodicals/NZLIST19561012.2.27.1.1

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

New Zealand Listener, Volume 35, Issue 897, 12 October 1956, Page 15

Word count
Tapeke kupu
394

PICNIC New Zealand Listener, Volume 35, Issue 897, 12 October 1956, Page 15

PICNIC New Zealand Listener, Volume 35, Issue 897, 12 October 1956, Page 15

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert