Nothing really happens in The Subject Was Roses, but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth your time.
The superb cast in the Kennedy Center’s contemporary revival of the award-winning drama does justice to the play’s intelligence and emotional depth.
The story itself is an often-tread one of familial relationships and middle-class American disenchantment. Set in the Bronx, New York, in 1946, the play tells the story of Timmy Cleary, a young soldier, returning home after World War II to find that his parents’ marriage is falling apart. Beneath the thin veneer of scrambled eggs, football games and Sunday mass, the Clearys’ problems are easy to identify.
The production consists solely of interactions among the Clearys in the family living room and kitchen. The limited cast and location would make for a spectacularly boring play were it not for the production’s wonderful energy and the authenticity of the actors.
Bill Pullman has made himself almost famous playing Hollywood’s levelheaded everyman. As John Cleary, Pullman takes his traditional role to a new level, portraying an aging alcoholic who stifles his impulses of kindness to preserve his pride. Everything from the sadness in his eyes to his over-gelled hair brings John Cleary to life, and the viewer will likely see in him a semblance of someone in their own lives. The complexity of the character is exposed piece by piece, as the hard-working breadwinner is revealed to be an alcoholic adulterer. Yet Pullman does not allow his character to be reduced to a villain. He maintains his humanity as a man who straddles the line between cruel and lovable. His love for his son is so real you can almost smell it, even when it manifests itself as harshness.
As young Timmy Cleary, Steve Kazee is the most impressive member of the cast. The subtlety of his acting appears to be effortless, though, as a recent graduate of New York University’s Graduate Acting Program, Kazee surely knows his craft. Kazee is remarkable as a young man struggling to re-establish social equilibrium with his parents after two formative years in the army.
Even better than the individual performances is the astounding chemistry between the actors. The emotionally intense yet realistic dynamic between Pullman, Kazee and Ivey is enough to keep the audience rapt for two hours, which is no small feat for such a tiny cast. No doubt the quick wit of Gilroy’s script provides the cast with wonderful material to flex their dramatist’s muscles.
The only significant weakness is the play’s ending, in which 20 years’ worth of familial conflicts is wrapped up with perplexing ease. Gilroy does a superb job of exposing the character’s emotions; it’s a shame he’s in such a rush to sweep them under the rug at the performance’s end.
On the whole, The Subject Was Roses is a fine work: a glimpse both into 1940s Americana and into the art of acting. Yet, at $25-$78 per ticket, this is a great thing to save for a visit from that loving dysfunctional family of your own.
