Just to get it out of the way, I’m not going to compare the Center Theatre Group’s production of Frost/Nixon to the film directed by Ron Howard. Mostly, it’s because I haven’t seen the film. And I haven’t seen the film mostly because there’s more art out there than this art critic has time for, and trailers featuring Frank Langella portraying Nixon with a bag of marbles in his mouth don’t quite offer much of an incentive. With that in mind, I’m pleased to say that irrespective of the movie, Frost/Nixon, the stage production, is outstanding.

[img]410|left|||no_popup[/img]

Alan Cox (Frost), left, and Stacy Keach (Nixon)

But I have to set aside (so to speak) the set design, which is elegantly sparse, and maybe gloss over a cast of pros, and ask: What is with the credits on the program? In big letters are Stacy Keach’s name, rightly so, followed by the name of the play and playwright (Academy-award winner Peter Morgan, who also wrote the film’s screenplay) – again, rightly so. But what’s up with the “also starring Alan Cox” in small type? Certainly, Stacy Keach is big. Mike Hammer? Classic. And his Col. Vincent Kane in The Ninth Configuration stands the test of time, and then some. Even a small role in that B-movie bit of fun, Escape from L.A. shows off Keach’s versatility. To see him in the role of Nixon, a role punctuated by a balanced blend of devious humour and pathos, is a delight. While he doesn’t go for aping Nixon, whose physique and mannerisms lend themselves so easily to caricature, he brings just enough of Nixon the man to the role so that, for two hours, we are convinced of the character’s reality.

Out of Proportion

But what about Alan Cox? As the other half of the play’s title, talk show personality cum Nixon adversary David Frost, he is cast against a formidable and charismatic stage presence. Yet he brings charm of his own, playing the little guy against Keach’s big guy with a sympathetic naivety that masks cunning and resolve. Like the straight man to the comic, Cox doesn’t get the flash, but he provides the play with a solid linchpin – and surely deserves more than small type.

There is the question, however, as to the play’s accuracy. Writing for the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-drew/ifrostnixoni-a-dishonorab_b_150948.html), journalist and author Elizabeth Drew – who covered Watergate and Nixon’s impeachment for the New Yorker, savages Peter Morgan for grossly distorting history, going even beyond artistic license. The question of where a playwright’s allegiance lies haunts Frost/Nixon, particularly given the recent, and emotionally unresolved, history of Nixon’s abuse of power and its correlation to the Bush Administration. Is it to truth? Is it to drama? Drew leans on the Artistic Director of the Shakespeare Theatre in Washington, Michael Kahn, who affirms that even Shakespeare, despite dramatic liberties, didn’t mess with the historical record of figures long dead the way Morgan messes with the record. Certainly, the Bard’s work wasn’t at risk of challenge from transcripts, tapes and readily accessible documents that can show exactly where and how Morgan deviates. For all that Drew perhaps underestimates Morgan’s acknowledgment of Nixon and Frost’s conjoined financial interests in making the interviews successful, her criticism does sting.

In contrast, and certainly with a more cavalier attitude, director Michael Grandage dismisses the hoopla, stating in the program:

“There’s lots of historical reference, but I don’t think we’re in the business, in theatre, of giving a history lesson. That’s not our job. I feel no responsibility whatsoever about what bits are fictionalized and what’s not factually correct. It doesn’t bother me. In theatre, I think we have the job of creating a piece of theatre for one night, not of sitting down and being lectured to. I absolutely love it when a play can mix both fact and fiction. The central scene the play revolves around is actually fiction. It thrilled me that the two could be mixed.”

As the score stands, it’s 1 for truth and 1 for drama. The tiebreaker may come in the form of the play’s packaging and the management of audience expectations. No mere fictionalized account, Frost/Nixon is almost an alternate history fantasia on the theme of achieving satisfaction from the whole Nixon affaire. Crafted like a thriller, gradually ratcheting up the cat-and-mouse tension, it delivers a catharsis missing from the national psyche. Yet there is, despite the entertainment value, something of a missed opportunity in terms of exploring the aftermath of a disgraced presidency. What if Gerald Ford had not pardoned Nixon? If Morgan falters, it lies in being content with where he ended up instead of pushing on further. By comfortably blurring reality and fabrication in a way that confuses audiences, he achieves a central tenet of drama, yet loses out on the freedom that comes with jettisoning reality altogether and extracting, instead, more substantial emotional and universal insights.

So there it is, then, the disclaimer that what’s on stage isn’t to be taken as anything other than two hours of funny, poignant, jabbing entertainment. If Grandage is content with dispensing with the history lesson and offering instead a Hollywood sort of appeal, then there’s no reason not to gobble up the entertainment with the knowledge that it is, indeed, the equivalent, not of a scrappy indie flick, but of a Hollywood blockbuster.

Frost/Nixon. Written by Peter Morgan. Directed by Michael Grandage. Starring Stacy Keach, Alan Cox, Meghan Andrews, Bob Ari, Antony Hagopian, Peter Hilton, Roxanna Hope, Ted Koch, Tamara Lovatt-Smith, Stephen Rowe, Brian Sgambati, David Sitler and Noel Velez. On stage at the Ahmanson Theatre until Sunday, March 29. Call 213-628-2772 for tickets or visit www.centertheatregroup.org.

Frédérik invites you to discuss Frost/Nixon at his blog (frederik-sisa.blogspot.com)