The Waterbury Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1917-1946, 1942-04-17

NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. NNNhbS WIZ WY
ropressive tactics OF the latter,
This being the sorry season that
Il mas been, | viii have to admit
that the play, adapted by Stetnheck
himself suffers little, II AT all, by
comparison with the other serious
plays OF American authorship that
We have been offered That, how
ever, Is small soaee for disappoint-
inent IN work By this author who
demonstrated IN "of Mice ard
Men" that he is capable Of produc-
ing taut melodrama like O. master
Finds Novel Tend
This time he was not so SucceSS-
full. That does not mean that he
failed to make q good adaptation OF
thu ncYal, witch, like Mice and
Men" is q short affair consisting
mostly OF dialogue, It Is written so
that II practically falls into play
form with little tinkerlng,
The play Is highly faithful TO the
original, maybe too much so for It's
own good found the noNel
rather tepld affair, and II anything
Is tepid between book covers you
can bet II Will be colder than PEN
gums feet II II Is tranSpoSed TO the
stage without plenty Of hot appll-
cations,
stelnbeak doesn't name his coun-
cry or It's invaders, nut 1t Is obvious
that the locale Is Norway and the
conquerofs are Germans Tho town
a mining center, Is quickly taken
and the commanding colonel ard
Ills staff move into The home OF the
elderly mayor, The colonel's Job IL
TO keep the coal coming out OF the
mine and he hopes for no trouble
from the pepulace. Invariably II
comes however, and executions do
not stop H. The reluctant colonel IT,
forced TO moro and more blood
letting, and finally the play ends
with the mayor himself sacrifice,
which, like the others, will be futile
because the people are conquered
but undefeated or vice versa,
SteInbcek Partly Responsible
Were II not for the fact that I
have read the book would be IN
clined 10 place moGt OF the blame
for the failure Of the play TO come
of on the casting and the direction
which can, OF course be billed for
much OF the trouble, However
Steinbeck alGo has q responsibility
for failure 10 bolster his original
work IN transferring II 10 the stage
Even those plays which seek 10 ifni-
tate most closely the routine OF nat
uraI existence must be inflated be-
yond natural proportions IN spots
In order 10 keep them from falling
utterly fiat In the unnatural at
mosphcre that Is Inherent IN the
theaer.
There Is no particular objection
10 the authors attempt to present
his colonel and some OF his other
officers 90 "huinan beings" but do
think he has Goftened them too
much TO make them belieyable az
totailtarlan conqueForg. The Fifth
Coiumnigt who prepared the way III
better done.
Otto Kruger has been q good
motor In q variety OF roles for lorg
time. but I gibmlt that he Is Just
too mild 10 make you believe that
he can DO q ruthless Nazl colonel
even when you know this character
Il supposed 10 have q Eofter eide.
K3aiIantlne IN Quisling Role
The performance az Ralph Nor
gan, on leave from the Aims, as
the mayor was disappointment TO
ne, III the novel this character
eomes through aii right because
when you read you contuFe up your
own mental picture Of how q char
acter looks and acts. But Moraan'g
portrayal falls considerably short
III nv eatimation Of this man.
There Is little enough for Whit
ford Kane 10 do as the old friend OF
the mayor. Or, Winter, and Joseph
Sweeney, q grand actor. II praeti-
ealIy wasted IN the role Of the
nsagogss Old servant. LeOBa Powers
FAX flie tliankless role Of the
mayors wife and Maria Palmer