"The Little Dog Laughed" at About Face Theater, Chicago, IL - 2/9/08

"The Little Dog Laughed" was written by Douglas Carter Beane, author of the movie "To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything! Julie Newmar" and the book for the musical "Xanadu," presently running on Broadway. The movie, which I thought was ok at best, and "Xanadu," which I loved, rely heavily on camp humor. So does "The Little Dog Laughed." As far as I'm concerned, his humor is sort of one-note, but in the case of "Xanadu," it is fantastically entertaining. In the case of "To Wong Foo," it's forgettable.

In About Face's production of this play, Mary Beth Fisher plays a Hollywood agent who will lie, cheat, and stuff her client in the closet, for success. Her client, who has been happy to remain in the closet and do rent boys every now and then, meets a rent boy for whom he's willing to come out. When he gets the lead in a movie that is certain to be a hit, his agent tells him he has to remain in the closet because the character is gay. Gay men can't play gay men in blockbusters, she tells him. Women have to believe he's straight.

The play is hysterical and Mary Beth Fisher is incredible: she steals the show. Then again, the script was written that way. Other characters have their moments but not nearly as many moments as she does. Apart from watching her, though, there's not much else to this play. Or maybe to this production.

When the play opens, the lead who plays the movie star is adorable (and has a great body) and when he falls asleep before getting it on with the fella he hired for the night, you're ready to like him. The two of them, both living largely in the closet, fall in love and decide they will come out to be with each other. Unfortunately, there is no sexual chemistry between the actors and so one never believes that they're in love and hot for each other. Plus, they're not very good in these roles. As a result, the exposure of hypocrisy in Hollywood as it plays itself out among the characters matters little to the audience We're supposed to be disappointed by the position the two guys find themselves in but we don't. There's a small controversy brewing in town because the stage directions call for a scene where the two men are nude and one goes down on the other. The playwright was upset when he saw the production and realized the men had on underwear in the scene. Frankly, I don't think it would have added anything because the audience wouldn't have believed there was any sexual attraction anyway.

At the end of the play, we all wondered if it would have felt like something more substantial than candy if we had seen a different production. The theme of hypocrisy and cut throat activities in Hollywood is hardly something that I care about. But if we could have seen the characters as people who felt something for each other and who may have lost that, then we may have cared for their lives, even if not Hollywood's. But I don't know. I loved "Xanadu" but there's no attempt to be serious in that play. So, I still don't know if it was an mediocre script or a mediocre script coupled with a lackluster production.