TWAIN-L Archives

Mark Twain Forum

TWAIN-L@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Alan Kitty <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 20 Aug 2013 09:15:03 -0400
text/plain (34 lines)
If you saw Holbrook 40 years ago you may be stating the case for Kilmer doing Twain at the same age. Ive seen clips of him as Twain and as a performer he is as capable. 

But he does not have to survive comparison if those who would compare the two are dead. Then the only way to compare is recordings. I have seen Holbrook live four times and watched several recordings - both his and Kilmer - many more. 

Both have credibly interpreted the iconic original. The difference will be the material. This raises the question of audience. Will the sAme material inspire a younger audience - and will a younger Twain appeal to them more?

As a Twain interpreter I am dying to see how it comes out. 
Alan

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 19, 2013, at 10:12 PM, "Carl J. Chimi" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hmm.  The difference between the lightning bug and the lightning...
> 
> Personally, I wish actors would stop thinking the only Mark Twain worth port=
> raying is the iconic, old, white-suited Mark Twain.  I'd sort of like to see=
> portrayals of him as he was in the 1860s, 1870s, and 1880s on the stage.
> 
> Putting him in a white suit and old makeup just invites comparison to Hal Ho=
> lbrook, whom I first saw as Mark Twain on a stage in Boston over 40 years ag=
> o.  No one is going to survive that comparison, not even a relatively accomp=
> lished actor like Val Kilmer.
> 
> My .02.
> 
> Carl
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Aug 19, 2013, at 8:31 PM, Dwayne Eutsey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
>> http://imgur.com/a/oVUBH/all

ATOM RSS1 RSS2