I actually like Lee Marvin quite a lot in this despite what some people have said about him not being up to the role.
I would never say that Marvin didn't do a good job with this role. He just didn't give the same electrifying performance as Jason Robards did in the 1960 version. Two critical scenes are a case in point: when Robards' Hickey shows up, he puts on a happy-go-lucky act, but he also makes clear that there's violence and borderline insanity under the facade. We only get the happy-go-lucky with Marvin's performance. Also, Robards put much more emotion into Hickey's final speech about his wife than Marvin.
In adapatations of plays, it's always refreshing to have different takes on the main character (I wish that I had a chance to see Kevin Spacey's take in the 1990's Broadway revival, or Brian Dennehy's performance last year in Chicago). I just happen to find Robards' take to be the more engaging one.
reply
share