It is very interesting that when Rod Serling was given the opportunity to revisit this remarkable play as a theatrical movie after a gap of six years--he chose to make major changes to it in terms of message and tone. While the Playhouse 90 production was sometimes sad, it also was often sweet and optimistic---and finally offered hope that Mountain (Jack Palance) and the sympathetic employment counselor (Kim Hunter) would find a better and brighter future. The feature film took off in a very different direction when reaching its climax, and in doing so the direction of the story often ranged from depressing to despair. Why?
When the Anthony Quinn-Julie Harris version was made in 1962, Serling was deeply involved in crafting The Twilight Zone series--a very major undertaking. But that in itself does not seem to explain how this rather simple and often touching story about several troubled people morphed into a generally downbeat tale that ends with such a negative feeling of loss. It is not difficult to understand why the Playhouse 90 production--even with all its well known creative and technical problems---was such a huge popular and critical success, while the feature film, with its greater invested resources and production values, was unsuccessful at the box office. The latter is actually a difficult movie to watch, with so much unrelieved pain experienced by the characters and audience from beginning to end. What was the point of Serling's decision to tell a quite different story in making the feature film version, and in doing so abandoning the positive possibilities inherent in the television play?
We do know quite a bit about how the Playhouse 90 version came into being. In 1960--four years after it was first broadcast---many of its original creative principals came together once more for a remarkable video reunion that shared that behind the scene tale. The Westinghouse Desilu Playhouse production of The Man In The Funny Suit was an extraordinary television event. The viewer was given the privilege to feel somewhat like "being a fly on the wall" during the creative process that ultimately resulted in the original RFAH. With the participation of original director Ralph Nelson, writer Rod Serling and actors Ed and Keenan Wynn among others, the Desilu drama is probably as definitive an explanation of the story as we are likely to ever receive. It involves serendipity---a fortuitous combination of great talent and good luck during an opportune moment in time, and is well worth your effort to seek it out on YouTube.
When Rod Serling signed on in 1962 to deliver the screenplay for his Playhouse 90 creation RFAH, he could most likely have gone in one of three different ways: (1) essentially draft an expanded replication of the original source material; (2) take the basic dramatic story and invest it with additional "feel good" elements to soften the tale and make it more accessible; or (3) write it to emphasize the heavily dramatic aspects inherent in the play, and then underpin those tragic elements to reinforce the ultimate downbeat conclusion. Perhaps some day we will definitively learn why Serling chose to take the third option in making the feature film.
As for the Playhouse 90 version of RFAH, there is little to add to what has already been said. It was an astonishing achievement during the dawn of the Golden Age Of Television. Jack Palance's performance is probably the finest work of his career--a towering accomplishment. And the Wynns also delivered in roles that represented acting at the highest level. Kim Hunter was most believable in her supporting part, and Ralph Nelson's direction inspired all the creative talent to do their very best to match the quality of Serling's play. Those of us who were fortunate enough to have seen it as a live broadcast probably realized they were witnessing a major event in the history of television. And seeing it again recently in its restored kinescope format fully confirms just how great that moment really was. RFAH set a very high bar for everything that was yet to come from the TV medium. It all began with RFAH!
When the Anthony Quinn-Julie Harris version was made in 1962, Serling was deeply involved in crafting The Twilight Zone series--a very major undertaking. But that in itself does not seem to explain how this rather simple and often touching story about several troubled people morphed into a generally downbeat tale that ends with such a negative feeling of loss. It is not difficult to understand why the Playhouse 90 production--even with all its well known creative and technical problems---was such a huge popular and critical success, while the feature film, with its greater invested resources and production values, was unsuccessful at the box office. The latter is actually a difficult movie to watch, with so much unrelieved pain experienced by the characters and audience from beginning to end. What was the point of Serling's decision to tell a quite different story in making the feature film version, and in doing so abandoning the positive possibilities inherent in the television play?
We do know quite a bit about how the Playhouse 90 version came into being. In 1960--four years after it was first broadcast---many of its original creative principals came together once more for a remarkable video reunion that shared that behind the scene tale. The Westinghouse Desilu Playhouse production of The Man In The Funny Suit was an extraordinary television event. The viewer was given the privilege to feel somewhat like "being a fly on the wall" during the creative process that ultimately resulted in the original RFAH. With the participation of original director Ralph Nelson, writer Rod Serling and actors Ed and Keenan Wynn among others, the Desilu drama is probably as definitive an explanation of the story as we are likely to ever receive. It involves serendipity---a fortuitous combination of great talent and good luck during an opportune moment in time, and is well worth your effort to seek it out on YouTube.
When Rod Serling signed on in 1962 to deliver the screenplay for his Playhouse 90 creation RFAH, he could most likely have gone in one of three different ways: (1) essentially draft an expanded replication of the original source material; (2) take the basic dramatic story and invest it with additional "feel good" elements to soften the tale and make it more accessible; or (3) write it to emphasize the heavily dramatic aspects inherent in the play, and then underpin those tragic elements to reinforce the ultimate downbeat conclusion. Perhaps some day we will definitively learn why Serling chose to take the third option in making the feature film.
As for the Playhouse 90 version of RFAH, there is little to add to what has already been said. It was an astonishing achievement during the dawn of the Golden Age Of Television. Jack Palance's performance is probably the finest work of his career--a towering accomplishment. And the Wynns also delivered in roles that represented acting at the highest level. Kim Hunter was most believable in her supporting part, and Ralph Nelson's direction inspired all the creative talent to do their very best to match the quality of Serling's play. Those of us who were fortunate enough to have seen it as a live broadcast probably realized they were witnessing a major event in the history of television. And seeing it again recently in its restored kinescope format fully confirms just how great that moment really was. RFAH set a very high bar for everything that was yet to come from the TV medium. It all began with RFAH!