SYLVIA Previews and Reviews- Page 3

[Patash]

Posted: 10/13/15 at 9:40am

I can't wait to see this now, particularly in light of all the Broderick comments.  I mentioned that I once played Greg (not to compare my community theatre experience with Broadway), but as usually I'm a more "over the top" actor, my biggest goal was to bring Greg down to a rather expressionless, borderline depression, character and let the overall exuberance of Sylvia take over.   Frankly, if I wanted a model for what I was trying to do -- Matthew Broderick's deadpan delivery style seems perfect.  I can't imagine the character of Greg having much "energy" or being "very expressive" -- but totally the opposite.  So now I'm really curious to see why (or if) his character doesn't work for most people.   But what do I know -- I actually loved his "dull" and "lifeless" characterization in Nice Work If You Can Get It?

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/13/15 at 9:43am

wickedfan11 said: "Anyone know where the rush seats are located?"

 

You mean like the person two posts above yours?

[dramamama611]

Posted: 10/13/15 at 10:35am

While I can see his character perhaps STARTING lifeless and withdrawn, what's the point if he isn't affected by Sylvia?   The only we see differently is where he spends his time.  His character needs to grow.

[Patash]

Posted: 10/13/15 at 10:38am

"His character needs to grow."

Yes, I agree completely, but sometimes the growth is subtle and not "over the top".  The character may also "grow" without totally "changing".  I keep getting the idea that some viewers wanted Greg to be a "high energy" person, but maybe I'm misinterpreting that.  It does usually seem to be the main Broderick "complaint". 

[mc1227]

Posted: 10/13/15 at 3:30pm

I think with Broderick's style, you either like it or you don't, there doesn't seem to be a grey area.  As in, "Its Only a Play", he is the mainstay that the others bounce off of for their laughs. Obviously, directors and producers like it since he keeps getting consistent work on stage.

I thought he did a fine job with this and his interaction with Sylvia was very enjoyable.  The second act is kind of slow paced but I don't think it is the fault of his character, its the length of the production and the writing itself.  I think the story could have had some more substance to it, but it doesn't so there's not much this cast can do about that.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 10/13/15 at 10:27pm

I don't think the character needs to be over the top or have some huge change, but the character - the lead in the play, the one we're suppose to care about - should at least be interesting? I feel like the way you talk to your dog and the way you talk to your wife should maybe be different shades to a person? I mean, by Act 2 he becomes borderline psychotic about this dog. But Scene 1 and the end are the same line reading, same flat tone. We also never get to see Greg without Sylvia, so there really isn't much of a change in his character throughout this show, only his and his wife relationship changes. But then again, we never saw it before, so maybe they weren't overly affectionate then either? I think that's a big issue with the play. There's no substance. And the ending is just terrible. 

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 10/13/15 at 10:36pm

RippedMan said: "IAnd the ending is just terrible."

 

So is Matthew Broderick

 

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 10/21/15 at 2:23pm

How difficult has this been to rush? Would it be possible to get one on a Saturday for either show around 11am?

[mc1227]

Posted: 10/21/15 at 5:56pm

Based on this week's box office numbers, I wouldn't imagine that you would have any problem getting a rush ticket.

[Patash]

Posted: 10/22/15 at 8:54am

To each his own, but I saw Sylvia yesterday and LOVED Matthew Broderick.  Yes, he's borderline psychotic (and frankly he already is at the beginning of the play -- even having left work to go sit in the park).   He's a lost soul, and I bought that 100%.   I found the whole cast wonderful, but was most surprised at Annaleigh NOT being so over the top as Sylvia is usually played (having seen five or six productions).  She was subtle and wonderful -- with less of the standard dog characteristics -- tongue out, panting, tail wagging, paws out and down, etc.!  And Julie White managed to play Kate as a character we could sympathize with and laugh at, at the same time-- she often comes off as a total shrew.  (oops. I mean Kate often comes off as a total shrew -- not Julie White!)

Updated On: 10/22/15 at 08:54 AM

[mc1227]

Posted: 10/22/15 at 4:33pm

Glad that you enjoyed the show.  I agree with your comments regarding the performances, I think they are all very good all around.  I'm not too sure they are marketing it correctly but I hope that it finds an audience.

[goldenboy]

Posted: 10/22/15 at 11:42pm

Thank you for letting me know about rush. I went there tonight (Thursday) and snagged a rush ticket at 7:30 pm for an 8 o clock curtain.

 

As a dog lover, I loved the show. As a theatre lover, I loved the show and found myself enthralled the entire evening. In fact, I laughed; I howled; I shivered; I whimpered. Theatre doesn't get better than this when it touches all of my emotions and that hasn't happened in some time. Leave it to a play about a man and his dog to do the trick.

Sometimes I feel guilty preferring my dog over my partner so I related to it. Thank God my partner also loves the dog cause I would definitely have chosen the dog over the wife! Thank goodness I don't have that dilemma. 

I howled at the humor and found the text a love letter to dog owners and their dogs. Gurney has written a witty funny and touching play!  Matthew Broderick was a charming dog lover. No he did not walk through: ihe was totally committed.  He was his charming understated self which worked in this role. He was having fun.  As reported Ms. Ashford s a revelation as Sylvia cavorting between teenage tease and canine.  Julie White almost has a thankless role because it's hard to side with her. She is thoroughly believable and quite good as a woman who has no time or need for a dog in her life. She is thoroughly convincing even though the character is somewhat unlikable. Robert Sella is very funny in numerous roles.

I loved it. I love dogs. Go get a ticket.

[Monty12112]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 8:48am

Went to try to get rush tickets Saturday morning at about 11:00 and they were already out for both performance that day.    I ended up going back right before the evening performance (at 7:50) and got a pair of standing room tickets which were located in the mezzanine.  Good view for the show.   I found the show to be pretty funny (being a dog owner).

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 12:33pm

Saw the Saturday matinee of Sylvia with a packed cozy house. Had last row of the Mezz seats from TDF and they were more than fine - and that comes from someone who likes to sit close. 

 

This was the most fun I have had at a Broadway show in a long time. Real belly laughs from the antics on stage some brought me to tears - of laughter. What a charming heartfelt piece. Yes I am a dog lover so I more than related to the material but in the hands of this exquisite cast the familiar was taken to hysterical heights. 

 

Having never been a fan of Matthew Broderick I found this role perfectly suited for his over aged Candide like personality. Julie White can do no wrong as the conflict creator of the piece and Robert Sellar is stellar in a variety of classic second banana roles with one in particular that stops the show if that's possible in a play vs a musical.

 

What can I say about Annaleigh Ashford? Fell in love with her as a performer in Dog Fight, became obsessed with her in Kinky Boots, she was the highlight of You Can't Take It With You and here she takes her specialty in eccentric roles to a new height. I am sill laughing as I describe her performance to friends. Subtle at times broad when going in for the big laughs, tender and tuff at times but never mean. She has solidified my unconditional love with this show and I will never be able to hear someone say "Hey!" again without thinking of her and laughing.

 

I am kicking myself for not having seen Sylvia the first time around. I think I was on Gurney overload and his wasp central comedy writing - this is probably his most accessible and global piece so I completely understand how it became a commercial venture. The play feels timeless though set in 90's vs Clever Little Lies which I also saw yesterday which is a new play that felt as if it were written more than 20 years ago. 

 

[macnyc]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 9:37pm

I agree 100% with the points made by Patash, GoldenBoy and Up in One. I saw the matinee today and found Sylvia hilarious. Great performances. This was a very pleasant surprise!

Updated On: 10/25/15 at 09:37 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 10:14pm

I was at the matinee today as well and was so surprised with just how much I enjoyed this. Even though act two dragged a bit and Broderick was the same as he's always been, the rest of the cast really shines, especially Ashford in another astounding performance. She's brilliant. 

[mc1227]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 10:28pm

It would appear that based on many of the recent comments on this board, there may have been some tightening up during the previews that is making this play more enjoyable.  I saw it early in previews and while I enjoyed the performances, I thought it was too long for the substance of the story.   I look forward to seeing it again on opening night.  

[little_sally]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 12:13pm

I saw this last night and thought it was very cute and charming but also very enjoyable. Laughed a bunch of times. The second act did begin to drag a bit but I really liked Ashford, White, and Broderick. I found Sella obnoxious as Phyllis and Leslie but liked him as Tom.

[Patash]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 12:29pm

"I found Sella obnoxious as Phyllis and Leslie but liked him as Tom."

 

Oh, so you really liked him in all three roles?  Phyllis is supposed to be obnoxious as is Leslie.  I guess Sella did a perfect job then.

[ClydeBarrow]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 12:53pm

I had very low expectations going into this show because I'm not a big AR Gurney fan and I don't think Matthew Broderick should be allowed on a stage unless his actually supposed to play a lifeless corpse. Reading some other reviews I'm honestly perplexed because I hated this so much. To call the play slight is being very generous. It's mind-boggling that the audience is made to suffer through this for 2 hours and 15 mins.

 

I'll admit that Annaleigh Ashford is amazing...but she always is (and I've seen her in a lot). Part of me is beginning to think she's a little one note and maybe should try her hand at something else. She's great on Masters of Sex and I think she should try something more like that on stage. Julie White, who I LOVE, has been making some very poor choices lately and I found this to be another one of them. I really wanted to like her but the character is written as such a bitch that I couldn't. Her last minute convenient change of heart was just aggravating. I honestly don't think I could have disliked Robert Sella more when he was playing Phyllis and Leslie. The whole audience is hysterical and I couldn't for the life of me understand why. I think it's a pretty cheap device (and slightly offensive) to just be like "here's a guy in a dress" or "we can't tell if he's a man or a woman" so let's laugh at him. Matthew Broderick was the same flat performance we've come to expect. He seemed slightly more alive last night but probably because it was a press performance and he wanted to give it the old 10%.

 

Like others have said, this thing is ENTIRELY too long. The scenes with Sella's characters want to come across like this play has something to say but it really doesn't. Just make it a straight up comedy without notions of gender identity and sex defining qualities and whatever else. If all of those scenes had been removed then maybe it would have been slightly more palatable. The epilogue comes out of left field and kind of feels like it negates the scene before where Kate has her change of heart.

 

The set and lighting were so whatever. 

 

I would probably only recommend this to hardcore dog people because that's who seemed to enjoy it (and tear up) around me. You could also go for Ashford's performance but leave at intermission because you're not missing anything in the second act.

Posted: 10/27/15 at 3:33pm

Updated On: 10/27/15 at 03:33 PM

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 6:12pm

 

I would probably only recommend this to hardcore dog people because that's who seemed to enjoy it (and tear up) around me. You could also go for Ashford's performance but leave at intermission because you're not missing anything in the second act.

 

I am not a dog person at all ...but I loved the show. It was maybe a little long in act 2 but I had a great time and everyone who I know who saw it already did as well (and only a couple of dog lovers in the bunch).

 

[Keiichi2]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 6:37pm

As others have said, I think this show is tightening in previews, because I saw it less than 2 weeks ago, and loved it.  I'm a cat person myself, but I loved this, and I think almost anyone who has built a special bond with a pet or any kind of animal can relate to this story.

 

Does Act 2 drag a little?  As others have said, yes.  But, I found it to be delightful, and I hope it does well with critics and audiences during its run.

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 6:44pm

Limelight Mike started a Reviews thread already. No need to rename.

[Patash]

Posted: 10/28/15 at 8:04am

"You could also go for Ashford's performance but leave at intermission because you're not missing anything in the second act."

It's always such a good idea to go see an actor do only half a play then go out and brag that you saw that actor's performance.   How incredibly rude and unfair -- whether your "review" of that performance is good or bad -- you really didn't see it.