First Preview Jerusalem?

[CATheaterLover]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 11:27am

Is anyone going to the first preview of Jerusalem tonight? Eager to hear something about this production. Considering going on my trip later this month.

Let us know what you think!

[peijenna]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 11:47am

Did anyone try the Rush this morning?

[Noel&Cole]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 1:55pm

I'm curious to see this but still feel like it maybe way to British. I wonder if it will resonate for American audiences in this same way.

I'm sure Mark will be wonderful just as he was in LA BETE. But that didn't seem to matter to the public at large,

[April Saul]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 1:59pm

And re: the rush, could anyone who uses it or attends the show let us know how high the stage is? Thanks much....

[djb]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 2:11pm

I was at the final dress rehearsal last night and I must say it is quite fantastic. The production is incredibly solid already. I cannot imagine that Rylance hasn't secured his second Tony with this performance. I was in awe of the range he plays in this production. The best part is that the rest of the cast is just as amazing as he is. Mackenzie Crook is especially great and so is Geraldine Hughes as Dawn, whose scene with Rylance was one of the best in the show.

I sat right in front of a group of pretentious assholes who spent the intermissions trying to rape the show for some higher meaning. My advice is just to let the production happen because it all comes together and plays out incredibly by the end.

I have more to say about the production but I can't think of it all right now.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 2:18pm

This play is right around 4 hours long, isn't it?

[vegas2]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 2:18pm

Thanks for this report, djb. I'm so glad you enjoyed this show. I saw it in London and was totally transported by it. Especially Mark Rylance! I already have my ticket to see it again.

[tking001]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 2:43pm

My friend rushed this morning and got AA105

[djb]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 4:56pm

It was just over 3 hours hours with the two intermissions.

[April Saul]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 10:39pm

tking, can you ask your friend if first row is okay with the height of the stage? It really seems to me like a lot of the stages are getting built up a bit and are higher than ever, at least from the perspective of a shorty like me :-p

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/2/11 at 11:55pm

Saw this tonight and can't quite say I really got it- I saw it in London last year and can't say I really got it there either- it's all metaphoric hooey but there are some wonderful performances by a strong ensemble and a few moments of very nice scenework. Rylance is brilliant as always. The play is grounded in very strong English roots which I think ultimately will polarize Nee York audiences. I noted several walk outs but definitely an enthusiastic curtain call.

[LaCageAuxFollesFan]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 12:14am

What a perplexing experience that was. I can't really say it's an enjoyable evening of theatre. I can't really say it's an awful evening of theatre either. Agreed that it's so deeply rooted in a British sensibility that it's really hard to appreciate. What is easy to appreciate is the strong ensemble that ultimately make this play tolerable to sit through. Honestly though, if it wasn't for Mark Rylance, I think it would have been pretty torturous. 3 hours and 10 minutes with 2 intermissions felt like an eternity here. I have no problem with a good 3 hour show (AUGUST OSAGE COUNTY & THE ROYAL FAMILY flew by for me), but this one just sort of staggered about. I've seen many plays worse than this, but I've also seen MUCH, MUCH better.
Updated On: 4/3/11 at 12:14 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 12:25am

I confess I find a lot of the play kind of boring as well- it's got a set up and a cast of colorful characters befitting a Martin McDonough play but isn't ultimately as satisfying or funny or engaging.

It may end up being a case of love it/ hate it-- but the British folk roots are a big underpinning to the evenings proceedings for sure

[LaCageAuxFollesFan]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 12:46am

It's an extremely talky British piece, that's for sure. I certainly won't be surprised if some people do love it. But, I don't expect it to be everyone's cup of tea either.

I don't even know if I'd throw this in the 4th slot for Best Play regarding the Tony's this season. GOOD PEOPLE would get my vote with WAR HORSE coming in second and BENGAL TIGER in third. I definitely enjoyed my experiences at BRIEF ENCOUNTER & THE PITMEN PAINTERS more than JERUSALEM. But, thanks to the acting, it's certainly a better experience than I had at MOTHERF*CKER.

[April Saul]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 12:51am

YIKES!! Can British sensibilities be that different than those of American theater geeks? LOL...I mean they have called this one of the best plays of the century, and now I'm thinking it's might bore me. Not that I'm giving up, but I guess I will try to be well-rested for this one.

[jbm2]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 1:13am

LaCageAuxFollesFan- What about HIGH or HOUSE OF BLUE LEAVES for the 4th spot?

[theaterkid1015]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 1:14am

Was also at the final dress last night. Rylance is incredible, rest of the ensemble very strong as well. Really impressed by Mackenzie Crook.

I feel like the play might have trouble in the States because (even as someone who liked it) I don't know/care all that much about St. George's Day or the English countryside. I would guess those things hold more meaning to a British audience.

I'd still say go. Yes, it's long, but I find parts of it totally fascinating and love the bits of magic he throws in.

[rentheadca]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 1:19am

I sat in the front row and the stage wasn't high at all! But it smells like grass and stuff up there. Sometimes it's good and sometimes it's terrible. You also get wet from the front. It was definitely worth the $26.50!
I really enjoyed some parts of the show, but some parts took way too long. They could cut out a few of Rylance's characters bs stories and it would be much shorter. Overall though I'm very happy I went tonight!

[Jyn326]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 1:28am

Any thoughts on John Gallagher, Jr's performance?

[rentheadca]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 1:42am

John Gallagher Jr. had a more believable accent than I thought he would! I felt his character was a lot like Johnny in American Idiot since in both he's getting away from his current situation. It kind of felt like the same John with a different name. He did a good job and fit in well.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 8:02am

House of Blue Leaves is a revival not a new play.

For those concerned about the British roots being an obstacle to your enjoyment I would recommend reading up a little bit on St George Day and the hymmm Jerusalem which has a sort of mythic symbolism for much of rural England. There are also notes in in the playbill.

Ultimately, I get the symbolism but I just don't really care: Rooster represents the salt of the earth untamed Rural Englishman confronted by encroaching development of the 'tribal' county forest, while the St George Day fair looms in the distance. There is a mythic element to Roosters storytelling that is appealing- and one of rhe final scenes with SPOILER the missing teenage fair queen during the final minutes of her rein is in itself haunting and beautiful- but ultimately the symbolism for what Roosters character and the falling land represent isn't all that interesting to me.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 8:16am

I dont get this whole 'british' thing which ive heard so many times when a UK show opens up on Broadway. UK audiences never have any problem understanding US plays that are grounded in US Polotics, history etc so why does the problem seem to happen when its the other way?

[peachesr]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 8:28am

^^^Thank-you! I was just going to say that myself! As a Brit, I have never struggled with a play set around uniquely American sensibilities.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 8:30am

It's not a question, for me at least, of understanding- it's a question of being emotionally invested. I can see, perhaps in the case of this particular play, how the patriotic and mythic underpinnings would resonate emotionally greater with UK audiences. Jerusalem as a hymn has deep significance there with many clamoring for it to become the British national anthem. Most Americans have never heard of it. And for a play like Jerusalem which is ultimately
Symbolism over plot that is undoubtedly going to play into American audiences affinity for the piece.


Updated On: 4/3/11 at 08:30 AM

[CurtainCall]

Posted: 4/3/11 at 9:11am

I should have thought that all that was required to be emotionally invested in this, or indeed any, play, would be a degree of empathy. There is little or no requirement to have any knowledge of or interest in English patriotism or myth. It maybe set in England, and a specific part of that as well, but the themes are so universal, that they transcend the location.