Breakfast At Tiffanys Is Closing THIS Sunday- Page 4

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/21/13 at 3:28pm

Cheesey -- what did you lie about?

You told us you saw the show and now you say you are in it. Either you lied in the first because you led us to believe you were an audience member or you are lying now saying you are in the cast.



Look about 9 or 10 posts up and read Wynbish's post where he quoted a previous post you made.

Oh, and I don't resort to PMs to confront someone.

Updated On: 4/21/13 at 03:28 PM

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 4/21/13 at 11:06pm

I was at the closing performance this afternoon, and I agree that it was far too long and very slow. But I would be lying if I said I thought it was a disaster. I certainly didn't think it was good, but I wouldn't say it was a complete and total travesty.

Firstly, there is Emilia Clarke, who made an absolutely ravishing Broadway debut in this production. I don't watch GAME OF THRONES, so I had no idea what to expect from her. And I was extremely impressed with her performance...and her lovely, lovely singing voice. I thought she had wonderful stage presence and I just wished she was in a stronger production.

Cory Michael Smith was fine, even if his accent was all over the place. He and Clarke did have good chemistry and played off of each other very well. George Wendt was clearly just there for his check.

Anyway, the whole thing was way too dark and dreary to look at the entire time, and the slow, incredibly uninspired direction didn't help things. The costumes were fantastic. And every problem I had with the writing itself echoed everyone else's (too much narration, too much focus on Fred, plenty of scenes could have been cut, extremely poor pacing, etc etc). But I was so taken with Clarke that she alone made the whole thing worthwhile. More than anything, this production was a snoozer, with a severe lack of charm and wit. But it certainly wasn't the worst thing I've seen this season. Updated On: 4/21/13 at 11:06 PM

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 4/21/13 at 11:15pm

I saw the show Thursday night and have to admit that I found the whole evening to be rather flat and dull. There didn't seem to be any levels to the acting, just a straight line of nothingness throughout the entire piece. The sad part is that the two leads both seemed to have a natural charisma that was just there waiting for a better director and/or script to really make them shine. The potential was there but I felt nothing was done with it.

All in all after seeing it I was not surprised that it failed to draw in the audiences.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 4/21/13 at 11:23pm

Agreed about the production's dullness.

I really hope Clarke comes back to Broadway soon though! ...In a show and production worthy of her talent and charisma. I was thinking afterwards, if she could sing the score, I would love to see her take on Eliza Dolittle.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/21/13 at 11:58pm

It wasn't as boring as THE PHILANTHROPIST but it was close.

[Copperfield2]

Posted: 4/22/13 at 1:01am

This show kind of reminded me of a Roundabout production, trying too hard to be tasteful and appeal to an unadventurous audience. It's surprising because the director helmed a very good production called Indiscretions on Broadway years ago with Jude Law.

I liked the chemistry between the two leads though I thought Clarke seemed too young for the role. And it's a shame that the title never gained true significance in the play.

I think Greenberg is a highly overrated playwright and this adaptation didn't convince otherwise.

But I don't think the show was a disaster by any means. Maybe this was the opportunity to turn the show into a play with songs rather than a full-blown musical.

[PlayItAgain]

Posted: 4/22/13 at 2:05am

this show was a ****ing wreck, and by far the worst play ive seen since I've lived here. And the blame falls squarely on the director, producers, and richard greenberg, the first act felt like the theatrical equivalent of getting my teeth pulled.

[suestorm]

Posted: 4/22/13 at 8:36am

i went to see the show this weekend and i hate to say it, i was a bit disappointed and bored. Emilia and Cory though were not the problem. Emilia is just mesmerizing as the NY Times i think said, and wow is she beautiful. I was never bored when she was on stage. That being said i really enjoyed Corey as well, even though there was too much narration from his character.

some other thoughts

I agree with the poster above, George Wendt was cashing it in, and geez he is unhealthily fat

i think they might have drugged Cat. she seemed very lethargic, and in one scene one of the party members had to carry her off the stage.

All the talk of Emilia being nude, i was quite shocked with Corys the full frontal nudity! as was my 15 year old sister! I will say, though he is quite blessed!

I wasnt a fan of the sets. the sliding projection screens were pretty annoying.

Both my sister and I noticed a lot of men all by themselves. i have never seen that before and it was kind of creepy.

EMilia should def do a musical, she sang twice and has a lovely voice. I do hope she comes back to Broadway, i was never bored when she was on stage. i think she was the best part of the play.

the house seemed packed and im guessing they were selling tix even as the show started. there were a lot of late arrivals which was very annoying for me, i can only imagine what it was like for the actors.

Updated On: 4/22/13 at 08:36 AM