Jonathan Pryce & Eileen Atkins ‘ HEIGHT OF THE STORM Coming To Broadway

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/6/19 at 11:47am

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Official-Jonathan-Pryce-and-Eileen-Atkins-Will-Lead-THE-HEIGHT-OF-THE-STORM-on-Broadway-20190206

I saw this a couple months ago in London and its very...interesting. Im curious to see what American audiences think of this - even the ushers at the theatre said they dont know what to make of it and go back and forth over what it means.

Updated On: 2/6/19 at 11:47 AM

[zainmax]

Posted: 2/6/19 at 12:12pm

I'll see pretty much anything with Jonathan Pryce!

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 2/6/19 at 12:34pm

I skipped this on my last London trip (saw the Inheritance a second time instead) because everyone told me it was just confusing and while they're both terrific neither performance was must-see. This seems very strange to transfer.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/6/19 at 12:38pm

Don’t get me wrong, the play completely devestated me. The lights came up and I just sat there, sobbing. But I don’t exactly understand it. And the more I think about it I wonder if that’s kind of the point.

[zainmax]

Posted: 2/6/19 at 1:17pm

Why does MTC keep on doing so many British shows?

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 10/1/19 at 1:48pm

Is there a previews/review thread for this? Got a ticket and I'd like to hear what others are saying.

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 10/1/19 at 3:10pm

I saw this on opening and I thought the two main performances are interesting and the play keeps twisting and turning. My friends and I had a healthy discussion afterwards about what we all got from it.

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 10/1/19 at 3:25pm

SouthernCakes said: "I saw this on opening and I thought the two main performances are interesting and the play keeps twisting and turning. My friends and I had a healthy discussion afterwards about what we all got from it."

I stayed for a talkback afterwards and that was basically the playwright's intention.There is no clear right or wrong, things are thrown in to confuse the audience on purpose like the man with the apple, etc. I thought it was the best work by this writer by far. The talkback was fairly pointless because the audience kept asking variants on the same question essentially wanting a hard yes or no answer to a play that purposefully doesn't have them. The poor actress who plays the daughter had to keep repeating they don't know and she can only play the truth of each moment as it's happening. 

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 10/1/19 at 3:52pm

There was no review thread for this play because no one bothered to start one. I guess people were still too busy debating Slave Play and the casting for Company to even notice this had opened. LOL. There is a brief previews thread that can be searched for.

The critics' reviews overall were mixed to positive with a few negatives. While critics fairly consistently lauded most, if not all of the performances and unanimously praised the two leads, some critics were intrigued by the premise of the play and really enjoyed the twists and turns and the lack of clarity of what was actually happening, while other critics including Jesse Green at the Times just felt the audience was being played with and overly manipulated being pushed in one direction and then being yanked in another, resented that and as a result downgraded their view of the play.

I really enjoyed it. It drew me in and of course Pryce and Atkins were masterful. I wondered while watching it if I was the only one without clarity as to what was actually going on and how to interpret the arrivals, departures and interactions of certain characters. Glad to know I wasn't. We're all so used to plays, movies and especially T.V. shows where everything is neatly wrapped up and every plot point is resolved in the last scene, a show like this is an outlier but of the 11 shows I saw on my recent trip, it's one of the 2 or 3 I was still thinking about days after I saw it and that's not a bad thing. A definite go see it from me if for no other reason than to watch two master actors at the top of their game and there are plenty of other reasons.

[Sauja]

Posted: 10/1/19 at 4:26pm

I took such issue with Green's review of the show. I can understand suggesting that the writing feels gimmicky or that the writer returns to the same themes too often, but I think he vastly undervalued the emotional power of the evening and the appealing lack of certainty around the whole thing (which of course feels intimately intertwined with the subject matter). I don't think it's for everyone, but I loved the show, and Pryce and Atkins are, of course, glorious.

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 10/1/19 at 5:17pm

I’ve never seen Atkins and was very taken with her

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 10/1/19 at 11:02pm

Pryce and Atkins are great. The play is... fine. I feel like I've seen it before. I wouldn't say I was gutted at all or really even all that moved. It was perfectly ok. I think I figured out what was going on, but the writing is extremely gimmicky and this isn't the first time this playwright has written this exact play. It's probably time for some new subject matter. It's a shame that these two legends have returned to star in such a shrug worthy piece.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 10/2/19 at 12:26am

I'm tempted to see this just to see Pryce live but I HATED The Father. Is this play actually about something? Also, are there any jarring stage effects (e.g. periodic bright lights)?

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 10/2/19 at 6:24am

VintageSnarker said: "I'm tempted to see this just to see Pryce live but I HATED The Father. Is this play actually about something? Also, are there any jarring stage effects (e.g. periodic bright lights)?"

I mean, the playwright claims that it's about "love," but all the themes feel so muddled and unspecific (which I understand is the "point" to the play).  He claims that the play is ambiguous.  I would just say that he's writing gimmicky plays that aren't really about much.  Pryce is great (exceptional actually), but the play isn't very good unfortunately.

I don't recall any wild light effects or anything.

[keen on kean]

Posted: 10/2/19 at 4:29pm

I saw this Saturday night, and I found it elegant and intriguing. I am of "a certain age," and I now have friends who are declining mentally, and I see how it changes them but, even more, how it changes their families. I thought this play was amazingly accurate without being clinical, and the relationship between the husband and wife was beautiful. If you are looking for a linear plot, this is not your cup of tea.

Atkins is a treasure. She has such enormous stage presence without effort or showiness.

I was emotionally struck by the performance, and have not stopped thinking about it.

[forgetmenotnyc]

Posted: 10/2/19 at 9:57pm

I found myself ultimately moved by this - but was also nodding off a bit. Not a great play & not a whole lot of scene-work worthy of its stars - but glad to have seen it.

[Skip23]

Posted: 10/3/19 at 10:00pm

My God - if this were any slighter, it would blow away.

SPOILERS

The decline and fall of an alzheimers patient seen from several perspectives.

The twists and turns aren’t that hard to figure out and aren’t very involving.

Over all, a tepid, barely acted evening.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 10/6/19 at 10:34am

I found this play to be a complete regurgitation of The Father, but far less interesting and intriguing. It's the same gimmicks and bag of tricks. 

[keen on kean]

Posted: 10/6/19 at 2:44pm

I didn't see The Father but I suppose my being closer to situations like the one presented makes this much more involving than it might to other audience members. I thought Atkins could not have been more perfect.

It says a lot about me, too, that my two favorite productions so far this season are plays where people say "nothing happens": Betrayal and Storm. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 10/6/19 at 10:41pm

I'm normally one for "production" (big sets, etc), but I've loved both Betrayal and The Height of the Storm. I'd recommend both because they're great conversation pieces. 

[jbm2]

Posted: 10/18/19 at 7:51pm

Thinking of taking a 14 year old to see this....
would it be appropriate ?

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 10/18/19 at 9:56pm

jbm2 said: "Thinking of taking a 14 year old to see this....
would it be appropriate ? "

Yes, but I would recommend against it.  It's not very good.

[jbm2]

Posted: 10/18/19 at 10:20pm

GeorgeandDot said: "jbm2 said: "Thinking of taking a 14 year old to see this....
would it be appropriate ? "

Yes, but I would recommend against it. It's not very good."

Advise against it because it’s not very good? Or because it’s not appropriate for that age?

[keen on kean]

Posted: 10/20/19 at 12:34pm

jbm2 said: "Thinking of taking a 14 year old to see this....
would it be appropriate ?"

It is not an easy play for the audience. It is not told in a linear fashion, and time and point of view change without warning. If the 14 year old is a theater kid, he/she will be intrigued by it, and the acting is brilliant and touching.  If there is a family member going through a decline, it might also be quite painful.

Updated On: 10/20/19 at 12:34 PM