INFINITE LIFE at Atlantic Theater Company

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 8/19/23 at 11:44am

Was on here at the first preview yesterday? Curious about this one.

[MarilynMonroeSmash]

Posted: 8/19/23 at 2:42pm

There are some positive reviews on Show Score from last night. I’m going tomorrow.

 

https://www.show-score.com/off-broadway-shows/infinite-life

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 8/19/23 at 7:08pm

Saw Circle Mirror Transformation 11+ years ago and quite liked it.  Never saw The Flick but remembering how critically lauded it was -  and also how polarizing it was amongst friends. 

Really curious about this - given that it is a co-production with National Theatre also puts it on the top of the want to see list.

Curious to reactions

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 8/23/23 at 1:25am

MarilynMonroeSmash said: "There are some positive reviews on Show Score from last night. I’m going tomorrow.



https://www.show-score.com/off-broadway-shows/infinite-life"

oof - there are some infinitely not so great reviews here.  Not all that familiar with show score. should we be?

I really do want to see this but when every comment is mentioning how slow it is...yikes

[ChaseDreams]

Posted: 8/23/23 at 5:36am

I’m having the same concern! Have tickets. I loved The Flick. But that didn’t feel slow to me.

[Sammy232]

Posted: 8/23/23 at 7:55am

Loved the flick and hated this. Acting was great given the material they had to work with as it felt sort of unfinished? I wonder if this is why it kept getting bumped from Signature? Also TW for people with a chronic/serious illness you may find the end upsetting. 

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

In the last scene ( I think it was the last, my brain was so fried by then) two characters have a discussion about how illness is your own fault. Personally, while I didn't feel "triggered" as someone with a medical condition I did find it insulting.

 

[OhHiii]

Posted: 8/23/23 at 9:19am

A playwright famous for 3-4 hour plays about not much at all writing a play with the word INFINITE in the title is quite concerning to me. 

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 8/23/23 at 4:57pm

I'm seeing this tonight. I'll take my chances with anti-drama with moments of epiphany from a talented cast and a brilliant director. It will also keep me from hate-watching the Republican Primary Debates.

Updated On: 8/23/23 at 04:57 PM

[Pashacar]

Posted: 8/23/23 at 10:47pm

Any codes for this floating around?

[Auggie27]

Posted: 8/26/23 at 5:36pm

MILD THEMATIC SPOILER; NO PLOT DETAILS

I've quipped that I’d see Kristine Nielsen in anything. Now I’ve done it. For hard core Baker fans, perhaps an illuminating exercise in what I label poetic photorealism. The staging is docu-reality with cinematic time jump control entrusted to the ostensible protagonist, a 4th wall breaking narrative device that isn't matched by any other stylistic decisions (beyond lighting cues) or acknowledgment that a specific existential slice is being presented in a theater. But this piece is not for anyone demanding incremental movement in storytelling - and I include fans of The Flick, which has a decided thrust in charting banal quotidian crises among movie buffs stuck in dead-end jobs. An ending arrives here but without enough setup or resolution to satisfy. Yes, the theme is the poignant irresolution of a chronic symptom; happy endings are not expected to be in the offing for these beleaguered sufferers. Yet the play has too little to add to any discussion, despite being larded with baroque clinical minutiae. {Some of which earns a medically valid trigger warning, and I'm not one prone to make such calls; I witnessed 4 walkouts in the first 30 minutes, one visibly disturbed}.

Kirk stands out necessarily and works the hardest, though two of her biggest moments are in the pitch dark (a point raised in prior posts); Nielsen is almost tragically underutilized; and the eccentric and beloved Burke, alas is often inaudible, including a critical scene which determines audience's ability to tease out a takeaway - a big discussion on its head-scratcher content ensued outside the Atlantic, centered on Burke's maddening sotto voce performance and the play's languid pacing. But the whole cast, stellar to a person, has too little to play; nothing feels excavated beyond a top textual layer, we wait in vain for surprising depths. A play that will "divide" audiences, to be sure. But many on the negative side this time may be Baker's fiercest defenders. The best I can say: this at times literally dark cavern of ineffable agony just feels unfinished.

 

 

Updated On: 8/26/23 at 05:36 PM

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 8/26/23 at 6:19pm

Auggie said it more eloquently than I could have.

This is all a great idea for a play, and there's a version of it that could be quite cathartic and meaningful, but I found it both shallow and a tough sit. Nielsen is given nothing to do here.

I wonder how it all might have been handled by a different director. I found the playing of night-time scenes in full darkness to be kind of infuriating, especially because they were all followed by blinding light when night switched to day. Another director might have found more levels for the actors to play, too, instead of everything being delivered almost ASMR-style.

The pedigree of the National being attached kind of dumbfounded me, but even our best institutions can whiff.

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 8/26/23 at 7:48pm

Was looking forward to this but have not heard anything remotely positive- between this board and friends - that would persuade me to sit through this.  

[RippedMan]

Posted: 8/26/23 at 8:43pm

Truly have never understood the universal praise for this playwright and I'm someone who loves a slice of life movie or book, but for some reason just find it kind of plodding on stage.

[JoeW4]

Posted: 8/26/23 at 8:46pm

Well, I guess I'll be the dissenter and say that I found this to be a solid offering from both Baker and MacDonald - an unlikely team that I actually thought worked together surprisingly well. I definitely felt MacDonald leaning into a Baker style more than the other way around, but that's as it should be, IMO.

If you don't like Annie Baker's style, then yeah, I'm not going to try to convince you to see this. It is what it is. It's slow, it's extremely understated, etc. If that's not your vibe, that's not your vibe, and you can probably skip this one.

But I think this is in the same ballpark of quality as the other pieces I've seen from her. I'll agree that it doesn't land on any firm message or catharsis, and maybe it did need that to hit "next level" status. But to me, the play was still successful as a meditation on the interplay between physical pain and physical pleasure co-existing in the same body, and how that affects different people emotionally and psychologically in different ways. I found it discomforting at times, but also quite funny; because of the understated approach, small moments of reaction from the older woman -- just a little turn of the head, or a meaningful pause, or a throwaway line delivery -- frequently had me laughing out loud.

Updated On: 8/26/23 at 08:46 PM

[Auggie27]

Posted: 8/27/23 at 8:14am

PLOT SPOILER

Someone argued that I didn't "get" the non-linear, non-Aristotelian model of the story structure. But actually, that's not an accurate analysis of the text's conventions. Baker resorts to an entirely linear and decidedly old-fashioned storytelling mechanism: the stranger comes to town and alters both the landscape and the thrust of a character's 

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

Once the shirtless man appears, and is eroticized by the other characters, creating sexual and dramatic tension, it's clear that he'll change the landscape and lives of at least one person. Which he does. The conclusion could not be reached without his arrival, his interaction, and the resulting cascade of epiphanies. This is in the tradition of, say, Hal Carter in Picnic, and in this tale, from plot functionary terms alone, he has the same general impact. This is hardly a criticism, only a comment that Baker - considering her reputation for being a stylistic iconoclast - resorts to the same (here very much needed) conventions as other dramatists, not offering a merely meditative observation on her theme.

 

I say, it's good news here, since the play spins repetitively and rather mundanely - albeit observing unities, both in setting and time, as hours tick by because the dramatic circumstance is defined by day counts -- until that point.  Baker instinctively crafted a play that's, well, still a craft adherent piece of theater.  

Updated On: 8/27/23 at 08:14 AM

[InTheBathroom1]

Posted: 8/27/23 at 10:11am

Also didn’t really care for this.  I have read a few of Baker’s plays and liked them quite a bit, but something about seeing one of her plays for the first time left me a little bored.  There’s some great acting happening here and great moments/scenes but it doesn’t really add up to much for me.  The slow pace (which I understand is intentional) drags on for so long.  Half of those scenes being in the dark doesn’t help either as it is easy to get a little sleepy.

Also, the two guys sitting behind me last night were definitely pleasuring each other during one of the dark scenes. 

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 8/27/23 at 10:39am

InTheBathroom1 said: "Also, the two guys sitting behind me last night were definitely pleasuring each other during one of the dark scenes."

 

I love immersive theatre.

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 8/27/23 at 8:34pm

InTheBathroom1 said: "Also didn’t really care for this. I have read a few of Baker’s plays and liked them quite a bit, but something about seeing one of her plays for the first time left me a little bored. There’s some great acting happening here and great moments/scenes but it doesn’t really add up to much for me. The slow pace (which I understand is intentional) drags on for so long. Half of those scenes being in the dark doesn’t help either as it is easy to get a little sleepy.

Also, the two guys sitting behind me last night were definitely pleasuring each other during one of the dark scenes.

 

We kinda need to hear more about this.  How could you tell?

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 9/5/23 at 2:24am

Updated On: 9/6/23 at 02:24 AM

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 9/5/23 at 7:57am

I enjoyed Infinite Life quite a bit. It’s shaggier than Annie Baker’s other plays, though more focused than The Antipodes. I didn’t find it grim or too graphic at all; I actually found it rather light-hearted and hopeful. In particular, the final scene between Marylouise Burke and Christina Kirk was incredibly touching. Elsewhere, the rest of the ladies in the ensemble (Kristine Nielsen, naturally, being the standout) find ample humor in their circumstances, and even just sitting in reclining chairs, they punctuate every moment with a subtle glance or a tilt of the head. And thanks to Baker’s trust in the power of silence and pause, they’re just as vital as the moments of dialogue.

There’s not much plot to speak of: a group of women sit on the back patio of a fasting treatment center and ponder their lives and ailments. But where there is a lack of plot, there’s an abundance of potent humanity.

Its certainly not going to be everyone’s cup of tea, but if you - like me - think John is a masterpiece and agree that Baker is one of our finest working playwrights, there’s much there to recommend.

[BoringBoredBoard40]

Posted: 9/9/23 at 12:06am

I rather enjoyed this even if it sags a bit in the last twenty minutes.

I don't understand why people keep saying there is no plot, it is pretty straightforward "A woman goes to a treatment center for a period of time and discovers things about herself and meets other patients and learns about them and their stories along the way"

thousands of plays exist like this 

a wonderful cast and a very funny script. and this is ironically the shortest play she has written in like a decade

[RippedMan]

Posted: 9/9/23 at 1:44am

ColorTheHours048 said: "I enjoyed Infinite Life quite a bit. It’s shaggier than Annie Baker’s other plays, though more focused than The Antipodes. I didn’t find it grim or too graphic at all; I actually found it rather light-hearted and hopeful. In particular, the final scene between Marylouise Burke and Christina Kirkwas incredibly touching. Elsewhere, the rest of the ladies in the ensemble (Kristine Nielsen, naturally, being the standout) find ample humor in their circumstances, and even just sitting in reclining chairs, they punctuate every moment with a subtle glance or a tilt of the head. And thanks to Baker’s trust in the power of silence and pause, they’re just as vital as the moments of dialogue.

There’s not much plot to speak of: a group of women sit on the back patio of a fasting treatment center and ponder their lives and ailments. But where there is a lack of plot, there’s an abundance of potent humanity.

Its certainly not going to be everyone’s cup of tea, but if you - like me - think John is a masterpiece and agree that Baker is one of our finest working playwrights, there’s much there to recommend."

Why do you think John is a masterpiece? Not looking for an argument but really curious! I’ve never been taken by a Baker play so feel like it’s just no resonating with me. 

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 9/9/23 at 8:58am

Re: why I think John is a masterpiece - It balances so many different genres and tones masterfully. It’s a drawing room comedy; a relationship drama; a (possibly) supernatural meditation on loneliness; a slow-creeping horror; hyper-realistic one second, then sharply theatrical the next. It’s Albee by way of David Lynch. And all the while, she’s slipping in these beautiful snippets of the human condition.

You have to tune into her radio frequency to enjoy her work. I don’t think all of her experimentation pays off in her plays - I think The Flick spends too much time in “meaningful silence” and not enough time on why I should care about these characters, and I think The Antipodes is clearly a response to Baker’s pressure to write a new play just because she was told to and it shows - but in John, it all clicks together perfectly to construct a very strange, human, funny, spooky play about people who are stuck.

Updated On: 9/9/23 at 08:58 AM

[JoeW4]

Posted: 9/9/23 at 9:46am

I liked John quite a bit as well.

But I'm in the minority as someone who thought that The Antipodes was maybe the most ambitious and gripping play she's written.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/9/23 at 11:18am

I am the first to say: I won't talk you out of your rave, so don't talk me out of my reservations. Mentioned because this play seems to provoke a certain amount of "You just don't understand Baker, particularly her silence." I do understand both the Baker oeuvre and her reliance on pauses.  I'm a fan of silence in the theater, particularly when so much direction seems presentational, characters cheating down and out performatively (which I thought overcooked Goodnight, Oscar, at least its first hour, and robbed the final 30 minutes -- the genuinely performative section of the play, the Paar Show - of its contrasting rewards; the whole play felt like a TV show to me, thanks to that push in the direction...)

But silence - to be golden - must arrive between textual content that illuminates, engages, electrifies, unsettles. Silence for silence sake can be a deadly drag on momentum, whether a structural framework has a suspense line or not (and this play decidedly does, once the male character appears and introduces Eros as a component of both pain and healing.)  Silence without substance can feel like a sandwich without a filling: two pieces of toast.  

This play is ambitious and thoughtful but to me still under realized, pauses and silence fully endorsed for their ability to weight human experience and their depiction in the theater.