1984 Previews — Page 3

Saw with my 16 year old, my second viewing (ART).

I still can't say I LIKED it,  but I hold that you aren't suppose to like it. It was disturbing and thought provoking - which, I believe, it's meant to be.

I had one couple leave during the torture scene, (what seemed to be) a ten year old girl and her mum. Tbe rest if tneir party stayed,  i cluding a slightly older child. 

A shout out to the box office here: I discovered I booked both our shows on Saturday, for 8pm (long story for how I think that happened) at lunch.  Raced to the box office to see if they might switch us to the matinee (other tix were for Indecent through TDF).  Box office attendant could not have been nicer. I was certainly willing to take ANY seats available, but he took a few minutes and found us a pair that were similar to our original seats...even a row closer and slightly more center! Disappointed to see the same man wasn't in the booth on our way out to thank him again.

Character choice.

Saw this past Saturday matinee. I was nervous me and my girlfriend wouldn't enjoy it based on some of the reviews, but I've got to say we both LOVED it. I enjoyed the lighting and sound effects. The set design, especially towards the end of the production, was some of the coolest and most creative I've seen on stage. I really have to give it to the whole team for making a show I truly loved. It did make me sad that I saw a whole bunch of empty seats in the balcony. Checked tickets out online and seems to be selling about 30%. I feel terrible for them, all actors really on a good show, especially Wilde and Sturridge. Hope it sells better soon.

In some 35 - 40 years of theatre-going, this has to be the worst thing I have ever seen (with a close second being Robert Altman's production of Arthur Miller's Resurrection Blues at The Old Vic, London, which at least was amusingly terrible). Saw it last summer in the West End at The Playhouse and am kind of relieved to see posters here generally disliking it, given the across the board great reviews it received in the UK. Should a play about torture genuinely torture the audience? I don't think so. Someone upthread mentioned "cheap scares" which implies there are several when, in fact, there is only one: that repetitive flashing of light with annoying sound effect, over and over and over and over. It was so inconsiderate of the audience - it gave me a migraine and I had to see a osteopath a few days after to release all the tension and pain in my back from being physically startled in an already uncomfortable seat. The production is terrible and lacks any real insight into how to present this material. All it did was push this audience member further and further away from it. I would've left after about 25 minutes if I hadn't been with out of town guests, who ultimately were kind of confused and mystified by the production.

Ultimately, it is the Orwell brand that sells this show, dependent on young theatre-goers who likely do not know any better how basic (and bad) this production is. It certainly isn't to do with anything happening on the stage. Avoid at all costs.

thealtoslament said: "Ok, reading all this, I'm slightly confused. Is there some sort of framing device? It's not just a straight adaptation of the novel?"

The show starts and ends with some sort of book club, comprising several members of the cast who also play other roles in the actual story, and they're discussing the book and whether any of it actually happens. They do this for the first several minutes, until Winston eventually pushes the action into the novel's story, and they return at the end after the Room 101 sequence.

 

dramamama611 said: "Gosh, I really hate posts like soneil's.    You are absolutely free to discuss your distaste of this show (any show), certainly....but to suggest that it should be "avoided at all costs is preposterous.  As you can see from reading thread (which you likely did not) there are many people that DON'T feel the way you do, and therefore, there will be others.

 

So....let's chock this up to another newbie with the sole desire to rant.

 

Please, don't make this about me. Post your own review. All I can say is: you have been warned.

 

The show starts and ends with some sort of book club, comprising several members of the cast who also play other roles in the actual story, and they're discussing the book and whether any of it actually happens. They do this for the first several minutes, until Winston eventually pushes the action into the novel's story, and they return at the end after the Room 101 sequence.

But it's more than just a framing device that lasts a few minutes. Winston spends a good chunk of the first half of the play wandering around in slack-jawed confusion.

I admit, I didn't get it. And my confusion about Winston's confusion made it really hard for me to connect to him as a character. And since I didn't care about him much as a character, the torture scenes just seemed gratuitous.

Updated On: 6/15/17 at 05:20 PM

dramamama611 said: "Gosh, I really hate posts like soneil's.    You are absolutely free to discuss your distaste of this show (any show), certainly....but to suggest that it should be "avoided at all costs is preposterous.  As you can see from reading thread (which you likely did not) there are many people that DON'T feel the way you do, and therefore, there will be others.

 

So....let's chock this up to another newbie with the sole desire to rant."

Also, he/she is reviewing a UK (one of many that are playing/have played there) and not the current version running on Broadway.  Reed Birney alone can improve ANY production.

Disagreeing with YOUR tactics is not bullying. On any planet. But again, you are assuming that you have the only correct opinion....an opinion I specifically said you have your right to have.  So exactly where am I bullying you?

 

Seems to me that soneil did nothing out of line. He expressed dislike for the show. Some of you seem very defensive. 

carnzee said: "Seems to me that soneil did nothing out of line. He expressed dislike for the show. Some of you seem very defensive."

Maybe you're right. I guess I've read so many "No one should ever see this, because if you have half a brain you couldn't possibly enjoy it, and it needs to close immediately" dissertations around here that I've grown trigger-happy with anything that approaches telling me what I should/should not enjoy. Honestly, I think I was okay until soneil's "Avoid at all costs" closer. 

Finally got the chance to see this tonight with 5 other friends (2 of whom I didn't know were at the same performance but found out when we got together after the show -- What a coincidence! But I digress...).

My friends' and my collective thoughts:

•  We were all sitting in the balcony (most of us in the second to last row), yet we still felt the sound and strobe light effects were incredibly strong -- for some way too strong (not to mention repetitive).

•  We felt the show was very heavy-handed and were disappointed in the playwrights' decision to hit you over the head with concepts, themes, and intense sensory experiences over creating an environment in which: (1) more is left to the imagination and (2) viewers could chew on the ideas being presented.  I know, I know -- it's a theatrical adaptation, not the novel itself; but we still felt the play was too on the nose when it could have been more nuanced.

•  It goes without saying that viewer discretion is strongly advised for this play.  Even so, one may not be fully prepared for the truly graphic nature of the Room 101 scene and one of the earlier video scenes.  Also, the time spent on the Room 101 scene was not insignificant (at least that's the way it came across).

Some additional thoughts from just me:

•  You'll want to read, at least, the Wikipedia summary of 1984 before going in to see the show.  You'll probably be able get by without preparation, but you may not appreciate (or follow) the play as well.

•  Reed Birney was the best actor on stage, by far.

•  Apart from the fantastic Reed Birney, the play's strongest asset is its set design.  I found it to be absolutely stunning.

•  I found the play to be quite perplexing in that it alternated between long, wordy scenes that bored me to death and massively intense sequences that assaulted my senses.  I felt the playwrights' adaptation of Orwell's themes and plot points into script format was quite haphazardly executed.

•  As one poster mentioned before, there were some lengthy scenes in which I questioned whether I was paying live theatre prices for what seemed like a movie being projected onto the stage.

•  The book club sub-plot (if you can even call it that) felt quite unnecessary, unless...

Updated On: 6/18/17 at 01:35 AM

hork said: ""Avoid at all costs" is extremely common review rhetoric. When did it suddenly become offensive?"

Who said it was offensive?