#26
Posted: 6/7/17 at 7:45pm
Most women of a certain age could play this Nora and make it work.
A DOLL'S HOUSE, PART 2 Extends to January 2018 — Page 2
#27
Posted: 6/7/17 at 9:24pm
Okay, it's not going to happen...but couldn't you just see Meryl Streep as Nora???!!
#28
Posted: 6/7/17 at 10:26pm
KJisgroovy said: "Do you think they have a big name replacement lined up? Seems like that might be the only thing that might justify such a long extension. "
I can think of several options. Of course, Meryl would be heaven and the show would certainly run at capacity for as long as she stayed with the show. If she wanted to do Broadway, this is the kind of role that would appeal to her.
But also I could see others in the part: Mary-Louise Parker, Emma Thompson, Laura Linney, and Allison Janney come to mind. Stockard Channing is older, but I would love to see what she could do, Sally Field, too, for that matter.
Updated On: 6/7/17 at 10:26 PM
#29
Posted: 6/7/17 at 10:29pm
I'd buy a ticket to see Mary-Louise Parker as Nora in less than a second.
#30
Posted: 6/7/17 at 11:42pm
I just got back from a trip to NYC, during which I saw 9 shows. All 9 got SOs, which are meaningless at this point. The thing that was interesting to me was that ADHP2 got the least applause at the end off the show by a sizable margin. Part of that was due to the absence of individual bows, but CFA did not have individual bows, nor did OSLO. Not a very scientific barometer, but from 50 years of theatergoing, that generally means something. I will be very surprised if this lasts till 2018 because I suspect that a lot of people are going to be a little disappointed.
Why disappointed? For the same reason that I was. I thought the play was entertaining, the ideas were very challenging, the acting was solid, I was never bored, but I just didn't see it as a full-blown play. It was too pat, an outline for the real thing. I would actually encourage the author to take another look at it, despite its current success, because it could be so much more than it really is.
Nevertheless, I am thinking that it IS going to win the Tony as will Laurie Metcalfe, for three reasons: (1) it is a (rare) surprise, dramatic hit opening at the very end of the season, following disastrous preview business; (2) the midnight show was brilliant marketing; and, (3) for some reason, people seem to think that Metcalf is more overdue for a Tony than Laura Linney, who has the same number of nominations (and whose performance I thought was possibly her best work to date).
#31
Posted: 6/8/17 at 12:45am
Having not seen Linney - I'm beating myself up - I think Metcalf is brilliant. It is what she BRINGS to the material. It's a great show, but I think Metcalf just adds so much heft to the part and is such a brilliant comedic actress. I cannot wait to see her again.
#32
Posted: 6/8/17 at 1:33am
I'm not sure how this play could be "much more than it really is." How pretentious to "encourage" the author to reconsider it. It's an incredible play, deceptively simple, but it'll be studied and written about for ages. An instant classic that also manages to be insanely entertaining. Unlike something like GOD OF CARNAGE (which I enjoyed immensely), this one offers some incisive commentary along with killer jokes.
What age is Nora supposed to be? I was thinking of actresses in their late 50s, early 60s, similar to Metcalf, but if it's more open, then yes, Martha Plimpton and Mary-Louise Parker and Cynthia Nixon and countless of others would be ideal. I'd love to see what Megan Mullally could do with this.
"Some people can thrive and bloom living life in a living room, that's perfect for some people of one hundred and five. But I at least gotta try, when I think of all the sights that I gotta see, all the places I gotta play, all the things that I gotta be at"
#33
Posted: 6/8/17 at 1:42am
I'm not really sure how the fairly incredibly turnaround of the grosses means more than a lukewarm-seeming audience at one performance, but ok. I dont think the show will ever become a massive hit, but it seems inexpensive enough to run that it could do rather well with a decent star. And for whatever it's worth, I know lots of people who have seen this show and raved about it- it has more buzz around it than any of the other Best Play nominees, even if I think it's likely to lose to the overrated Oslo.
I am a firm believer in serendipity- all the random pieces coming together in one wonderful moment, when suddenly you see what their purpose was all along.
#34
Posted: 6/8/17 at 1:51am
Nora is about 30 in A Doll's House so she would be about 45 in Part 2,
Updated On: 6/8/17 at 01:51 AM
#35
Posted: 6/16/17 at 10:03pm
Ever since this announces , I keep thinking that Sally field would be perfect . I'm glad someone mentioned her before. N before people start commenting on age . Sally Field doesn't look her age.
#36
Posted: 6/16/17 at 10:21pm
Frances McDormand would be an ideal Nora.
Tonya Pinkins: Then we had a "Lot's Wife" last June that was my personal favorite. I'm still trying to get them to let me sing it at some performance where we get to sing an excerpt that's gone.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.
#37
Posted: 6/17/17 at 7:45am
While I prefer her in singing roles, Victoria Clark could be interesting in the part.
#38
Posted: 7/1/17 at 12:42am
I think Julie White may be replacing Metcalf. I heard that she pulled out of Assassins at Encores to do a Broadway play...
#39
Posted: 7/1/17 at 8:08pm
Does anyone know when the cast is due to leave?
#40
Posted: 7/1/17 at 8:14pm
Laurie is leaving in August, I believe. And ElphabaGoodman is correct.
#41
Posted: 7/2/17 at 12:38pm
I lowkey wish Carolee Carmello was doing it, since she was originally due to leave Sweeney in August. Excited about Julie White as well.
Caption: Every so often there was a rare moment of perfect balance when I soared above him.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $72
Tickets From $65