A DOLL'S HOUSE, PART 2 previews — Page 2

Who is this elf, who inhabits my mind and my body?/I can't lie, it's myself!/It's the me that was asleep and now wakened with a leap!

I thought of this lyric during one of Metcalf's monologues tonight; I've been listening to A Doll's Life all day in preparation for tonight's preview which my friends and I have been referring to as A Doll's Life: The Play. I admit I entered with much skepticism after seeing a production of A Doll's Life a few years ago and finding the idea a bad one, even though I have an affection for a good deal of the score.

I turned to Mandelbaum for his thoughts- he places the musical in the sub-section "Don't start with a bad/impossible idea"- and has some interesting things to say. He includes a note in the published text (from I assume Comden and Green) that concludes: It is a romantic odyssey of self-realization in the difficult world of 1879, in which she (Nora) rises from the depths of poverty and hopelessness to the heights of glamour, wealth and achievement. Along the way she learns that men as well as women are trapped in the traditions of the world they are born into, and that each person must have the inner strength to stand alone.

Mandelbaum offers this as his own analysis: Why ask what happened to Nora after she slammed the door at the end of A Doll's House? Ibsen's play deliberately ended there, having made its point without needing to go any further.

Having seen what Comden, Green, Grossman and Prince came up with I thought I agreed with this assessment. Do we really need to see George and Martha clean up their living room the following day or watch Blanche's sanatorium adventures- well ok, maybe the latter idea could be fun.

Hnath goes in a COMPLETELY different direction than his predecessors. We don't see Nora's struggles and eventual success that A Doll's Life depicts, but rather we jump to 15 years later when Nora must return home to resolve a matter with Torvald that has come up. This is a plot device that we've seen on every sitcom in the past twenty years: a person has moved on with his or her life, usually wanting to get married or engaged, and right when the audience thinks a happy ending is in store an until now unmentioned ex shows up to let the character know that they're still married because they never signed the divorce papers. Yes, Torvald hasn't signed the divorce papers and Nora's in a pickle because of it.

I won't go into any more of the plot than that, but play is written in modern vernacular the actors have been directed to act as if they're in modern TV show- maybe a hybrid of Mike & Molly, Girls and Friends. There are plenty of genuine laughs; it doesn't get any funnier this season than Houdyshell looking Metcalf dead in the eyes and saying, "Fvck you, Nora!" with impeccable timing.

Metcalf is a true wonder. I think she has a very, very good shot at finally picking up her Tony here. She never leaves the stage and runs the full gamut of emotions A to Z. Rashad and Houdyshell will be nominated in the featured categories. Cooper has the weakest link to me. This one belongs to the women.

I don't think the play says anything as deep or profound as it maybe thinks it does, but it's entertaining and just the right length at 90/95 minutes.

Looks like this year will mark the first time Laurie Metcalfe didn't end up being the sole nominee from her production.

Was there last night, knowing nothing really about the play and had a wonderful time.

The acting was incredible across the board, though Jayne Houdyshell is a damn delight and could genuinely win another featured Tony for this. She has the audience cackling throughout and her comedy is perfectly measured. Rashad is also wonderful and makes some surprising and effective choices in her portrayal. Jayne is more of a steamroller here, so in terms of a Tony win she has the edge, but both women could easily land in the featured category.

I thought Cooper did a great job, though some of his quieter, more emotional moments (particularly in the very beginning) were not quite calibrated right for the stage. He sort of had to ramp up his energy if that makes sense, like it took him a few beats to open his performance up for the theatre. But given that this was the first preview on a play opening cold, he definitely has time to make the necessary adjustments. He shares some beautiful moments with Metcalf.

And Metcalf is just plain awesome. She looks fierce as hell in her costume and has complete command of the stage, which she never leaves. She can expertly switch from comedy to drama on a dime and is having a ball up there. There's a lot to chew on with this character and Id like to go back to see how it evolves, as I imagine it will. She did call line once during a rather tongue twisting monologue towards the end, but she was so "in it" that I was still totally captivated and had no idea she was grabbing for a line. She's truly one of our best actors.

I'm still unsure as to whether I like the ending or not. And with the ending of the original, well...how the hell do you end a thing like this? Cant really discuss anything there w/o spoilers, but I guess I wanted slightly more. In the end, this is all about the actors, and they are immensely entertaining. The play may not be as "profound" as some other weighty dramas this season, but absolutely worth your money.

Updated On: 3/31/17 at 10:27 AM

Did anyone try rush today or yesterday? How's the front row at the Golden?

I didnt sit in the front row, so cant speak specifically as to what the view is. But the stage juts out into the audience. The playing space is square shaped, but turned, so that one of the "points" or "corners" sticks straight out. The front 2 or 3 rows have been adjusted accordingly. You will be right there with the action. There are no higher levels of the set that you would have to look up at. I didnt look at how high the stage is relative to the seats, but dont remember seeing people craning their necks. I think if you enjoy being up close and personal they would be great seats.

I'm not sure how anyone could be surprised that a play called A Doll's House, Part 2 would be funny.

I'm glad for the positive reports, though! I'll be seeing this on Sunday and I am looking forward to it.

I was surprised it was a comedy. I mean A Doll's Life wasn't a comedy- at all! It was a dark, almost-opera.

I wouldn't call it a satire either. I don't know how I would classify it, ha. I missed Red Speedo and skipped The Christians because of some nasty word of mouth. I wish I had seen both now.

WhizzerMarvin said: "I was surprised it was a comedy. I mean A Doll's Life wasn't a comedy- at all! It was a dark, almost-opera.

I wouldn't call it a satire either. I don't know how I would classify it, ha. I missed Red Speedo and skipped The Christians because of some nasty word of mouth. I wish I had seen both now.





"

It's a bummer you missed The Christians. I think it's one of the most important plays of the 21st century so far.

I found both Isaac's Eye (at EST) and Public Reading... to be very funny (and wonderfully odd).

I'm not surprised this is more comedic, simply because the title is so flip. Not to the extent of, say, The Further Adventures of Hedda Gabler, but still somewhat with a wink.

Updated On: 3/31/17 at 12:12 PM

Glad to hear positive word on this!

Seeing it next week and now even more looking forward to it with these comments.

Newsflash!

Tony's aren't based on how many shows one has been in. She was quite deserving of an award for THE OTHER PLACE., in my opinion.