Breakfast At Tiffany's Previews- Page 2

[suestorm]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 10:34am

steven, im not discounting what you say, but if you had to get up early in the morning why on earth did you go??

[stevenycguy]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:04am

I went since I was looking forward to the story and acting, but I found it to be dull and lifeless. They used too much narration - they should "show", not "tell". Unfortunately they started 15 minutes late, had an extended 20 minute intermission and I didn't get out until almost 11pm (way later than the 10:30pm I was expecting from telecharge.com).

[suestorm]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:05am

ahhhh yes, i can see that.

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:44am

Crap. I saw that London version a few years back, and it was a beautiful set and costumes, lovely Joseph Cross/Anna Friel glimpses of nudity, but was otherwise a colossal bore. So much I ran at intermission. Sounds like it's going to be a similar situation, despite Greenburg's script.

[siny]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 1:19pm

How did the cat do ?
I was thinking of going just to see the cat :)

[Patash]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 1:23pm

I understand the cat is fine, but it would help the show a lot if it sang Memory in Act II.


Cats -- now and forever.
Breakfast at Tiffany's -- not so much.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 5:59pm

Sounds like maybe they tried to be too faithful to the structure of the novella. It's perfection on the page, but it's hard to pull off that narrated, meandering type of style on stage--especially in a *long* play.

With spoilers, can someone tell me where the nudity takes place--I mean the situation? Cuz I'm having trouble picturing it shoe-horned in there...

[jetts7]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 6:26pm

I saw the show last night (well Act 1) and I thought it was decent. I only saw Act 1 because my friend wasn't feeling good so I had to leave. I would have stayed for the second act if my friend were feeling fine. Hopefully i'll get to see it again. To be honest, it most likely wont last. The actors were great, but it was just boring. My friend and I were talking about the show and we both thought it could better as a musical. While I was walking out of the theatre a lady said "My husband and I see 3 shows a month and ALL of them have been amazing, but this one is HORRIBLE! Im so dissapointed."

[Patash]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 6:29pm

Why am I being reminded of that disaster musical called Holly Golightly? Didn't anyone learn from that bomb? Do you think this one is going to be worse that that?

[getatme]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 6:31pm

With spoilers, can someone tell me where the nudity takes place--I mean the situation? Cuz I'm having trouble picturing it shoe-horned in there...

There's a scene where Holly and Fred go horse back riding in Central Park, his horse takes off and he's thrown to the ground. Fred steps out of the scene and begins narrating as a bathtub slides on stage left. He says something to the effect of "Somehow, Holly got me home...and naked. It was perfection." Holly helps him unbutton his shirt and pants, then walks offstage leaving him in period underwear and an undershirt. He takes off the undershirt, turns around and takes the drawers off and climbs into the tub, managing to cover everything decently well. As he sits in the tub, Holly enters wrapped in a towel, she climbs into the tub behind him and removes the towel. There's a short scene in the tub and then the police burst in to the bathroom, Holly grabs the towel and covers herself as she climbs out of the tub, Fred climbs out and covers himself with his hands. At the end of the scene, he thinks everyone has left the bathroom and turns and sees someone is still there; startled, he throws his arms up. Blackout.

It just seemed rather gratuitous and unnecessary. I kept expecting the nudity to either happen quickly or, like several other earlier scenes, for the moment to be cut short by the beginning of a new narration or scene.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 7:14pm

Thanks Getatme--that does sound fairly, well, gratuitous.

[Shakeshafte]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 7:34pm

I was very interested in seeing this, but given some of the comments here on the script/gratuitous nudity ~ I will probably go see something else instead. I just feel bad for the actors appearing in this.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:22pm

(Shocked to be agreeing with Sue) but really. The production isn't responsible for your choices.

[uncageg]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:23pm

Just saw it tonight. One, don't get excited over the nudty. The bathtub is in bright lighting until they get into it and then the lighting dims. You see his rear and if you are looking for more, look quick. It is very gratuitous and almost laughable.

On my way to have the cocktail I needed after seeing this I decided that a big problem is the pacing. It is too slow IMO. Since she talks with that accent throughout the play the slow pacing makes it worse.

The sets, costumes and music are nice but I was actually nodding near the end. (OK I had 3 glasses of wine prior and it was hot as hell in the mezz)

I attended an event prior to the show where the lead producer told us a lot of changes will be made in previews. I hope pacing is one.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:27pm

The evening was pretty dreadful overall. In Act 2, when Emilia Clarke was holding the cat, the cat tried to scurry out of her arms - I felt like it was the cat saying she wanted out of the production...and rightfully so!

Clarke and Smith were fine, but the script and direction were so bad, that this production did them no favors. I could not recommend this to anyone. Stay away.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:32pm

I was at the show tonight and truly wish I had liked it, but the show is a tough ride right now. The production felt like something from Tennessee Williams; Vieux Carre comes to mind, and even the set felt more like The French Quarter than New York.

As others have mentioned it's long, slow moving and has too much narration. I haven't read the novella, but I love the movie and I watched it so many times during my college years that I had most of it committed to memory. For all the talk about going back to the original source material (and it is set in 1943), many of the scenes had large portions of dialogue that were identical to the film.

There are large panels of scrim type material that move across the stage and have projections put upon them. The costumes, sets and lighting are all very dark and drab. Many grays, browns, navy blues.

The script just never finds a spark. The actors do their best, and I liked both Cory Michael Smith and Emilia Clarke, but it's hard to feel for either one of them. The characters are cold and distant.

There were walkouts and by the end your could feel a restlessness in the theater. Holly has a line during the taxi scene where she tells Fred, "Darling this could go on forever," which drew some unsolicited chuckles.

The cast appeared somber at the curtain call, and in all honesty I felt for them. This property has a history of being difficult to effectively bring to life on stage. Perhaps the movie works so well, for me, because those creators apparently altered the tone radically from that of the novella. I don't know what they'll be able to do during previews, but I wish them the best of luck.

[uncageg]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:35pm

Without...that was funny. And when she had to tell it to go twice. It stood there in the shadows for a bit then scampered. Bet his understudy will be on tomorrow!

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:40pm

...and that scene where they were both riding the horses!!! It was laughable. From that point on until the end of the show, I pretty much had uncontrollable laughter at everything the actors said and did. I lost it. It is sad that something on Broadway could be this painful.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:45pm

The actors looked upset with the cat in that taxi scene. At first it couldn't wait to leave and then it wouldn't get off the stage!

I agree that the scene with the horses was awkwardly staged.

[djb]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:47pm

Updated On: 11/28/22 at 11:47 PM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 3/5/13 at 11:52pm

I really think narration in a play is dreadful. Find a better device.

[bk]

Posted: 3/6/13 at 12:02am

Really. Narration in this play or any play? Because you'd have a hard time convincing anyone with a semblance of a brain in their head that the narration in The Glass Menagerie isn't a) necessary, and b) perfection.

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 3/6/13 at 12:04am

I thought the costumes were stunning, especially Holly's gowns. But when Colleen Atwood is at the helm, I don't expect anything less.

That said...having walked out at intermission for the London version, I truly expected to walk out tonight - especially with the sweltering mezzanine. But okay, Act I wasn't horrible, maybe it's worth staying for Act II? Boy, was I wrong. Any whiff of energy and pace left after intermission, and even though there was more plot in Act II, it felt like people were acting in a vacuum and just willing it to end.

Emilia Clark. Anyone else feel like she looked like a smaller Sofia Vergara? Maybe it's my lens prescription.

Anyway, maybe I need to read the novella, because in both versions of this play, I just don't get why people are so fascinated by her. To me, Holly's a bit of a cipher. Maybe it's the direction, but I just feel no depth to the character. So why should I care?

I knew both versions shared a director, but I had no idea they shared a lead producer. I don't know why they are obsessed with this property, because as a team, it just doesn't seem worth the effort.

[After Eight]

Posted: 3/6/13 at 12:27am

"I was there last night and my companion and I walked out during intermission as did many others."

Pammylicious,

You made a wise decision, as you only missed more of the same in the second act.

I stayed, but got nothing by doing so but an extra hour of boredom at a listless, lifeless play.

Just think; in that one hour I could have done something pleasurable like
listening to The Boy Friend or Fade Out-Fade In.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 3/6/13 at 12:31am

Touche, bk. I guess, what I meant was narration like "And then this happened" sort of thing. I don't really feel like the narration in Menagerie is narration, but more like an extended monologue.