China Doll Previews Thread- Page 4

[After Eight]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 1:45pm

"I don't remember ANYONE hyping Act of God, "

 

Did you read Isherwood's review of it?

 

Seth,

 

If your play is not in acceptable shape to be seen by the public, then don't show it to the public. I heard many expressions of disappointment expressed by audience members at that first preview. They're not just guinea pigs to enable the creators to get the show right. The creators have a responsibility to the paying customers as well.

 

[mamaleh]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 1:57pm

As someone else noted above, the basic structure sounds pretty similar to that of the hilarious MISTAKES WERE MADE.  Does CHINA DOLL play like a comedy? drama? dramedy?  Maybe a change in tone is necessary.  I haven't seen it; not sure I will do so.  I like Pacino but in recent years I've enjoyed Michael Shannon on stage a bit more.

[PianoMann]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 1:59pm

Sight unseen, I have to agree that China Doll should not be in previews and charging full price if it is in as abysmal shape as readers here have reported.  

 

I agree, sethleaf2, that there is only so much work you can do in the rehearsal room without receiving feedback from an audience, but all the more reason that China Doll this should have received an out-of-town tryout.  It's completely understandable that Pacino would not be available to commit to a tryout, but the production team still should have mounted a production with someone else in the lead role to fix the apparent plethora of problems with the script.  Supposedly China Doll was written with Pacino in mind, but it sounds like the major fault is structural, and those issues could have been worked on with any capable actor in the role. I certainly hope Mamet isn't precious with his material and is willing to cut and revise the material and work with MacKinnon to make it as good as possible by opening.  

 

For those seeing this in previews, they're unfortunately out of luck... 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 2:00pm

"Did you read Isherwood's review of it?"


We all know Isherwood doesn't count.

[After Eight]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 2:03pm

"It is a shame that people feel the need to condemn an entirely new work after two or three days of previews (and in one case after the dress rehearsal)."

 

Similarly, no one is forced to read assessments of early previews, or to give them any credibility if they do.

 

So if you find reports on previews so objectionable, just hold off reading people's comments until after the show opens. But don't try to silence people, or make them feel somehow guilty for expressing their reactions to what they saw.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 3:05pm

To make it sound like this is the first time a show has been trashed in previews is absolutely ludicrous.The landscape is littered with examples especially now since shows  , for the most part, do not try out away from NY so they are right in the bullseye.

[sethleaf2]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 4:52pm

First off, thank you for your feedback. I was nervous posting but it's actually good to hear people's different takes and expectations.

I didn't mean to say that previews don't need to be good enough for public consumption, they certainly should be, but that this was the very first public performance of a brand new work, so perhaps too soon to make complete and drastic conclusions on the material. 

The margins on a star driven limited runs are not what people may think, so reducing the prices for previews would mean needing a longer run to recoup, which with star schedules, are just not available. That in no way is meant to be an excuse, and the goal is always to have a show ready, but the reality, as some of you pointed out, is that there are changes you just can't make until you've been naked on a stage in front of a thousand eyes. And when developing work for a specific actor who has very much been a part of the process, you just can't do it out of town with someone else, even if it would be a helpful tool.

WhizzerMarvin, I can tell you that work is continuing, and that last night was considerably stronger than Wednesday. I SO don't mean to sound like a defender from the ranks, but I do hope people keep their mind open to the material. I believe there's a very timely discussion on the influence of money on politics, and it's part of an important national conversation right now. There's even some very real reflections on the current presidential race in the play. So when I hear people throwing it out completely because it may not have totally found its sea legs just yet, I feel the need to defend it. Okay, so I guess I am a defender from the ranks, but I think the work at the moment is helping the material that's there get through more clearly. I don't think that's abnormal for the first week of a new work, and this team is all over it.

Everyone will draw their own conclusion, but thank you for letting me share. And genuinely, thank you for the feedback. I subscribe to the same high standard of presenting a show to the public, but have to marry that with what's available, and the willingness to be a public work in progress. 

[feedpuppy]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 12:06am

Just saw the show, and oh well, it was boring. Mr. Pacino gave a good performance and there're one or two intriguing moments about business, politics etc. But the basic idea is just way too thin. Can't see a way they can make this play more interesting. 

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 12:07am

"I certainly hope Mamet isn't precious with his material"

Ha!

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 9:53am

I'm not going to lie, there's a certain thrill I get knowing that people are paying hand over fist to get into this show, and most of the run is pretty much sold out, by people who don't know and don't care what the show is about and are seeing solely because Al Pacino is in it, and there going to hate it or even worse  just be bored. 

Of course, those people paying $400 or more will probably rave anyway just to justify burning their money. 

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 11:18am

You think they would look stupid by admitting that they paid  a ton of money to see the biggest Turkey since the turkey the original pilgrims ate.

 

This will never be considered a vapid show. See this to protect your theater bonafides. He could read the  phone book and people would still pay. In reality, reading the phone book might be more interesting.

 

 

Updated On: 10/24/15 at 11:18 AM

[After Eight]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 11:56am

"Of course, those people paying $400 or more will probably rave anyway just to justify burning their money. "

 

Do do you think the same phenomenon occurs at the latest must-see critics' darling?

[Fosse76]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 12:21pm

The show is pretty well-sold through the holidays. January is dead. If word of mouth continues to be bad and if the critics destroy it, it may indeed close early.

[feedpuppy]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 2:06pm

everythingtaboo said: "Of course, those people paying $400 or more will probably rave anyway just to justify burning their money. "

If I paid full price, I'd be a bit upset. From what I heard from the audience, the most positive thing was how difficult it must be for Al Pacino since it's not an easy role to perform. After the show, a lady in front of me turned around, and quietly said, that was boring. 

[Busby]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 2:43pm

Saw the first preview and walked at the intermission. On that night, it was a mess. I can accept that moves, lines and energy might not always be fully performance ready in a first preview, but if that's the case you have no right to charge $97 for a mezzanine seat. It's the poor script that's the biggest problem. The first act largely consists of an actor talking on the phone, and is untheatrical, which is not a good start in the theatre. This is especially true when he's using an earpiece and it's not always clear if he's talking to the person on the other end of the line or the person in the room. Knowing it's a two-hander is a big problem too, because if it's not working with them, it's not getting saved by anyone else arriving. This is compounded by the fact that the most interesting characters are all offstage. Listing a fight director in the credits is bizarre - want to guess what's going to happen in Act 2 folks? See it if you are forewarned and still curious, or if knitting beside the guillotine sounds like a fun night out to you. I enjoyed the experience of seeing Pacino live and at least what I saw wasn't long. Some of the themes have mileage in them, but the script needs significant surgery if what opens in November isn't going to be savaged in reviews. And I mean savaged. It can only get better.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 5:46pm

After 8, what show would you be referring to? I have no idea. Wink wink - Nudge nudge. Say no more.

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 5:11am

keep those reviews comin

Updated On: 10/25/15 at 05:11 AM

[BroadwayLuv2]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 5:03pm

Does anyone have any info on if they are offering standing room tickets?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 5:07pm

 

 

If this is indeed sold out, they would probably be selling standing room until word of mouth spreads.

[bfreak]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 5:57pm

It's sold out (mostly) through January, Mr Roxy and then availability is large for that month.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 6:16pm

When the reviews come out, tickets will really be plentiful. Had no intention of seeing it before this thread started. Now it is even less.

[Brick]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 6:17pm

Discussion of the play aside, the notion people are actually saying previews don't exist and a show should be ready on the first public performance is not only insane, it just betrays your lack of experience.

 

An out of town tryout also has paying houses. Sure, they're paying less, but no one is making NY people pay more, or pay anything. If you want to see a show that's "ready", don't come to the second preview. Many come early because they want to get a jump on the buzz. Well, the price you pay is seeing a work that isn't finished. Rehearsal periods for most productions are extremely fast. Essentially, you are rushing to just get it up, and then revise, revise, revise in previews.

 

That's the way the business model is set, because of the money. You may not like it, but denying the creative team time to make revisions in front of an audience (the only time you truly can test the material) is just ignorance.

 

Haven't seen CHINA DOLL yet, so not defending it.  PianoMann, I agree, I hope they're willing to do the work and not be precious.

Updated On: 10/25/15 at 06:17 PM

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 6:32pm

I think I'll feel weird about reviewing previews when creators really turn a show with essentially bad material or essentially weak staging around during the process. Things get tighter, things get cut, but I really can't think of a show in recent memory that went from unwatchable to competent over previews. When something is special, it's usually apparent from the start. 

Updated On: 10/25/15 at 06:32 PM

[MarsBars]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 6:57pm

"I think I'll feel weird about reviewing previews when creators really turn a show with essentially bad material or essentially weak staging around during the process. When something is special, it's usually apparent from the start."

 

Untrue.

Funny Girl in the '60s, The Wiz in the '70s, My One and Only in the '80s, Titanic in the '90s (and let's not forget the Jerry Zaks Guys and Dolls, which went from having poisonously unwatchable word-of-mouth to being the biggest hit of that season - but that's a different story since that's a revival), and (in my opinion) In the Heights (even though it was by no means a disaster off-Broadway), are all shows that used their Broadway preview periods well and turned things around.  Most recently, the word of mouth of An American in Paris sure got a lot better from 1st NY preview to rapturously received opening night, after apparently a significant amount of work on the book and performances.  I'm sure there are plays that people can similarly reference.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 7:23pm

Aside from An American in Paris, with which I would disagree, those are all shows from a very different Broadway, though.

Updated On: 10/25/15 at 07:23 PM