China Doll Previews Thread- Page 9

[SmoothLover]

Posted: 11/8/15 at 12:52am

Just saw the other thread....I need to read the Post article...someone said that even the playwright walked away from it early on.

[haterobics]

Posted: 11/8/15 at 1:02am

SmoothLover said: "someone said that even the playwright walked away from it early on."

 

I don't know that he walked away from it, he is in L.A. working on something else... but he didn't get frustrated and leave in a huff. He wasn't planning to be involved in previews, for whatever strange reason.

[PianoMann]

Posted: 11/8/15 at 10:02am

SmoothLover said: "Just saw the other thread....I need to read the Post article...someone said that even the playwright walked away from it early on."

 

Many of the "facts" in the Riedel article are untrue, including his claim that Mamet only saw the first preview and then ran back to California.  Someone in this thread posted that they saw Mamet in the audience days after the article was posted, and Riedel even changed his tune about it in the subsequent article he wrote about Bruce Willis and the increased use of earpieces.

 

As entertaining as it is to read the rumors he's spreading about this show, I'd save most (probably with the exception of the teleprompters) are unfounded rubbish.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 11/8/15 at 4:58pm

"Yes, the impetus of the events is the tax on the plane and the difference between the Swiss versus American tail numbers, but the implications of the one plot point are far reaching, leading to a discussion of privilege, politics, invasive security measures, immigration status, etc."

 

Possibly using spoiler tags, could you talk a bit more about this? This is some of the only positive word of mouth concerning the existence of a plot so I'd be curious to hear more.

[Blender2]

Posted: 11/8/15 at 11:26pm

Piano Mann I'd love to hear more about your thoughts on that one plot point. 

Someone suggested using spoiler tags when you elaborate.  That's a good idea.

[PianoMann]

Posted: 11/8/15 at 11:43pm

VintageSnarker said: ""Yes, the impetus of the events is the tax on the plane and the difference between the Swiss versus American tail numbers, but the implications of the one plot point are far reaching, leading to a discussion of privilege, politics, invasive security measures, immigration status, etc."

 

 

 

Possibly using spoiler tags, could you talk a bit more about this? This is some of the only positive word of mouth concerning the existence of a plot so I'd be curious to hear more."

 

Sure, here are some additional plot details as I remember them, as admittedly it's a bit convoluted:

 

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

The events of the play all occur during or near an election season.  Pacino's character has known the incumbent governor since he was a child as Pacino was a close acquaintance of the governor's father and still has dirt on the family: There are numerous references to a particular evening before the father passed away in which he begged Pacino to burn certain files.  The governor, a self-proclaimed man of the people, is looking for "an issue" to tackle as a part of his bid for re-election, or perhaps a bid for the Presidential election, and publicly begins to target Pacino's character for trying to evade paying the $5,000,000 in property taxes on the purchase of the jet, and in the second act has has Pacino officially indicted.  Pacino's girlfriend becomes significant because she was on the jet when it touched down, the company claims the cause was a "faulty" low-fuel warning light and not an actual emergency. Due to her connection to Pacino's character, she is physically dragged off the plane and invasively strip searched; this angers Pacino's character as he believes he is "fair game" as a political pawn but his girlfriend should be "off-limits". She is also not a legal U.S. citizen and numerous individuals try to manipulate her status against Pacino to get what they want and his choice to protect her is pivotal in climax of the show.

 

I honestly don't know if Mamet was explicitly saying or trying to imply that the governor was "in bed" with the airline manufacturer and had them a) change the tail number intentionally and b) make the pilot land so that Pacino would now incur the property taxes that he didn't intend to pay, but that certainly seemed in the realm of possibility.  Quite frankly, there are a lot of characters who we hear Pacino talking to on the phone that are not necessarily easy to place in terms of their role in the action, so I could be getting some of the above incorrect; if anyone remembers something differently, please feel free to share!

 

Ultimately, I thought the issues with Pacino's girlfriend, the governor and the dirt on the family and whether or not he would use it were all very engrossing and I can't say I knew where the plot was going. Perhaps people would think there was more too it if some of these unseen characters were physically present to give the characters and actions more texture.

I hope this was helpful to anyone who's interested in hearing more about the plot!

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 11/9/15 at 2:25pm

It was just announced that opening night has been rescheduled for December 4th:

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Breaking-News-CHINA-DOLL-Reschedules-Opening-From-November-19th-To-December-4th-20151109

[After Eight]

Posted: 11/9/15 at 3:59pm

Maybe they should reschedule the opening to the last night of the limited engagement. That way they could make a ton of money throughout the play's run, and never have to suffer any consequences at the box-office from bad reviews.

[PianoMann]

Posted: 11/9/15 at 5:04pm

The New York Times article states that there was new material added last week and new material will be added this upcoming week.  Could anyone who saw the show before me read through on my plot summary and let us know if there is anything that I saw that was not included in an earlier preview?  I'd love to know if they're actually adding any new material to the script, or if perhaps MacKinnon is just changing some blocking.

[sethleaf2]

Posted: 11/10/15 at 7:26am

"I hope I'm not lambasted for this but... I actually liked China Doll quite a bit.  I'm not sure how much my low expectations influenced my reaction, but I can honestly say I was seldom bored, and certainly never contemplated leaving. The plot is certainly not as paper-thin as many here seem to make it out to be: Yes, the impetus of the events is the tax on the plane and the difference between the Swiss versus American tail numbers, but the implications of the one plot point are far reaching, leading to a discussion of privilege, politics, invasive security measures, immigration status, etc."

 

Thank you, PianoMann, I was starting to think perhaps I was losing my mind. I will only say this, what drives a billionaire to have so much, and what drives them to keep what they have is no pretty Architectural Digest cover story. I've enjoyed everyone's passion but it's nice to read a post from someone who has seen the play and received its argument. I don't know if others will, but I do know it's there. And the work continues.

[greygarden]

Posted: 11/10/15 at 1:00pm

How on earth can a two character play need two extra weeks of previews. It's taking a fortune on the strength of Pacino's name why not just open. If it gets terrible reviews surely it can't affect the box office.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 11/10/15 at 1:02pm

"It's taking a fortune on the strength of Pacino's name why not just open."

Because they don't have to.

[haterobics]

Posted: 11/10/15 at 1:09pm

greygarden said: "It's taking a fortune on the strength of Pacino's name why not just open. If it gets terrible reviews surely it can't affect the box office."

 

The reviews can shape opinion to other regional theaters that might consider staging it later.

[PianoMann]

Posted: 11/10/15 at 2:46pm

sethleaf2 said: ""I hope I'm not lambasted for this but... I actually liked China Doll quite a bit.  I'm not sure how much my low expectations influenced my reaction, but I can honestly say I was seldom bored, and certainly never contemplated leaving. The plot is certainly not as paper-thin as many here seem to make it out to be: Yes, the impetus of the events is the tax on the plane and the difference between the Swiss versus American tail numbers, but the implications of the one plot point are far reaching, leading to a discussion of privilege, politics, invasive security measures, immigration status, etc."

 

 

 

Thank you, PianoMann, I was starting to think perhaps I was losing my mind. I will only say this, what drives a billionaire to have so much, and what drives them to keep what they have is no pretty Architectural Digest cover story. I've enjoyed everyone's passion but it's nice to read a post from someone who has seen the play and received its argument. I don't know if others will, but I do know it's there. And the work continues."

 

Sethleaf, could you provide us any insight on what changes have been / are being made since the beginning of previews?

[Tom-497]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 7:24pm

I saw this afternoon's performance. There was no mass exodus at intermission, the standing ovation (by no means a certainty for a straight play) was enthusiastic, and some of the comments I overheard on the way out were along the lines of "wonderful," "incredible," etc. However, I also heard some people saying they were confused by the plot and/or outright didn't like the show.

 

I personally would place it about in the middle of my experiences seeing Pacino on stage -- definitely better than the recent Glengarry, and probably a bit better than Salome. Overall, it was a decent couple of hours in the theater. The biggest problems for me were the excessive repetition in Act I (which nevertheless built to a strong conclusion) and the contrived, unbelievable (though fast-paced) last section of Act II.

 

 

 

Spoiler

In my opinion, an extremely rich guy who'd clawed his way up from nothing almost certainly wouldn't have buckled as quickly as Pacino's character does when faced with the threat he's faced with in Act II. The play makes it look like he's only got access to one lawyer, when in reality he'd have an army of the best attorneys destroying the extremely flimsy-sounding case against him.

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 11/19/15 at 1:01am

Did no one inform Broadwayworld that the opening was postponed? Why is the logo on display?

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 11/19/15 at 2:38am

if you mean the logo on the top left corner, it's an ad buy - digital advertising 

[PianoMann]

Posted: 11/19/15 at 9:06am

VernonGersch said: "if you mean the logo on the top left corner, it's an ad buy - digital advertising"

 

Nope, that's not an ad buy.  BroadwayWorld always posts the logo of a show next to theirs on its opening night. Obviously, someone caught the mistake because it's gone now.   

 

[sethleaf2]

Posted: 11/20/15 at 2:39am

 

 

Sethleaf, could you provide us any insight on what changes have been / are being made since the beginning of previews?

 

Apologies for not responding sooner. I'm just seeing this now and need to figure out how to get notifications.

Mostly clarifying some story points and a few confusing dynamics. A little bit of streamlining and cutting. And 

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

 fixing the fight scene. 

I know there's a difference of opinion on here as to what is expected of a preview, but it certainly doesn't hurt to have a play with a distinct rhythmic style get as many shows under its belt as possible before it is officially open to critics. Those are the bulk of the work.  

 

Updated On: 11/20/15 at 02:39 AM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 11/20/15 at 2:50am

So opening was set back, but were the critics re-invited? 

[haterobics]

Posted: 11/20/15 at 3:13am

sethleaf2 said: " A little bit of streamlining and cutting. And *SPOILER ALERT*..."

 

BWW has a spoiler functionality now, btw.

 

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

Also known as where you can probably say things about Mr Roxy and he'll never see them!

 

[sethleaf2]

Posted: 11/20/15 at 6:45am

BWW has a spoiler functionality now, btw.

 

 

 

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

Also known as where you can probably say things about Mr Roxy and he'll never see them!

 

"

That's a great feature, how do I do it? And am I able to edit my previous post? I'm not able to find directions on the site. Thanks so much for the help. 

[KCW]

Posted: 11/20/15 at 7:21am

There should be a little plus sign, click on that. Type what you want inside the spoiler section, and everything else either above or below. You can add emoticons/emojis with the button next to it (smiley face.) You can also edit posts that you made with the edit button at the bottom right.

[sethleaf2]

Posted: 11/20/15 at 8:22am

Many thanks! You kids and your technologies 

[revlis]

Posted: 11/23/15 at 9:41am

Saw the show on Saturday, and unfortunately it's as bad as most are saying. Pacino did seem to know his lines quite well, but it was also obvious that he was looking a few different places for help (two laptops on stage). But that didn't bother me too much. What bothered me was that there was nothing interesting about the story. You could feel an enormous sigh from the audience at the end of act one, almost saying, "What the heck is going on here?" The script was bad; the story was bad; and Pacino was unfortunately bad as well, but at least he has an excuse - he was a victim. His staccato, halting delivery made it impossible to follow the story. The 'climactic' twist at the end, was anything but. Completely incomprehensible and boring. I spoke to several other audience members, who shared my opinion. Best of luck to them on opening night.