DEUCE Reviews

Far too kind...

---

I imagine we'll see a lot of the same type of reviews...

It's certainly what I thought about it. Great to see the Grand Dames; even if there is no play.

---

I'm with TomMonster. The reviews are all going to be the same.

Word of Mouth did not give this scathing reviews. http://www.broadway.com/gen/general.aspx?ci=547761

By the way, where is Margo?

Updated On: 5/6/07 at 07:01 PM

Variety is mixed, lukewarm reaction to the play, RAVES for the two ladies:

It's standard-issue benevolence, with both theater critics and fans, to describe thesps who continue working long after they receive their AARP cards with terms like "national treasure" or "theater royalty," or with adjectives such as "cherished" or "beloved." Cliche or not, that language is unavoidable when confronted with the redoubtable team of Angela Lansbury and Marian Seldes, bringing their wit, wisdom and ineffable class to Terrence McNally's slender trifle, "Deuce." The comedy began life as a playlet written for a benefit and, even as a 95-minute one-act, shows its stretch marks. But anyone with a deep affection for the theater won't want to miss these rare birds bantering.

The odd-couple scenario has been shaped by McNally along the not so illustrious lines of 1980 two-hander "A Coupla White Chicks Sitting Around Talking," of which this is an old-gal variation. It's a two-character study, expanded via the addition of some functional extras -- two athletes-turned-sports-commentators (Brian Haley, Joanna P. Adler), who supply droll vocal shtick and historical background from an elevated box, and one entirely superfluous reverential fan (Michael Mulheren), who keeps appearing to articulate self-evident subtext about why these women deserve our admiration.

Of course that appreciation extends even more to the seasoned actresses onstage than to the characters they're playing, and Lansbury and Seldes earn every ounce of it. Each has her own soignee specialty that helps coax a nuanced character with heart out of thin material. Lansbury can floor us with an eye roll or a subtle double-take, turning mildly clever lines into acerbic zingers with apparent nonchalance. Seldes can communicate internalized feeling with just a slight modulation of her voice or a quiet gesture.

Likewise, unless you count the calculated shock of first Lansbury and then Seldes saying the "c" word (the one that rhymes with "blunt"), there's not a lot of action to speak of. But even when the play dips into dull patches, there's the consistent satisfaction of watching two bona fide stage stars doing what they do with effortless aplomb.

The characters reflect on everything from the commercialization and spectacle-ization of sport, with its surrounding media circus, to the ephemeral nature of fame, from feminism and lesbians in tennis to being a team player vs. a solo star. Naturally, there's time given to more commonplace issues regarding old lovers and husbands, friendship and marriage, aging, health and approaching death.

More amusing than funny, this might not be McNally's most ambitious writing and it stretches the competitive tennis-as-life metaphor until it all but snaps. But both the playwright and Blakemore make no mistake about where their assets lie. To stick with the overworked metaphor, Lansbury and Seldes turn the featherweight "Deuce" into a game, set and match victory.
Variety Review

---

The funny thing is, I didn't even feel that the two ladies were fantastic.

---

Times is up...
Times

---

Why is the reverance interesting? It's expected and warrented. They're two legendary actors who turned an unremarkable piece of crap into something even the slightest bit interesting.

I think this says it all:

"...the true tension in 'Deuce' arises from the fight between two valiant, vibrant actresses against a swamp of a play that keeps trying to suck the life out of them."

---

Yes, Pennywise, that's the line in Brantley's review that struck me.

Regarding why I think it's "interesting" how a few writers (not all of the reviews have yet been posted or linked here) have addressed Lansbury and Seldes, one only has to consider the reception Vanessa Redgrave received for her performance in another shallow play a month or so ago (she, too, sits for most of her time on stage). All three actresses are consummate professionals and talented individuals. I just find the terms used to describe Lansbury and Seldes to be more endearing.

Admittedly, I may have overstated that this could be Seldes's last show. Apologies if I offended anyone, but many here have observed that even she had challenges with this play.

Updated On: 5/6/07 at 10:25 PM

I spoke to Seldes the other night (bumped into her while making my way down 45th) and she did admit how 'difficult' the play was (though she used some other four letter words to describe it), since they opened cold on Broadway, without the benefit of a tryout.

Having seen a great many shows, even I'll admit that DEUCE is a toughie. Dialogue comes as in and out of nowhere as a tennis ball. Very easy to be thrown off - especially if there's even the slightest distraction.

She's in at least one or two shows per season. DEUCE is hardly her last. Lansbury, on the other hand, who knows?

And Brantley's review: It confirms his affinity for blondes, with age having no bearing. While his criticisms of the play are spot-on, it just strikes me as a tad bit too gushy.

Updated On: 5/6/07 at 10:39 PM