Enron is a big YES for best play this year!- Page 2

[singtopher]

Posted: 4/10/10 at 7:31pm

He went up on the monologue last night at the 2nd preview. It could be re-writes that he just wasn't comfortable enough with. (I'm assuming there will be some re-writes for the american version?)

[hubee]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 1:50am

Is there a rush for this?

[tommigyrl5]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 2:11am

CAX - I am going to out myself as one of those MTV generation theater goers and as I said before, I strongly disliked this.

The MFA in me says, "bad writing, bad directing (I think the transitions need WORK) and I was utterly disappointed that Itzin couldn't cover when he went up on his line-I completely left the world of the play and it took a few minutes to remind myself where we were in the story. The loudness, the uneven tempo and style (which was not always consistent) did nothing to cover up those major holes.


I agree with you that the in your face quality makes for a show that MTVers would get into, but it takes place in a world (stocks, college funds, livelihoods) that our parents lived in, not us. It just made me think about my dad and that he should see it.

And I doubt he'd like it. He'd rather read about in in the WSJ.

[taylorPHENOMENON2]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 2:22am

As already answered about rush: I've asked the week before and the day of first preview and they said not now, but maybe when they open. The cheapest ticket is $66.50.

[Nick2]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 9:04am

I saw Enron last night. I found it compelling in some parts (thinking to myself, "WOW, this material would make a great play!"). It was most interesting when Prebble made use of business ideas (game theory, counting and accounting, etc.) to explore human relationships. However, at other times I completely checked out (mostly watching other people watching other people, which I found ironic, since that's part of what the show is about.) Overall, it felt like a college production--puerile experiments with surrealism, melodramatic scene-ending lines, really laughable "choreography" or staged movement (imagine a dance based on the signals made by floor traders!) Plus, I'm guessing that the actors were tinkering with the pacing last night, which was all over the place. It moved like an arthritic cat on roller skates. Good news is I sat next to two of the ADs who had a notebook's worth of notes to share. I credit the actors for shouldering the load of this otherwise unremarkable production.

My main issue is with the writing: Here was an opportunity to explore the mind of greedy genius, to send audiences away with insight about the addiction and necessity of risk, to challenge the notion that our justice and legal systems "protect" us. Yet mostly what we got was a half-hearted indictment of greed. I wasn't convinced.

SPOILER: There's a visual reference to the World Trade Center that I found sloppy and difficult to watch. I'm no prude, but it brought nothing to the scene or production, but made me somewhat indignant that a show would try to pull this off on New Yorkers. The tourists may like it, but for me, it was the last straw.

Posted: 4/11/10 at 10:16am

SPOILER:


i thought the images of the towers was tasteful. very moving. and yes, I was here for 9-11 before you ask.
Updated On: 4/11/10 at 10:16 AM

[Nick2]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 11:35am

spoiler:

@mercades: I'm not sanctimonious about 9/11, so my objection isn't with its level of tastefulness. for me, it felt like the production was drawing upon the drama of the smoldering towers to compensate for a really lame scene about kenneth lay. really, placing lay in the literal and figurative hole of the WTC was sloppy dramatically, politically, and historically. i just didn't buy it.

Posted: 4/11/10 at 11:38am

i see what you mean. I guess I thought it was an interesting way to tie the two events (9-11 and skilling resigning) together, since it was so strangely close together. do you think the "fall of enron" and the "falling of the towers" was too literal?

I am only asking because I found it to be one of the more moving parts of the show and I am just curious to hear others thoughts.

[Nick2]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 11:50am

SPOILER:
maybe i was hoping for a more subtle, compelling connection between the two. i mean, ken lay speaking from the burning towers?! ( i get the biblical reference, thanks!)
you're right to say that 9/11 was a very important part of the Enron story. It has to be there--but its presence in the play as it stands it way overdetermined, as if the two events were actually the same thing. remember the setup for the scene: the crash of Enron becomes the crashing of the planes into the towers.

Posted: 4/11/10 at 11:59am

SPOILER:

I guess i don't remember that part. i thought the plane went into the "tower" then the tower fell then the shredding of something...i thought THAT was the symbol of enron actually going down. but I see where you are coming from. I think I will see it again once it has opened. it was a lot to take in. lots of information. I will be the first to admit I was not the most knowledgeable audience member about the fall of enron, I feel more informed now. having said that, I feel as though I was so busy absorbing all the information, I may have missed things. I think the overall visual concept was very thought provoking, performances were strong (especially norbert and the man who played andy fastow)

I also think it was inventive and different. Interested to see the changes they put in. if any.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 2:18pm

Grumbles from across the pond claimed it was brilliant but too long and needed cutting...is it?

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 5:17pm

If you think that the show is actually equating 9-11 and the collapse of Enron, you didn't get it. It's the literalization of an overreaching metaphor from Ken Lay, and the interconnectivity of the two events.

I also found it moving and tasteful as well.

[Cat Wicks]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 5:35pm

ERON is definitely going to be a big contender this year. It was great to see Norbert Leo Butz starring back on Broadway and he was fantastic! It's so interesting to how the public is reacting because how do you tell a story like this? ERON isn't exactly an easy story to understand, but it was done beautifully. This uses of dance and movement really make this play unique. It's a must see!

[bwaybug85]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 7:13pm

When I spend money on a ticket I like to be "dazzled". From experience I don't get that from many plays (more so from musicals) but this is what makes this play unique. Many won't like it for those very reasons (light sabers, raptors, etc) but for me, I like to know I'm seeing something I normally wouldn't, be very entertained, and generally, just have fun. For me, you get that with this show (obviously due to the large investment) which is why I prefer it over something like Miracle Worker, God of Carnage, Brighton Beach Memoirs, etc. Call me naive, but I'm more into what I'm getting to see being performed and can overlook the writing. Obviously tons of people feel different but this is just my opinion. Yes it may be "gimmicky" and odd at times, but it is fun and entertaining for sure.

Posted: 4/11/10 at 8:35pm

sorry, to clarify. I am not saying one happened bc of the other. but yes, there were connections. Because due to 9-11 the stock market crashed/closed which brought the attention to enron. This is just what I have found from googling today. which is great, that a piece of theater is making me get off my butt and try to understand the politics, of something as massive as this.

i will be back.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 8:47pm

Who thought it was a musical?

Just kidding but there are a few dance numbers in it. The show is great but the real kudos belong to Butz. He is great in maybe the best role of his career. Marin Mazzie is also quite good in her role as well. The rest of the cast shines .The look of it is a knockout & the staging is very good.

As mentioned above, the reference to 9/11 was quite powerful.
I got a kick out of The Lehman Brothers gag.

As far as what they are selling, it is a hat, magnet & men & womens T shirts. Not much but adequate. This may be a new thing but it is a real bold way to separate you from your money & rip you off. When you buy a drink, you cannot bring it to your seat unless you buy a souvenir cup . Than you can. The kicker is that it is not even a cup with the shows logo. It has Shubert on it. You can really impress your friends with a Shubert plastic glass for $ 4. This is what Chico Marx called Chutzpah

Updated On: 4/12/10 at 08:47 PM

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/11/10 at 9:36pm

I saw this today and absolutely loved it. The whole thing was very ethereal. It was fascinating to watch the rise and fall of the company in 2 and a half hours. Some of the dialogue is a little amateurish, but the play itself is riveting.

Norbert was fantastic, as was Kunken. Mazzie and Itzin are both very good in smaller roles.

Overall, I loved it and can't wait to go back. My favorite new play of the year, by far.

[ljay889]

Posted: 4/12/10 at 12:03am

I saw it today and enjoyed it quite a bit! Yes, it's bizarre, but I found it fascinating.
Norbert, Marin, and Stephen Kunken were the standouts. Fabulous performances.

[Andergoat]

Posted: 4/12/10 at 12:29pm

I was at the first preview and was a bit disappointed. I wouldn't say I didn't enjoy it--there are some really great visual elements and some of the dialogue, especially Skilling's, is fantastic.

{spoilers ahead}

I have somewhat of a wonkish interest in the Enron case and have read quite a bit about it, including "The Smartest Guys in the Room", which Prebble seems to have used as a primary source. I also saw the documentary. It felt like Prebble went through "Smartest Guys" and thought, "how can we visualize this". It's an interesting idea; I loved many elements--the raptors, esp--but many fell flat and didn't feel incredibly purposeful.

I like what both "Smartest Guys" and this play tried to do--more than just an account of what happened, they both tried to present Enron as a culture and this culture of being indicative of how it happened. The book succeeds, but the play does not, which is too bad, because I think there could be a lot of ways to make this statement bigger and connect it to our current culture/economy.

I'm glad I went; I wasn't bored by any means and I'd probably recommend it, especially to those who know the basics about Enron, but not the details. I found a discount on broadwaybox and would probably been extremely pissed if I paid full price.

Oh, and Norbert is incredible. Wasn't so impressed by anyone else, but Skilling is by far the meatiest role, so Norbert was really given a chance to shine.

[dave1606]

Posted: 4/12/10 at 1:14pm

Went to the Saturday night show, and went in knowing that people who had seen it pretty much fell into two groups, the ones who thought this show was absolutely incredible and had the best play tony in the bag, and the ones who thought it was absolutely dreadful and hated every second of it.

Let me be the first to say that I fall in the middle ground. I REALLY liked it, but didn’t love it completely. First off let me say there hasn’t been a theater experience I have had where the audience was less involved with what was happening onstage. To put it bluntly they seemed bored. People were talking for most of the first act, running to the bathroom and just generally restless. Let me just say that my boyfriend and I were not bored or restless, but that it did distract a bit from the play.

The first act was definitely stronger than the second, and I think the show definitely felt like it was still in previews. The transitions from scene to scene were a little shaky and definitely need to be tightened up. I thought the direction was outstanding, and expected that from Rupert Goold who when I was in London seemed to literally be directing every show running on the West End. (His No Man’s Land with Michael Gambon was excellent.) I think for me, I was just so taken aback at the guts and creativity for tackling what could have been such a dry subject and really throwing in everything including the kitchen sink to make it entertaining. And don’t for a minute think that I don’t understand the subject matter, as I re-watched Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room earlier this week in preparation for the show.

As far as the cast goes I am really surprised that no one is talking about Norbert Leo-Butz’s performance. I thought it was absolutely incredible, and one that deserves a tony nomination. Marin Mazzie does have a smaller part, but to say that she has nothing to do isn’t fair. I thought she was excellent in her role. The rest of the cast worked really well for me also.

So I did have problems with the second act including the 9/11 reference, but the majority of my issues were with its length. I felt like a lot of the aftermath (post Enron collapse) bits could have been shortened. Overall I think this is a powerful piece of theater that isn’t going to work for everyone, but worked pretty well for me. I really wonder if this can make it here because the orchestra was very empty on Saturday night.

Updated On: 4/12/10 at 01:14 PM

[musical_ash_09]

Posted: 4/12/10 at 7:01pm

"I really wonder if this can make it here because the orchestra was very empty on Saturday night."

It better make it haha. I have tickets to see it in June.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 4/14/10 at 11:17am

For me the big problem is that the show doesn't really go far enough in any one direction. There are some good satiric devices (the raptors, for example) that don't really go anywhere (why have raptors onstage if they don't eat anyone?).

The show tries too hard to be clever, shoe-horning in jokes and references whether they mean anything or not. Those 3 Blind Mice that keep appearing, for example. Ha ha, funny, I guess, but what are they saying with them? A symbol of moral blindness, or something? That last line of the first act, taken from JURASSIC PARK: okay, cute, I guess, but not really appropriate, considering what happens in the film but not onstage. And the Dance O'The Light Sabers in act two. What was the point of having light sabers, beyond a reference to STAR WARS, and the idea that light sabers run on electricity, or something. It just petered out in a flurry of saber waving.

So the big satire doesn't work, and the more restrained fact-based stuff doesn't really work, either, never generating much interest in these people, who the entire world knows by now to have been basically The Scum Of The Earth. And the explanations of what was really going down in Enronland are dry as dust.

A misfire. Just rent ENRON: THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM.

Updated On: 4/14/10 at 11:17 AM

[Andergoat]

Posted: 4/14/10 at 4:51pm

I don't even remember this being in the show, but one of the strategies or shell companies or something was named JEDI by Andy Fastow, so I'm guess that's where that came from.

I think Cax's first post in this thread neatly sums up my overall feelings in two words: "mass oversimplification"
Updated On: 4/14/10 at 04:51 PM

[CAX]

Posted: 4/14/10 at 9:40pm

So my question is. If we take a bet on this one, how long does this play have?

Also, had a funny (awkward) realization a few nights back. The night I saw the show with my pals from a few big banks in town, one friend, who'd had a couple of drinks, was pretty vocal about how much he was hating the darn thing while it was playing. We were sitting behind a gentleman and his lady friend who was taking what appeared to be notes. At intermission they moved on to somewhere else in the house. Well, while looking through some online reviews about the show I came across some pictures and discovered Rupert Gould was the guy we were sitting behind. How awful that must have been. Day 2 of previews and hearing a very disgruntled audience member NOT digging his show.

[srg129]

Posted: 4/15/10 at 3:44am

This play could definately be a contender for the Tony award this year. If you're thinking of seeing it, don't let the misled detractors on this thread sway your opinion. See it for yourself and then decide. It's certainly a masterpiece as far as the direction is concerned. And given some of the comments about actors forgetting their lines, etc. I saw it the next night and there were no line flubs or otherwise. While I have to agree that my biggest problem with this show is the undeniable fact that it doesn't draw you in emotionally to the characters, it does provide a very theatrical story-telling account of the collapse of Enron. This type of representational story-telling has been sorely missed on Broadway lately.

What many on here have erroniously dismissed as "gimmicks" are actually quite fitting to the treatment of the material and add impact to it's theatrical effect. It's really quite amazing how the staging, metaphors, and visual presentation gives complete and honest merit to the mindset and culture of apparent "invincibility" of corporate culture and "gimmicks" that were sold to employees pre-9-11. That's why the staging of the 9-11 scene is so potent, rather than "distasteful" as other posters have suggested.

Would I say that investment bankers and other like minded CEOs would like this. Probably absolutely not. But in fact, most American corporations don't behave with the same ethics code and blindness (i.e. the 3 blind mice) that Enron did. That's what makes it such a fascinating study.

Enron was trying to make something out of nothing and pure political hype for the veiled pathetic attemps of ego satisfaction. Much like the current administration in Washington today.

It's simply uncanny how eye opening the accounting principals of this failed corporation mirror that of what our President, Senate, and Congress have recently espoused in their latest legislative decisions.

One only needs to question "Why?" when presented the same dilemma, just as this play asks when presented a "sham" of a business that was wholeheartedly set on pulling the wool over American citizens and investors. And BTW, usually the posters on this board who consider themselves "insiders" and involved in the industry of theater are usually just standing on the outside looking in while wishing they were truly involved in Broadway theater. Otherwise they wouldn't need to mention that fact.