FRANKIE AND JOHNNY Previews — Page 4

Saw it last night and I have to say is WOW. They have some
chemistry on that stage that I haven’t seen in a long time.
As for the nudity it’s dimly lit, and very tastefully done. The last five seconds of the show needs to be cut (reveal) Didn't make sense why they were doing that. Maybe it’s in the script ? Theatre was 70 percent full. Run and see this!

Haven’t seen this production yet, but how is it “a prologue to rape”? They’ve already had sex before the play starts. I love love love the movie which is completely different than play. Completely different. Nathan Lane is great in it. It’s when I fell in love with him.

Speed said: "Haven’t seen this production yet, but how is it “a prologue to rape”? They’ve already had sex before the play starts. I love love love the movie which is completely different than play. Completely different. Nathan Lane is great in it. It’s when I fell in love with him."

Having sex once doesn't give consent to having more sex. I didn't exactly call it rape because she did give consent in the end, but I'm questioning the process of her getting there.

For those who have seen the play, what do you think is going to happen after Frankie slapped Johnny, if she didn't suddenly change her mind?

The production really is stunning. Arin Arbus has done a masterful job navigating the complex waters of the relationship between Frankie and Johnny. It's an absolute master class in acting and chemistry between performers but Arbus should be credited for bringing such complex and beautiful life to the piece(along with the intimacy director, whom I presume has done a stellar job as well since the production feels seamless and startling in its intimacy).

The last full production of the show I saw was the 2002 revival when I was 24 years old. While I loved it, I don’t think it was until tonight, 17 years later (and me 17 years older), that I fully understand these two people. These two very flawed, very damaged adults who somehow, maybe through fate, are brought together and totally connect with another person for maybe the first time in each of their lives.

No, neither of them asks permission before complimenting the other and they say hurtful things and hurt each other along the way so maybe it’s not a show that a 17 year old who knows nothing about what life can do to a person after years of neglect, heartache and hardships, would understand. Is it a show for the “MeToo” era? Yes. Why wouldn’t it be? Nobody does anything they don’t want to do. Nobody is forced to do anything. She tells him to leave a hundred times and he doesn’t. She never once goes to the door and opens it up for him to leave or calls for help. While she might be telling him to go, I believe she’s scared that he might just do it. So enough with that stupid argument trying to justify Your not understanding these two people.

I fell in love with both of them again tonight.

I saw Frankie and Johnny over the weekend, and all I can say is that it was stunning, in theory and in physicality. In terms of gender performance, the play explores the notions of basic societal expectations between two people and within themselves, and how Frankie and Johnny both go against the grain of these norms. When they say it's a play about being human...they aren't kidding. From my seat in the mezzanine I could see everything, and what I saw was absolutely spectacular. This is a play we NEED right now, putting every human being on the same playing field, and watching them make choices, decisions, and actions in the heat of the moment. We are all human, and this play reminds us what it is to care. 5/5 I definitely recommend

Anyone know the actual run time?

Thanks in advance

I saw this last night and was absolutely blown away. It's a wonderful play, performed by two masterful actors. To answer and comment on some things mentioned in this thread:

Regarding nudity - Michael Shannon is definitely naked at the beginning, though the lighting is pretty dark. It's a little funny/uncomfortable seeing his butt, but it does seem natural for the scene. Audra is more covered-up (as befits the character), though "appears" naked as she goes between the bed and the bathroom (where she puts on a robe). I think that she is actually wearing a body-stocking or something, and the lighting is quite dark.

I saw this with my parents! Now, I am 40 and they are in their 70s but we have always loved Audra (since they took me to see Carousel when I was in HS) so we decided to see this together. Yes, it was a little uncomfortable siting next to them during the sex scene, and discussions of "****s" and "blowjobs" but in the end, the play is about 2 people trying to connect, and we could all relate to that.

Yes, there are times when Johnny comes across a little creepy (knowledge of Michael Shannon's film career only enhances this). But I would never describe it as "rapey" or think that it comes across differently to a post-MeToo audience. Frankie has all sorts of walls up that he is trying to break down, because he feels that there could be a real connection between them. In the one moment that he gets more physical with her than she wants, he backs off once she's clearly said "no."

As mentioned above, there is a passing reference to AIDS, and having to be so careful "these days." I understand why this line would have been written/necessary in 1987, but it seemed unnecessary and distracting to my 2019 ears. Since it has no bearing on the rest of the play, it's like Chekov's gun that never goes off.

Saw this on Thursday and also thought it was really lovely. They’ve been very careful about digging into the elements of the script that may be troubling or make folks uncomfortable. Michael Shannon and Audra MacDonald are absolute pros on that stage, and have such wonderful chemistry. MacDonald has some line readings that got applause breaks. It’s really early to be saying this, but I do hope they’ll be remembered come awards time.

I heard a few people chat about this after the show, but I think that I’d like to see a little more progression with the characters and relationship throughout the show. E.g. how the immediately preceding events effect the following conversations, etc. That’s a nitpick, though — they’re in a great place for being less than a week into previews.

As for the people who asked about merch: the merch stand is downstairs. I just saw it in passing, but I definitely saw a tote with the show name on it and a really pretty blue mug with the name as well. Not sure what else was there, but no window cards just yet.

Jordan Catalano said: "A couple things - I was 4th row center. I believe Audra was wearing some sort of thong but that’s it, definitely not covering anything else up.

Secondly, saying the discussion of AIDS is unnecessary is ridiculous. As you yourself said, it was written and takes place 30 years ago. Why on earth would McNally change that line now? If that’s how people felt about the crisis happening then rewriting that line would be like rewriting history which is what so many people seem to want to do to plays and musicals now, to fit their “modern” sensibilities."

I will admit to being wrong on Audra's covering, I was in row M and not looking terribly hard. I just thought I saw something non-skin-like.

But to call my opinion regarding the AIDS line "ridiculous" is rude and uncalled for. You are free to disagree, I was just offering my opinion. And IN MY OPINION, that line took me out of the play, and did not add anything to the story or the characters. You may have a different opinion. If it wasn't there, you might have thought "how could a show set in 1987 NOT mention AIDS" but I would not. If it's there because they did not want to change any of the text, that's fine. I just found it interesting how I reacted to it.

You’re welcome!

(For what?)

I saw this Friday night. Got to the box office around 10:45 and was able to get a rush ticket--row C side orchestra, so I don't think anybody interested in rushing should have much trouble right now. (The man at the box office was very nice.) The five or six seats closer to the aisle were all empty so I could have moved over at intermission, but a bunch of people swooped in while I was in the restroom. Oh well.

I agree with the above. The show was worth it for the performances--McDonald and Shannon were excellent, as you'd expect--but otherwise there really wasn't much there. I was bored through much of the first act and considering leaving at intermission, but the final sequence in Act I was good enough I figured I might as well stay. But I'm bored with character development through sob stories, so when it came down to him telling his sad story and her telling hers, all of which seemed familiar and predictable, it just seemed tired. In the end, watching them sit there as the stage effect took place, my only response was, "That's it?"

As to the discussion above, there was never any moment where I felt uncomfortable with their interactions or felt like she was in any danger from him (as opposed to Burn This, where there were several moments when I thought the Anna character should be put off and afraid of that guy). But while I wasn't overly impressed with Burn This, there are still moments of that I remember two months later. It's been less than a week, and I barely remember this play. Circular conversations about nothing, a few funny moments (not that I could tell you what they were), sob stories as character development, and a couple well-played romantic moments. That's about it.

Updated On: 5/15/19 at 10:33 AM