GHOSTS - Ibsen Returns

[Skip23]

Posted: 2/13/25 at 11:20pm

 

Mrs Alving has everything but the hounds yapping at her rear end!  Here played by Lily Rabe - a favorite - she's dealing with a lot - most puzzlingly a throw-away framing device.  Jack O'Brien directs an all star cast including the scruffy Hamish Linklater and a strain-ing-ly pious Billy Crudup. First preview and all - seems rather efficient but not quite gripping.   Suspect it's the script.  I still hear the hounds yapping.   

[JeaniusIsMe]

Posted: 2/14/25 at 8:39pm

Definitely agree that something is amiss with this new translation. I wasn’t familiar with the play going in and I’ll admit to having zero clue just what actually ailed Oswald - read up on the play after and that made a hell of a lot more sense. Considering this translation is so focused on telling us everything rather than showing us, why not just spell that huge plot point out as well?

Anyway, that framing device was strange and unnecessary and frankly took me out of the play more than some of the other issues I had with it. Hoping someone down the line can explain why it’s being used.

[two ladies tickets]

Posted: 2/15/25 at 2:52pm

I like to consider myself a savvy theatergoer but somehow I had missed the fact that this was "a new version", so this is yet another classic play that someone decided needed to be fixed. I would say that this is based on Ibsen's Ghosts but it is not a good representation of the original script. As mentioned in the post above the major plot point that caused massive controversy when the play debuted is merely hinted at in this version and makes me wonder why they even chose to do it. Also, they seem to have taken a couple of random plot points from another Ibsen play called Rosmersholm and shoehorned them in for some reason. There is a lot of Acting with a capital A.  The design is decent.

[Dreamboy3]

Posted: 3/8/25 at 10:55pm

I’m puzzled why there was puzzlement about his illness. 

In any event, Lily Rabe is giving quite a masterful performance  Beatty and Hawk were…underwhelming.  I’m a fan of Crudup and I enjoyed his presence but he has a mischievous quality that works against the character.

Adam Feldman was a few rows ahead of me so I’ll be curious to read his review.

 

[Voter]

Posted: 3/9/25 at 12:58am

This was my first experience with this play, and while I liked the play (the writing, I mean), it was a bit confusing that this is such a renowned play. But it's interesting to hear that it maybe it's the new translation having diluted it. The play feels separated into distinct sections, each with a bit of a different focus, and it felt odd how the focus kept shifting in this way. Especially when the end suddenly becomes about the sons illness after it's only barely mentioned till then. I, too, was confused by the framing device. Overall, though, I found this engaging but forgettable. Hawke was... not great. But seeing Hamish Linklater on stage, who I've liked for a while, did not disappoint. He was remarkable and easily the standout of the cast. The rest of the cast was also very good but the performances on the whole (excluding only Linklater) did feel a bit "put on" though I figured that might be a directorial choice.