Posted: 5/9/23 at 2:37pm
Does anyone have insight into the view of the stage from the last few rows of center orchestra? It was fine when I saw A Christmas Carol at the Lyceum a few years ago, but with the higher set for this show, I wonder if I might miss anything that happens towards the top of the set. TIA.
Posted: 5/9/23 at 2:57pm
Emma White said: "This thread is nuts, LOL.
AA is normally sold as rush, right? I've been dying to see this from closer and everyone I know who has rushed has gotten front row, so hoping to get that by rushing.
As for the "overall takeaway," well, I don't know if there's supposed to be some clear strong message from this. I think it's just a story about
But I don't think there's meant to be some kind of clear message from it. I think this story probably appeals most to people like me who love thrillers precisely because of that element of trying to piece a story together with strange, haphazard bits of information. The mystery of what is going on isthe point. Personally, the story for me became clear the second Hank started talking in the dinner scene - there was the satisfying moment of OH I THINK I KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, and then Raleigh confirmed my understanding of the story in the scene after it.
Re: gore, I personally found the gore too much from my seat in the mezzanine, but I am not a fan of gore. It's easy to look away, though."
My Row AA - seat 101 and 102 tickets were most definitely NOT sold as rush tickets. They cost $179 each with a meager $10 discount taking them down to $169 each. I could not get the other discount code to work. Considering how obstructed the view was, they should have been sold as rush. I would advise anyone to avoid those seats.
Posted: 5/11/23 at 8:56pm
For anyone who has seen it recently, what time did you get out?
Posted: 5/11/23 at 10:18pm
the.hard.part said: "For anyone who has seen it recently, what time did you get out?"
Tonight, it started at 8:05 and I was on the street at 9:50 which matched what the ushers were saying pre-show.
I liked it quite a bit. Not all of it works but there’s a lot I really liked. It’s also quite funny, even if I’m not sure all of the laughter was intended.
Updated On: 5/12/23 at 10:18 PM
Posted: 5/11/23 at 11:55pm
Emma White said: "This thread is nuts, LOL.
AA is normally sold as rush, right? I've been dying to see this from closer and everyone I know who has rushed has gotten front row, so hoping to get that by rushing.
As for the "overall takeaway," well, I don't know if there's supposed to be some clear strong message from this. I think it's just a story about
But I don't think there's meant to be some kind of clear message from it. I think this story probably appeals most to people like me who love thrillers precisely because of that element of trying to piece a story together with strange, haphazard bits of information. The mystery of what is going on isthe point. Personally, the story for me became clear the second Hank started talking in the dinner scene - there was the satisfying moment of OH I THINK I KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, and then Raleigh confirmed my understanding of the story in the scene after it.
Re: gore, I personally found the gore too much from my seat in the mezzanine, but I am not a fan of gore. It's easy to look away, though."
Is this kinda like Alex Garland's "Men"? That was a good film.
Posted: 5/12/23 at 10:07am
Saw this last night and quite enjoyed it.
Rushed at about 10:45 in the morning and was Orch L Row B. Great seat. Only missed a couple of things that happened at the door.
It felt different from a lot of shows I’ve seen recently. Loved the eerie and strange vibes. It’s not full throttle horror, but more of that ongoing uneasy feeling that something screwed up is happening in this house.
Great performances from an ensemble cast. The sound design is crazy good. And Joe Mantello is just such a master of his craft.
I guess I’m surprised to hear that so many people are baffled or confused by it because everything felt quite clear to me. And I think it is very much in the vein of horror/thrillers to leave you with some unanswered questions. Maybe they’ve been using previews to clarify things. Either way, this felt very refreshing to me.
Regarding the structure on the ceiling of the house. From up close, they looked like hearts and they had lights inside them that beat like hearts.
Posted: 5/12/23 at 10:19am
About the ceiling-
In Chicago it was staged at A Red Orchid a theater with a very low ceiling. When you entered, there was a complex web of thick red string hanging from the ceiling. It was weird, added to the creepiness, and was sort of beautiful. When they eviscerated Henry they pulled all this red string out of him... either his soul or abstract viscera... they then attached that string to the string on the ceiling and it was sort of... "A-ha!" We'd been staring at viscera/souls the whole show without realizing it.
I'd imagine what they're doing here is similar?
Posted: 5/12/23 at 12:26pm
KJisgroovy said: "About the ceiling-
"
The red string is still used, but the web of it is seen on the kitchen table at the start of the play, like a quilt the girls are working on. It’s cleared from the stage in the first blackout and brought down from the flys over the kitchen table for the climactic dinner scene. When they pull Henry’s veins out of his leg, they tie it into the rest.
The ceiling here is different than the design of the original production as you described it. It looks like a regular roof of a cabin, but it’s covered in lanterns/glass bulbs and it’s black and shiny. When Henry puts on the extraction mask and then dies, the lantern things glow on and off, and it looks like the roof is covered in souls or fireflies or something.
Updated On: 5/12/23 at 12:26 PM
Posted: 5/13/23 at 7:22am
Today is the day!! Finally seeing Grey House and I cant wait! I’ve avoided this thread since first preview and can’t wait to go through and read all the comments later.
Posted: 5/13/23 at 10:16am
A couple of thoughts on the ending....
For me the thing that was narratively most confusing about the ending was a lot was made of one person leaves and a new girl comes in and replaces her. So Squirrel disappears and a new girl arrives at the front door, I got that.
But also Laurie Metcalf's character leaves, and Tatiana Maslany's character was told she had the choice to either leave or take care of the children. I get that the girls and mother figures serve different roles in the house but there has to be a way to explain that better without it seeming like two completely different sets of rules.
I don't need to understand everything, for example I didn't quite clock that the girls were also deer or what the boy represented, but I do think it should be more straightforward to understand to what extend Maslany is volunteering for her ending.
Also, naming a character who is also a deer "Squirrel" seems needlessly complicated, lol.
Updated On: 5/13/23 at 10:16 AM
Posted: 5/13/23 at 10:32am
Jonathan Cohen, I think you typed your spoiler outside of the spoiler box.
Posted: 5/13/23 at 10:40am
uncageg said: "Jonathan Cohen, I think you typed your spoiler outside of the spoiler box."
I just fixed it, sorry about that!
Posted: 5/13/23 at 5:49pm
Y’all I loved it!! I was in the mezz today so some things I didn’t see - like Bernie has blood on her nose/face and I didn’t notice it until I saw a picture now. I’m seeing it again in June from the orchestra to get all the details I missed! Colby Kipnes, Squirrel, is the stand out here.
Posted: 5/14/23 at 2:16pm
It’s crazy that people need to see this freaking thing twice to even come close to trying to understand it.
Posted: 5/14/23 at 2:46pm
Matt Rogers said: "It’s crazy that people need to see this freaking thing twice to even come close to trying to understand it."
They don’t, as has already been shown by this thread. We get it, you hated it.
Posted: 5/14/23 at 4:05pm
Cape Twirl of Doom said: "Matt Rogers said: "It’s crazy that people need to see this freaking thing twice to even come close to trying to understand it."
They don’t, as has already been shown by this thread. We get it, you hated it."
Multiple people have said they are seeing it again to try and get clarity and understand it.
Updated On: 5/14/23 at 04:05 PM
Posted: 5/14/23 at 4:50pm
perfectpenguin said: "Y’all I loved it!! I was in the mezz today so some things I didn’t see - like Bernie has blood on her nose/face and I didn’t notice it until I saw a picture now. I’m seeing it again in June from the orchestra to get all the details I missed! Colby Kipnes, Squirrel, is the stand out here."
That's interesting that you thought she was the standout, I was amazed that Laurie Metcalf didn't even seem like she was acting. But really, with so many of them it's just wonderful performances all-around that I could see any one of them being a standout for someone.
Posted: 5/14/23 at 5:52pm
Fwiw, I also thought Colby Kipnes was a standout. Squirrel is definitely the most enigmatic of the girls, and she’s the first Max and Henry meet.
Posted: 5/20/23 at 10:44pm
Some rush insight: I went to the box office at 4 p.m. for the evening show. I got J 18, house right all the way to the side. It was mostly fine, but both sets of stairs were mostly blocked. Definitely worth the price for $35; I was just never sure whether I was missing anything on the stairs (I don’t think I was).
One question about something minor that was obscured:
What was the jump scare toward the beginning when Max pulls back the curtain?
Posted: 5/20/23 at 11:17pm
hollebolle said: "Some rush insight: I went to the box office at 4 p.m. for the evening show. I got J 18, house right all the way to the side. It was mostly fine, but both sets of stairs were mostly blocked. Definitely worth the price for $35; I was just never sure whether I was missing anything on the stairs (I don’t think I was).
One question about something minor that was obscured:
"
The little girl was standing there. Like the one in the promos. Was sitting house right in the Mezz and only saw it when people screamed.
Posted: 5/21/23 at 10:39pm
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12099575/Deeply-disturbing-new-Broadway-play-leaving-audiences-TERRIFIED.html
This is in the Daily Mail tonight. The last bit of the article was confusing because there a few sentences about a movie that was too scary for people to watch. Don't know what that has to do with the play.
Posted: 5/22/23 at 5:53am
ManOfLaMuncha said: "https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12099575/Deeply-disturbing-new-Broadway-play-leaving-audiences-TERRIFIED.html
This is in the Daily Mail tonight. The last bit of the article was confusing because there a few sentences about a movie that was too scary for people to watch. Don't know what that has to do with the play."
Even as someone who thinks this show is amazing... was this written by ChatGPT? Lol such an odd article.
Posted: 5/22/23 at 11:31am
My wife and I saw this Friday night. I really wanted to like it but....
We both left with WTF? Technically flawless as far as sets, performances, lighting, and especially sound design. I deliberately avoided spoilers before seeing this. Now I am reading through them to understand what I saw on stage. Great reading and the play makes a little more sense, but I just think the source material is weak. Maybe I'm just not smart enough, but even understanding more about the plot I would not see this again.
Posted: 5/22/23 at 11:37am
ManOfLaMuncha said: "https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12099575/Deeply-disturbing-new-Broadway-play-leaving-audiences-TERRIFIED.html
This is in the Daily Mail tonight. The last bit of the article was confusing because there a few sentences about a movie that was too scary for people to watch. Don't know what that has to do with the play."
Slightly unrelated, but they used my tweet in that article, and I had no idea hahaha, what a fun surprise!
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
