HARRY POTTER AND THE CURSED CHILD Previews- Page 10

[HunterK]

Posted: 3/31/18 at 10:41pm

Hi All!

Not sure if this has been asked yet, but I'll give it a go. 

Does anyone have info, suggestions or websites on where I can go to be ready for this show? I have seen all movies and read the books, but that was 3-4 years ago. I am seeing the show next week and just want to be ready to understand it all and not sit there confused (more than my regular confused look)? I just don't have to time to re-read to re-watch everything. Any suggestions would be so appreciated!

 

THANK YOU! 

[dearalanaaaa]

Posted: 3/31/18 at 10:47pm

HunterK said: "Hi All!

Not sure if this has been asked yet, but I'll give it a go.

Does anyone have info, suggestionsor websites on where I can go to be ready for this show? I have seen all movies and read the books, but that was 3-4 years ago. I am seeing the show next week and just want to be ready to understand it all and not sit there confused (more than my regular confused look)? I just don't have to time to re-read to re-watch everything. Any suggestions would be so appreciated!



THANK YOU!"

In the playbill there is a quick rehash of the whole plot up until when the show takes place. Just read that, I hadn't read the books in years and I understood everything after reading it!

[LesWickedly]

Posted: 3/31/18 at 10:48pm

If you can’t rewatch all the films, I’d recommended at least watching Goblet of Fire and both parts of Deathly Hallows. If you don’t have time for much, I believe I’ve seen that the Playbill has information on the whole series to sort of recap for you.

[WestCoast331]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 10:09am

We did the doubleheader yesterday, which was more exhausting than I would have anticipated. That being said, I’ll echo everyone else here in saying that this has got to be one of the most impressive technical achievements Broadway’s seen. I avoided all spoilers and didn’t read the script beforehand— wise move I think— and I certainly wasn’t alone as there were a lot of other people gasping at various reveals. The story worked on the whole for me... a few random quibbles here and there but overall the show has excellent momentum and deserves its long running time.

Anthony Boyle is undoubtedly the standout of the ensemble cast, with most of the leading players turning in some great performances as well. As stated by others, McGonagall is the weakest link and the one that many people around me were complaining about.

And the theatre renovation is stunning. Absolutely stunning. Go early, walk around, take it all in.

FYI: We sat row D center, and the view was stupendous. Stage wasn’t too high, caught everything, etc. Sure, a few illusions were “spoiled” by being so close, but that didn’t impact our experience negatively whatsoever. There are just so many illusions happening, sometimes at a very rapid pace. Didn’t appear to be a bad seat in the house, at least in the orchestra.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 2:48pm

I saw both parts on Saturday and while I questioned that choice, I was SO happy I did both shows in a single day. Everything felt like one giant experience, and if I had gone two nights in a row, I think I would have felt that Part II was not as special and would have been less satisfying. It wasn't taxing at all. Had a break for dinner and had plenty of time.

I read on the show's website that you don't need to be familiar with HARRY POTTER to see the show, and that it is enjoyable without the knowledge of what happens in the books. I want to address that for a moment. I disagree. Someone who hadn't seen the films or hasn't read the books would only appreciate the stage magic and production values. Without knowing the characters and specific plot occurances, one would not appreciate the play's many moments of intricate nuance and depth of understanding that its characters have. You would be mostly lost. Even someone who gets the gist of it, whose limited knowledge comes from only seeing film clips or perhaps by reading the timeline in the Showbill, wouldn't be able to appreciate fully all that is going on. This is a sequel - an expansion - of the story. It doesn't live on its own.

Security line was long, and once inside there are long lines for everything. The merch booths, the concessions, the bathrooms, everything. I recommend exploring the entire beautifully renovated lobby (from basement to dress circle) but I would do so at Part II. It's too crowded at Part I because everyone is trying to look around at the same time. There IS merch that you can only buy at the booths and not at the gift shop that is open to the public. That said, it's not a lot. Also, another tip: if you desire basic concessions such as wine, soda, water, ice cream, candy, etc. then go to your seat. There is a menu there and you can use your phone to place an order and someone brings it to you. This way, you can skip the long lines. Note, however, that there are concessions NOT available in this manner, such as fruit, certain candy, certain beverages, etc.

There truly is not a bad seat in the house. Not even the box seats (I went up there to try it out). I think, honestly, the best viewing is from the mid-to-rear orchestra (starting in row M) or in the front dress circle.

Now then, the play itself.

Firstly, the lighting design is one of the best I have ever seen. It accomplishes the artistic and technical needs exceptionally well. EXCEPTIONALLY. A word I'm specifically choosing because it fits to describe the lighting best. It should certainly be studied by students of stagecraft. The lighting design makes the production. 

Yes. It's true. The special effects are actually surprising and I saw some tricks done that I have never seen before. One can probably figure out how everything is done, but to see it all executed so seamlessly and flawlessly is what will make you believe in magic. As someone who thinks I have seen it all, I was surprised that I bought into the magic elements as much as I did. Bravo!

The other embellishments of the production, including the stage movement, set design, costumes, and music, all served the production well. They heightened the play to create for an experience that makes one believe you are living in a different world.

I have nothing negative to say about the performers. You can't expect imitations of the film actors. I knew each character immediately by the appearance and that was enough for me to believe that they were that character.

Part I was better than Part II. The writing leaves something to be desired, but it doesn't matter. It's not BAD. I just wish it felt more worthy on its own, without all the production elements. That said, it doesn't matter. I had a great time and this will certainly be one of the more significant theatre going memories I will ever have. Special, unique, stunning, and  worthy of the six hours I spent there.

 

Updated On: 4/1/18 at 02:48 PM

[musikman]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 6:44pm

CapnHook:

Having done the Thurs/Fri coupling, I’d say that Part I definitely left me wanting more, and the anticipation for seeing Part II kept building and I couldn’t wait to get back to the theatre the next evening. The whole day allowed me to think and process what I saw, leaving me pumped up for the second performance. I can’t even imagine what it’s like for the performers to do both parts in one day. It’s such an epically demanding piece!

Also, am I the only one here who found the show/writing/acting/overall performance stronger in Part II than Part I? Perhaps it was the more emotional moments that stuck with me more, especially as a huge Potter fan (books and films).

[Conif]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 9:51am

When I saw Part 2 again, I started noticing what were the things that Harry had to experience before he started to change towards Albus. It wasn't as fast as what I remembered from first viewing. I think the playwrights had to make him earn it, make it more true to life.

The other powerful moment for me was Delphi. Her character doesn't really get revealed until the end and I was really touched by what Harry said to her.

Some of the moments that affected me don't really happen until towards the second half of Part 2 and by that time, my attention was filled up already from the earlier moments.

My sense is Part 2 may suffer from this and it may do better with a second viewing. Or failing that, perhaps a  quick read of Part 2 of the script before seeing it.

edit: The play has people switch identities throughout but the imagery for that last switch is still resonating with me. Some things just come in on a level below words, especially when one is experiencing it live.

Updated On: 4/2/18 at 09:51 AM

[Serendipiteedee]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 9:59am

Conif said: "When I saw Part 2 again, I started noticing what were the things that Harry had to experience before he started to change towards Albus. It wasn't as fast as what I remembered from first viewing. I think the playwrights had to make him earn it, make it more true to life.

The other powerfulmoment for me was Delphi. Her character doesn't really get revealed until the end and I was really touched by what Harry said to her.

Some of the moments that affected me don't really happen until towards the second half of Part 2 and by that time, my attention was filled up already from the earlier moments.

My sense is Part 2 may suffer from this and it may do better with a second viewing. Or failing that, perhaps a quick read of Part 2 of the script before seeing it."

 

 

Mm, I agree. It’s fascinating to see how different reviews written by book fans are from reviews written by “fandom” people. 

 

[Megsamegatron]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 11:56am

musikman said: "
Also, am I the only one here who found the show/writing/acting/overall performance stronger in Part II than Part I? Perhaps it was the more emotional moments that stuck with me more, especially as a huge Potter fan (books and films)."

Part II is my favorite part! There are more tech elements in the first part but Part II Act I is my favorite with the acting and the writing. Ugh, makes me want to see it again just thinking about it. 

[Fosse76]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 12:05pm

When I first saw the show in London, I recall liking the first part better than the second part. The second time I saw it in London, I really enjoyed the second part better than the first part. When I saw it last month on Broadway, I didn't favor either part; they were equal for me. Part 2 is definitely more character driven than Part 1.

[MrsSallyAdams]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 12:14pm

For the ones who asked, here's what you'll want to know from the books (or films) going in to Cursed Child. 

In book one:

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

An evil wizard, Voldemort, killed Harry's parents. A protective spell killed Voldemort in the process. Baby Harry survived and was raised by his abusive Aunt. As a teenager he was sent to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizard. He made two friends, Ron and Hermione, an enemy, posh student Draco Malfoy, and survived an attempt on his life by Voldermort's followers.

In book four:

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

Harry is tricked into competing in the Triwizard Tournament alongside fellow student Cedric Diggory. Cedric and Harry win the tournament but Voldermort's followers use Harry's blood to revive Voldemort. Harry escapes but Cedric is killed. Cedric's father blames Harry for his death.

In book six:

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

Harry's mentor, school headmaster Albus Dumbledore, is murdered by the mysterious potion-master Severus Snape. 

In book seven:

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

Harry gathers the magical artifacts needed to defeat Voldemort and learns of Professor Snape's tragic semi-noble backstory. Years later Harry has a son he names Albus Severus Potter after his two mentors.

The play begins where book seven ends. Other Potter fans, did I leave anything important out?

[Dancingthrulife2]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 12:31pm

I saw it three times in London and was fairly bored the third time. There's only so much the stage magic can do before the problematic writing sucks the soul out of the show.

[Serendipiteedee]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 12:45pm

I saw it over twenty times in London and I love the writing. The writing, the story, and the ideas the story expresses are what make me love the show. That and some of the performances. The spectacle is great, but it's not enough to make me want to come back over and over again. 

Seeing the original cast again this past Thursday and Friday brought it all back for me. The trio embody Harry, Ron and Hermione so perfectly, especially Jamie Parker. Watching him is like watching Harry walk straight out of the books. He's talked in interviews about reading the series over and over again and it really shows. The magic is fun, but what I really love are the character interactions, watching them learn and change as they go through their adventures. I love how the idea of love giving people the strength to make good choices is still so evident. 

Sometimes I wonder if the stage craft actually distracts people from the deeper stuff. Although so much of it reinforces the themes: the stage and the choreography is full of circles, emphasising the cycles we watch play out. The cycle of abuse, with regard to Harry and another character. The men trying to give their sons what they needed as kids as opposed to what their kids actually need. 

I think the new dialogue in the hospital scene and the scene in McGonagall's office is great, especially for people who needed that spelled out for them. 

[grocker]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 5:26pm

I watched HP and the Cursed Child on Saturday March 31st for Part 1 and 2 in one day, and having watched it a handful of times in London with the original cast and the current London cast, it was interesting to note the little tweaks between London and Broadway.

Totally agree with Serendipiteedee's comment above: the principal cast are a joy to watch because they really embody their roles. Anthony Boyle and Jamie Parker are my faves (but really, they're all great).

Admittedly, the non-Brits were distracting when they couldn't hold their accents so I can only hope they get better as the show goes on.

The play itself is executed mostly the same as its original London counterpart, but a few fun/interesting changes I noticed included the following:

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

The St Oswald's Home for Old Witches and Wizards sequence included some physical antics by the residents that aren't in the London production.

The young male attendant dealing with the residents in the Broadway version puts up more of a fight than the London version. The London attendant gets picked on by the residents, whereas the Broadway one is actively trying to get the better of them in his interactions.

The elderly black woman on the couch laughing as she pulls out fabric from her throat in the London version is replaced with an elderly woman embedded in the couch with her legs in disarray before saying the 'miserable old sod' line regarding Amos Diggory.

Scorpius and Hermione's line in St Jerome's church as the principal cast discuss theories about Delphi and Voldemort:

'You're not wrong.' (London)

'You're right.' (Broadway)

Not 100% sure on this, but I feel that Scorpius' lines about the fallacy of fulfilling and breaking prophecies when trying to reason with Delphi were cut in Broadway.

That's what I can remember from the top of my head, but it's still previews for the Cursed Child on Broadway, so I don't know if those changes are staying or going before the official opening night on April 22. I would tend to think they would stay if those are the changes they found necessary across the pond.

I wish I could remember more specifics on the St Oswald's scene because I find movement/choreography to play a big part in this play and it's personally something I pay attention to when I watch live performances in general.

The refurbished Lyric Theatre is splendid. I wish I had more time in New York to watch it again to catch more changes, but alas, not everyone can own a Time Turner that gleams like gold just the way the Malfoys like it.

I'd love to read about any more changes people have noticed between London and Broadway.

[Serendipiteedee]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 5:49pm

"I'd love to read about any more changes people have noticed between London and Broadway."

I can't get the spoiler function to work, so I won't list all the changes I noticed here, but I've detailed them in some tumblr posts for anyone interested: 

Part 1 

Dialogue changes

Part 2

 

[Conif]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 7:20pm

Thanks for this. I wasn't as clear that the circles meant repeating patterns. That makes sense now that the last scenes in Godric's Hollow have some straight lines.

Also thanks for telling me about those two added scenes.

I pm'ed you with some thoughts as I don't want to spoil for others.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 10:30pm

I saw Harry Potter last week, and you can add me to this list of raves for this truly magical production. It takes a lot to surprise and wow me in the theatre these days, so my expectations were high from the beginning. I'm happy to say they were met and surpassed.

The spectacle of the production is astounding. The Lyric Theatre right now genuinely looks and feels like a work of art. Whoever said it feels like what an auditorium at Hogwarts would be like is right on the money.

Performances are across the board sensational (with the exception of an incredibly disappointing Professor McGonagall). Jamie Parker has tapped into the heart and soul of Harry Potter, which is such a difficult task since the entire world knows this character intimately. He got it perfectly.

The standout performance, however, is Anthony Boyle as Scorpius Malfoy. If it were up to me alone, he'd be getting the Tony this year. He's absolutely nailing it on that stage.

Part I and Part II are quite different in tone, and I think I enjoyed Part I more (not to say I didn't like Part II). It's more focused on spectacle and magic, versus the darker, deeper themes which are explored in Part II. Sure, the playwriting isn't exactly Pulitzer-worthy or anything, but it's not as elementary as some on here have made it seem. I was thoroughly engaged the entire time, and was even moved to tears a few times in Part II.

"Magical" sums up the entire experience perfectly. If we're going to have Harry Potter on Broadway for the next 50 years, I'm happy to say that this production is strong and worthy of a long stay here in New York.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 10:44pm

Why do people hate the actress playing McGonagall so much? She’s my favorite character in the books, and Maggie Smith was perfection in the films, so I’m very concerned!

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 10:51pm

adamgreer said: "Why do people hate the actress playing McGonagall so much? She’s my favorite character in the books, and Maggie Smith was perfection in the films, so I’m very concerned!"

Maggie Smith was indeed perfection (when is she not though?). The actress in this production varies across three or four different accents and is way too young. To me, she was the only one who seemed like she was desperately over-trying to emulate a character from the film, versus making the character her own.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 1:27pm

As someone who is also dissatisfied with the portrayal of McGonagall, I think there is more at work than a poor accent or bad acting. 

1. The actress is not Maggie Smith. You cannot escape her voice, her demeanor, or her style. She was perfect. 

2. I think she is written out of character, and poorly at that. At one point she berates both Harry and Hermione over the handling of the time turner, as if she was still their teacher and they answer to her. She is written almost to believe that she is the new Dumbledore, and the book version of McGonagall wouldn't dare presume that.

3. The actress is too young. How can she presume to be the new Dumbledorewhen she looks like she is the same age as Harry and Hermione. She does not have "presence" that would allow the audience to believe that she should be revered as much as Dumbledore, able to command control of situations. 

I had the same problems with the character in London, but the character's flaws are more apparent on Broadway. The actress just is string enough to overcome these flaws.

 

 

Though McGonagall is a stern force to be reckoned with, she simply comes across as bossy whenever she berates the trio. They are no longer her students, and in one scene in particular not only does she treat them as if they are still 13 year olds, she also thinks she is in charge of them, ordering them around as if they don't know what they are doing (when in fact they do, which is revealed a little later).  

3. The actress is too young. She doesn't look much older than Jamie Parker, and she is not a strong enough actress to overcome the characters shortcomings as written.

[rclocalz]

Posted: 4/6/18 at 11:26am

I got to see Part 1 last night (can't wait for Part 2 tonight), truly thrilling experience in the theater. I sat in the third to last row of the Balcony and I have to say that the seats are not bad up there. For $20 tickets, you can see basically everything just fine. Tonight was the first night that the Front of House tried a "no snacks and candy inside the theater" policy and I must say it was a BLESSING!! Only drinks were allowed. I have heard grumbles on the message board previously about bad audience behavior and the loud snack wrappers. I felt like last night's audience was well behaved (for the most part the folks around me) and there were less distractions. I REALLY hope the uphold this policy!

[Notreallysilent 2]

Posted: 4/6/18 at 11:56am

I’m glad they put that new policy! I went this past Wednesday, and I didn’t particularly notice any sounds from candy bags and food, I’m sure it will definitely be really distracting when it happens, especially in such an intimate show like this. Also, I completely agree with what people said about mcgonnagal. I was utterly surprised to see how young the actress was at the stage door! Anyways, for the actual show I had really high expectations given I am a huge potter fan and my friends have told me amazing things from the London production. All I can say is it exceeded my very high expectations. There are still issues with the book, and even some inconsistencies I noticed with the other stories, but the story works just so well on stage. My mouth was on the floor for some of the effects like wow I’ve never seen a more cool piece of theater. The actors were amazing. Anthony Boyle is literally the perfect scorpius he really plays the part so so well. The theater is absolutely gorgeous. I walked around the thester to look at the little details they’ve added and they really thought of everything. On the mezz level the wallpaper is a green and has a snake theme to go along with nagini. The bottom floor has a yellow themed wallpaper, and the rugs throughout were red and blue (so I’m guessing they tried to match the house colors). The lobby gets really hectic though while your waiting for the doors to open. They opened them at 1:10 for me for part 1 and then at 1:30 opened the auditorium doors. The lines get very long for everything. Just a head up there is a merchandise stand in the mezz lobby which seemed less crowded than the orchestra one (you could also use the public store on 42nd). It has mostly everything you would get in the theater besides a few things. The theming for all the stores are really cool they mimic the theming in HP world in universal. I tried the pumpkin juice and it was pretty good. I never tried it in universal so I was eager to here. It pretty much tastes like cinnamon apple sauce to me. There were also other fresh juices like regular cider, a berry one and a green one that I didn’t check what flavor it was. The entire staff was super kind and helpful, and I loved their uniform it really puts you in the setting. As far as my view it was literally perfect. I sat in row x in the aisle, and it was a perfect view. My ticket was $20 per part, and I literally could not have been happier. The overhang does not block anything. I’ve seen pictures of the overhang in the palace theatre in London and it’s nothing like that. You see the entire set even the top part of it. The aisle in the orchestra is also real cool for a certain scene (which I obviously won’t mention since I don’t want to spoil anything). Overall this is a perfect production that will definitely make potterheads like myself happy. There is nothing quite like the ending for part 1, it literally left my mouth on the floor. I highly recommend this show if you can get tickets it’s really worth the price. Btw if anyone wants to see the view from rear orchestra just let me know I could try to attach a picture of the view!

edit: I completely forgot to mention the coreograohy and movement for this show. I was surprised at just how cool the movement was. They really thought of every single detail of the show. Every transition is perfectly choreographed. Also, the music works surprisingly well in this show. I was a bit disappointed when I heard the music from the movie was not in it, but if you were disappointed like me trust me the music is perfect within the show. Overall it was just a magical experience no other word to explain it.

Updated On: 4/6/18 at 11:56 AM

[Lot666]

Posted: 4/6/18 at 12:55pm

Is there any iteration of "Hedwig's Theme" anywhere in the music?

[Notreallysilent 2]

Posted: 4/6/18 at 1:11pm

No there isn’t. It was disappointing at first, but the music within the show works very well, and idk if hedwigs theme would fit with it.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/6/18 at 1:16pm

The music in the show is totally different from the film scores. It was a little jarring at first since it felt out of tone for me, but I got used to it quickly, and it really works perfectly for the show.