Harvey On The Negative Audience Reactions To AFFAIR- Page 2

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 10:44pm

Maybe ya just didn't like it.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 10:46pm

For whatever record there may be, I didn't dislike the show. I wasn't crazy about it either, but I did like it. I guess I'm one of those people who Harvey seems to imply don't really exist, since I neither loved it nor hated it with fiery passion, but was rather just lukewarm in my liking.

Updated On: 5/26/08 at 10:46 PM

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 11:03pm

Oh, Em, I wasn't talking about YOU. When I used the word "ya," I was referring to "anyone."

I simply meant that it seems a tad pompous (even though he admitted he wasn't a "shrink") to suggest that if someone isn't deeply affected by your work that they have something "wrong" with them.

I don't like peppermint. Is there some underlying reason for it this that I am repressing? Should I seek professional help?

If we're getting all psychological and stuff, allow me to quote Sigmund Freud:

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 11:09pm

I feel that A CATERED AFFAIR is a brilliant, glowing success - but I agree with Emcee on every point.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 11:19pm

Oh, Miss P, I was totally kidding. I know.

But yes, I do think you should be carefully evaluated due to your distaste toward peppermint.

(Munk, I miss you.)

Updated On: 5/26/08 at 11:19 PM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 11:21pm

I miss you too. We really need to play.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 11:25pm

Soon, I promise.

And since thou shalt not threadjack, back to ACA.

Updated On: 5/26/08 at 11:25 PM

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 5/26/08 at 11:26pm

Yeah, Munk. Where have you been?

Em, I am going to start searching for a therapist tomorrow. Maybe by 2010 I will be "cured" and will binge on candy canes.

Stupid peppermint.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/27/08 at 2:29am

"nor do I believe that his character would ever be openly gay with his family only to then explode about how they don't want to invite him to the wedding because he's gay. If they didn't accept him in the first place they wouldn't have let him be living with them. "

But life really isn't always so simple, nor do people always react rationally. It's not impossible or implausible for his character to be irrational or to feel the way he does given the way Tom treats him despite his sister's love. And sometimes things are just more complex than "she fully accepts me and he doesn't". I would bet there have been times when Aggie didn't accept him. The dinner scene for example.

"Yeah, it may be seem tad unrealistic for someone to be so openly gay during this period"

Absolutely not true. Plenty of people were out back then. The Mattachine Society was in existence. Stonewall didn't just happen out of nowhere with closeted people.

"It's not a gaffe, or lack of acting prowess, or anything like that. It was a conscious decision on his part. "

Excellent point. Too often, people assume the artists made a mistake instead of asking why did they make that choice--maybe that choice is absolutely valid and maybe I need to step out of my preconceived notions of what is and isn't. Just food for thought.

So, yes, sometimes SOME in the audience didn't get it. I think there are a bunch of people that just were not ready for this story--they do not connect to it. And that's fine. But what's curious is the out and out animosity some on BWW and in the community have for it. I think Harvey could have worded it better*, but I think he's on to something--maybe some of these people DO connect to it and that upsets them. There are definitely moments when the audience seems to get punched in the stomach by some pretty brutally honest things said on that stage, namely Aggie in the bridal shop.

*I don't think Harvey intended his comments to come off as harsh as is being intrepreted here. I can't speak for him, but that's my educated guess.

[ZiggyCringe]

Posted: 5/27/08 at 6:09am

In all my years of theatregoing, I've never seen an audience actively hate a show as much as "A Catered Affair."

I really liked it. I think it's the smartest musical that opened this year, and the score is gorgeous.

But the audience, at the performance I attended, HATED this show.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 5/27/08 at 7:29am

Really nicely put. I agree with every word.

I can't say I was permanently affected by it (there are very, very few shows that do that for me) but in the moment, I was very moved and enthralled by what was going on onstage. It's a beautiful piece of work and my favorite new musical of the year. It deserved way more Tony nods and positive reviews. I loved it and hope it finds a loyal target audience. It's a really good show.

[nyb418]

Posted: 5/27/08 at 9:19am

Saw the 3pm show on Sunday. My family and I (and the audience) absolutley adored it.I connected with the story and the characters quite well. I found it very emotional.My mother in law actually broke down at the end as she felt she lived the life of Aggie and saw alot of her own marriage played out on stage.

I personaly thought it would have worked very well as a play.

Afterwards, Harvey came out and was interested in all our critiques. Although he said he was in a rush, he spent some time wih the smnall crowd at the stage door.He is a sweetheart and I love how he made eye contact with everyone he spoke to.We waited a bit for Faith Prince but were well rewarded. She is truly a classy woman who loves her fans. She is interested in what the fans think and say.We all had a blast talking to her and appreciated her time .The Sunday crowd really enjoyed the show and showed the cast their enthusiasm. Bravo and I wish the cast well at the TONYS!

[DG]

Posted: 5/27/08 at 10:55am

I'd just like to point out that Harvey prefaced his last statement with "I suppose it's possible" - which doesn't imply direct condemnation to me. It just implies the possibility, which is true.

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 5/27/08 at 1:27pm

I found the show powerful, moving and beautiful, but I would not even "suggest" that people who didn't feel what I felt might be trying to avoid getting in touch with the part of themselves that connects to a work like this. That would be narcissistic, judgmental and obnoxious!

I think ACA has the potential to reach a broad spectrum of society, especially since it deals with "real" people in a "real" place, in a "real" time. But not everyone likes the music or the pace or the lack of pointed dramatic action. Some people like movies with car chases, explosions and graphic violence. I don't. But that doesn't mean I'm avoiding some inner aversion to watching things get blown up. It just means I'd rather spend my time elsewhere.

I don't think the animosity some are showing ACA is any different from that shown other productions. All of this debate makes ME want to see the show again. I think I'll be even more moved by it the second time, but if I'm not, it doesn't mean that I need to see a "shrink." (There are many other reasons for THAT!)

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 9:44am

Well....I saw the show this past Friday.

I had read most of the reviews and alot of the posts here and was truly braced for the worst.

It's not the worst.

The problem is, first and foremost, the music does nothing to expand the plot, themes or pack an emotional wallop; in truth, it just gets in the way. The songs are pedestrian and unmemorable...I don't even remember what they sounded like.

But it's too late for that--it's already a musical.

I think the central problem is framing the story through Winston. The story is about the parents and the children--it is not about Winston. By having Winston relate the story, a narrator is created where none is required. This isn't Sartre...it's a 50s slice-of-life, kitchen sink, whatever-you-wanna-call-it drama.

Doyle does his job--some nice if not profound mise-en-scene (la di dah!)...he tries to convey the transitory nature of life, the changes that are happening to all the characters...I'm not sure how successful he is.

I think the show's biggest problem is Harvey.

First, I CANNOT UNDERSTAND YOU, HARVEY! Speak the speech, I pray you.

He's not the only one, the three housewives were pretty incoherent as well. Didn't have that problem with any of the other actors.

It's a shame too--those three character roles would be goldin the hands of an Eve Arden, Mary Wickes or Thelma Ritter. These ladies are not Arden, Wickes or Ritter by any stretch of the imagination.

Yes, Harvey's character is an outsider, but he's clearly accepted in the neighborhood--the ladies consider him one of their own, obviously Tom and Ralph are okay with him and the caterer doesn't find him offensive at all--not that she gets his jokes...

Which brings me to the other problem--Harvey gets laughs to be sure--but Harvey's getting them--not Winston. It's funny because it's Harvey's contemporary comment on 50s values. Would it be funny in someone else's hands? Maybe, but that person would have to actually try to play Winston, not trade in on his persona.

That said, Faith and Tom couldn't be better or more (to use high school theatre terminology) "realistic." I bought Tom Wopat as the schlubby hubby, taking a backseat to his wife's wishes and doing the best he can to make a living. And Faith is just as honest as the tough ol' Ma. I was THRILLED when Leslie accidentally broke a glass and without missing a beat, they start to clean it up. But not all of it....a few minutes later, here comes Faith with a broom and dust pan. That's MY kind of actress.

Leslie and Matt are fine, but you can't help but feel they're both treading water till something better comes along. Will someone PLEASE cast Matt Cavenaugh in a good part? And Leslie just has WAY too much sparkle and quirkiness to downplay her natural charm. Let's see her in something fun soon!

Phil Hoffman was quite good as both the cabbie partner and the father-in-law. I didn't even realize he played both roles till I got home...but maybe I'm just stupid which would explain my feelings about Harvey.

I think alot of people see a show like this and because it reminds them of their own families, confuse familiarity with quality.

[Patash]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 11:27am

I'm confused. So I take it it's possible to go back to a post and change it after the fact? There is now no mention of intermission in bjh2114's original thread. But I do understand the issue. It's so easy to mean to type "after the show" and accidentally hit the wrong keys spelling out "intermission". That's such an easy typo to make! We recently had a letter to the editor in our local paper from someone taking issue with a rave review for a The Goat, or Who is Sylvia?, saying "obviously much of the audience didn't agree judging by the throngs that left the theatre at the end of Act I the night I saw it". Huh? If they left at the end of Act I, then the show was over -- again, there is no intermission, which obviously anyone who had SEEN the show would know. I think someone got caught here talking about a show he didn't attend.

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 12:24pm

"I think someone got caught here talking about a show he didn't attend. "

Well, it was bound to happen...

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 2:24pm

He's not indicating that the show's critics have some sort of psychopathology, but rather seems to be taking a psychodynamic approach. In his eyes, people are possibly rejecting the show because it makes their own related experiences and the emotions that they cause (most likely related to homosexuality) too salient.

That statement to me says far more interesting things about the speaker than about the group to whom he is referring.

Updated On: 5/28/08 at 02:24 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 2:57pm

Here's my question for Harvey: WHY is Winston the narrator?

What kind of point (literary or social) is being made?

Isn't the story about Aggie, Tom and how to spend the money? That seems the central conflict.

SPOLIERS!!!

I don't feel like Winston was engaged in the story enough to require his presence. For example, he's disinvited from the wedding, but it doesn't have the sting it should have because we don't know how vital Winston is to the family.

He sleeps on the sofa...shouldn't the sofa become a pawn then? They use it during the dinner party and Winston does comment about it being used, but he does so without any sense of territorality (did i just make up a word?). My roommate sleeps on the sofa in my apt (don't ask) and we treat that sofa like it's his, even though it isn't.

Or perhaps Aggie asks Winston to help with the wedding and then says, "But you can't come." The stakes for him just aren't high enough to be interesting.

Aggie and Tom have a very difficult decision to make, a brief moment of perfection for the daughter they've neglected or a bright future for Tom and Aggie alone.

We just see a glimpse of the fear Aggie has of being left with Tom, whom she doesn't really think loves her--and that's fascinating. But it's also subtle.

You miss that if you miss Tom's line "Don't put words in my mouth" in regard to Aggie's comment about a loveless marriage.

It's about the fear of repeating history and how to escape it--the whole show is about escape really.

Those fire escape stairs aren't there for nuthin'.

I think this show has all the elements needed--it just needs a re-write and a different Winston.

And maybe a helicopter.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 4:40pm

"They use it during the dinner party and Winston does comment about it being used, but he does so without any sense of territorality "

Aside from kicking everyone off the sofa during the dinner?

I can't make enough sense of your critique to fully respond to it but Winston and Aggie's situations are similar--they are both afraid to love and be loved. And finally they both learn to.

You didn't like it--got it. I don't think the show's as flawed as you think. The writers and Doyle aren't dummies. They made choices you don't agree with. Fierstein's not a dummy. He and Doyle made choices about his character you don't agree with.

No helicopters please.

Updated On: 5/28/08 at 04:40 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 4:58pm

Lord, I knew you'd jump on me for this.

Yes, he did kick them off the sofa, but I never saw what THAT MEANT TO HIM. And none of the other characters treated the sofa as Harvey's. If the stakes were life and death, as they should be, his reaction (and their) reactions would have been more interesting or at least not as brief. As it is, he plops down and moves on...

And his laughs are Harvey-oriented. It's funny because we all know Harvey, we all know he's gay and we all know he's mischievous, so of course the jokes land. But they don't come from the material or the performance but from the reputation.

If Winston has a struggle about whether or not to live with his bf, he doesn't say much about it. In fact, I don't remember him talking about whether he should stay or go at all--he just announces it at the end of the show.

I don't think he or Doyle is dumb--nor did I say that.

And I didn't say I didn't like it--I just think it's unfocused and off-balance.

My problems with the show are mainly literary.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 5:01pm

"If Winston has a struggle about whether or not to live with his bf, he doesn't say much about it. In fact, I don't remember him talking about whether he should stay or go at all--he just announces it at the end of the show."

He completely goes off about this during the dinner scene. I'm starting to think you missed the dinner scene. lol

I feel like all you need is right there in the script and in these performances. I found the piece lacking nothing. I was deeply moved by it.

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 5:05pm

I'm glad you enjoyed it....maybe I missed those lines because I couldn't understand Harvey...but it wasn't clear at any rate--and how many times have you seen the show now? Or at least heard it? Of course it makes sense when you have it memorized.

Which kinda galls me because toward the end of the show, he sings in a really nice smooth tone--if he keeps it out of his throat, he's fine.

But that is a DEFINITE problem...one you'll find posted on alot of sites about this show. I ain't the only one.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 5:14pm

Well it's the first I've of it on here. I don't read other sites. Maybe it was an off night for sound?

"and how many times have you seen the show now? Or at least heard it? Of course it makes sense when you have it memorized. "

Cute. :P No, I formed my opinions from the beginning. Yes, hearing a piece more than once is a help, but it didn't take 10 or 50 or so listens to get it. Got it the first time.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 5/28/08 at 5:20pm

Best Musical of the 2007-2008 season, in my opinion.