INHERIT THE WIND - First Preview - March 19, 2007- Page 2

[Tirso de Molina]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 12:02pm

I can't comment on O'Hare's performance as Hornbeck until after I see the show tonight, but I've always found that a fascinating role -- and it's nearly always cast against type; think of Gene Kelly in the movie. This is why I thought O'Hare sounded like an excellent choice on paper, since his "nebbishy" affect onstage would play against the character's deep cynicism. I'll be interested to see tonight how I find him.

Of course, it's also fair to assume that all the actors are still fine-tuning their approaches; some productions change a lot during previews. I remember sitting through a preview of the LCT AWAKE AND SING that was one of the least entertaining evenings I ever spent in the theater (I was sitting next to one of the production staff for the show, and it was far more interesting watching him scribble page after page of notes on his yellow legal pad than it was watching the show itself). But the show improved enormously and of course won the Tony, a win I wouldn't have bet 50 cents on after that first preview.

[sidjones09]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 12:09pm

What is the onstage seating like? Are they supposed to represent a courtroom audience, or is it just set up like seats on the sides like Spring Awakening?

[Smartful Dodger]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 12:15pm

At one point, those seated onstage represent a crowd in bleechers during Brady's arrival. Then, they appear as if they're the crowd in the courtroom. And, they could be read as participants at a prayer meeting toward the end of the first act.

As with SPRING AWAKENING, the actors sometimes emerge from or sit with the onstage audience.

Posted: 3/20/07 at 12:25pm

It's too bad that some people don't realize this play was based on a true event. The Scopes monkey trial. Why change the time period for something that really happened? I know there are directors who do that, but they're frustrated playwrights who don't have an idea of their own

[Tirso de Molina]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 12:39pm

An interesting historical factoid: William Jennings Bryan, the real-life Presidential candidate and religious orator who opposed Darrow in the Scopes Trial, resigned as Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of State at the beginning of World War I on Christian pacifist grounds. Lots of modern liberals want see Bryan/Brady as a contemporary fundamentalist a la Bush & Company, but he was more complex than that.

[Smartful Dodger]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 12:54pm

Er...ah..."some people" like me are well aware that the play emerges from the Scopes Trial. Please. In terms of suggesting that it be updated, there have been several recent cases in Ohio and Pennsylvania where Darwin's Theory has been banned from the curriculum. It's a very, VERY contemporary debate that's extremely close in vocabulary and spirit to what happened in Tennessee back in the 1920s. I bet if Lawrence and Lee were able to revise some of the scenes for today's audiences, there would be language like "compassionate conservative" and "intelligent design" peppered through the script. They'd have jumped all over those given their love of and respect for words.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 2:58pm

Hello, all! I was there last night, on stage, and it was QUITE the experience. There are 44 on-stage seats for audience members; four rows on stage right and four rows on stage left, with a fifth row at the top only for cast members. Two seats on each side of the front row were each also for cast members, and cast members utilized the staircases throughout the performance as well. It was completely unlike sitting on stage in SPRING AWAKENING, in which the audience members are seated to the side facing one another from opposite sides of the stage. Here, I was stage left, in the third row, in the aisle seat on the left. When I arrived to the theatre I was directed up onto the stage and there were lockers back stage, similar to those back stage at SPRING AWAKENING, where you were told to turn off your cell phone and place all possessions in your designated locker (for example, I was in seat CC 16 and my locker was labeled as such). I walked up the staircase and sat in my seat and was quite amazed at what I saw before me. Unlike in SPRING AWAKENING, you are directly facing the entire audience throughout the whole show. I could see the entire house clearly, from the orchestra to the top of the balcony. The theatre was FILLED. For those of you wondering about standing room, the entire standing room section was filled. I immediately noted Doug Hughes sitting in the last row of the center orchestra, aisle seat, audience left.

This was my first exposure to INHERIT THE WIND. From the perspective of sitting on stage, the experience was enchanting. To see Christopher Plummer doing what he was doing directly before my eyes was absolutely surreal. He was PHENOMENAL. Completely committed both on stage and off. When the actors enter and exit the stage, the on stage audience members can see everything going on back stage, so the actors have been directed to remain in character and continue their performance to and from the point they emerge from behind the lockers, out of the audience's view.

About 15 minutes before the performance begins, a band of five enters, walks to the top center of the stairs and starts strumming their bangos and guitars, singing some wonderful old school style songs. This was terrific and really helped the audience adjust to the time period. They continued to sing songs, earning applause after each number, until about 8:05 when the house lights were dimmed. The band leader announced something along the lines of "Welcome to the Lyceum Theatre. Please turn off your cell phones at this time, unwrap any candy, and I heard some sniffling and a little coughing out there, so I hope you're all startin' to feel a little better now, and enjoy the show."

I lean mostly with WithoutATrace's feelings on the production. It was stunning. Plummer gave a beginning-to-end tour de force, and I do agree that he was indeed the star of the show. I was underwhelmed by Brian Dennehy's performance. I felt that he sleep walked through the whole show. Yes, he was great as Brian Dennehy is a great actor, but most of what I saw up there was Brian Dennehy giving a fine, generic performance. Not once did I see him make a choice that would help define his character or make him unique. It was simply Brian Dennehy giving a great public speech. And up against Plummer's fine tuned, specific performance, Dennehy paled in comparison. Not for one moment did Dennehy convince me that his character believed what he is supposed to be so adament about. Considering that this was the first performance and that Dennehy is not only a stage veteran but a legend, I see no excuse for a performance that seemed as though it was taking place toward the end of a long, tired run.

I disagree greatly with LaCageAuxFollesFan2 on Maggie Lacey's performance. Her performance was committed and ultimately heartbreaking. She constantly kept the audience's attention and portrayed Rachel's arc in what was easily one of the most naturalistic performances of the evening. I saw her Broadway debut as Emily Webb in OUR TOWN a few years ago, and not only does she live up to what was a pitch perfect performance in a classic role, but she shows a great growth in the depth she instills in her character. Her performance here in INHERIT THE WIND is absolutely stunning.

A few more notes on sitting on stage:

You need to listen very carefully at some moments, as I did have trouble understanding dialogue now and then. The actors are obviously mostly projecting toward the audience, but, in the trial scenes, the judge is located upstage in between the two sets of on-stage seating, so at times the actors do direct their words toward him. The ensemble surrounds you at many moments and becomes a part of the group of spectators at the trial, or whatever group the on-stage audience members serve as at the given moment. The ensemble members react to a lot of what it being said down below and it is quite interesting to feel as though you are a part of what is going on.

One more note:

Denis O'Hare was fantastic. Let me say this. I saw him in TAKE ME OUT and have seen every show he has been in since. Yes, he does have his "O'Hare-isms" that he incorporates into all of his roles, but, he never fails to make each character stand on its own. What I saw last night was completely different than anything else I've seen from him in the past. O'Hare is one of those performers, like Patti LuPone for example, who tends to always give a variation of the same performance no matter what role he is playing. Many people say "Patti is playing Patti" often, which I tend to agree with. To that, I say we embrace the brilliance of the variations of "Patti as Patti" or "Denis as Denis" and so on. Mr. O'Hare is a fine stage actor, and he has yet to give a tired performance. I have come to look forward to seeing him in new roles, and his portrayal of the wise-guy reporter in 1925 here is certainly one of his most unique.

Updated On: 3/22/07 at 02:58 PM

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 3:13pm

Thank you, WBAF, for your review and your recount of sitting on stage for this production. I'm glad you enjoyed the show and that we both agreed about Christopher Plummer's brilliance. He is definitely the star of the show and I will be seeing this again mostly because of him.

[LaCageAuxFollesFan]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 3:31pm

I am glad everyone enjoyed it, it is a very solid and nice production and Doug Hughes works wonders with it. But is the play not the slightest bit worn to anyone else? Not the message...that is obviously still alive and well and living, but the play just seems like it doesn't provide the kind of fluid, all-encompassing rejuvenation I would hope a revival would for me anyway. But you know, it was the first preview, so I don't want to critisize. The talent is certainly there and the names behind the talent is grand. I just wonder if audiences who are used to quicker dramatic interpretations of courtroom conflict will be interested in the PLAY or just seeing those 2 men?!?!

Posted: 3/20/07 at 3:43pm

I can't speak to this production, as I have not seen it, but I think the play itself is wonderful. It is very well-written and apart from the riveting subject matter, I've found it's drama to be gripping whenever I have seen it or read it.

From the director's point of view, the show starts with a hero and an underdog. Only one can win-- will it be Brady, the beloved, eloquent, self-effacing giant of a man or Drummond, the serious, amoral, slouching hulk who seems to not give a damn about what you think. Of course, by the end you have to appreciate Drummond's intellectual detachment and love of the law. But I've seen productions where right out of the gate you are meant to feel that Brady is a fundamentalist boob-- a big mistake. As someone pointed out above, they should both be sympathetic and fully-developed characters.

If you can't get to see this show, read the play-- it's a classic.

[theaterdude87]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 4:22pm

in the production I did one of our cast members fell asleep in the jury box. our director told her she was an incredible actress....

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 4:44pm

I didn't care for Maggie Lacey all that much in "Our Town", though I will say her performance was better on the PBS telecast as opposed to what I saw live in the theatre of the same show.

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 5:33pm

Thanks for posting WAT, you're reviews are always spot on and this just persuaded my already curious mind to see this show.

[jewishboy]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 8:03pm

Can anyone tell me how Charlotte Maier was (I don't think she is just part of the ensemble)? I know her role is not big at all she is just a friend of a friend. Thanks!

[caitiesus1522]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 8:47pm

These reviews are making me wish I had emailed the Honors College sooner! It sounds like quite an experience.

We were offered tickets to opening night on Wednesday and apparently I emailed too late, maybe I will catch it some other time though

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 9:37pm

I've always wondered, what does the onstage audience do if they need to pee during the show? Do they tell you where the bathrooms are offstage?

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 9:44pm

I can't imagine that the onstage audience is allowed to get up during the show...it would be totally disruptive. Most of them got up during intermission though.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 10:04pm

We were not allowed to get up during the show. They told us to use the facilities before the show and during intermission as we were absolutely not allowed to get up during the performance.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 10:11pm

Interesting. It just would suck really bad if you had an emergency, being sick or something. Oh well, I guess if you're one of those people that has to get up a lot, those aren't for you.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 10:12pm

Rentboy, each act is less than an hour. You're not sitting for very long.

[GYPSY1527]

Posted: 3/20/07 at 10:41pm

Thanks for all the reviews guys. I am beyond excited for opening night. The prospect of seeing Plummer and Dehenney on stage together is almost too much to fathom!

[Tirso de Molina]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 2:13am

Okay, here I am, reporting in from the Tuesday 3/20 preview!

Basic reaction: this is a very, *very* good show already, and by the time it opens it may be amazing. For me, INHERIT THE WIND is a classic example of a work which isn't a great play, but it *is* great theater; when it's well performed, it's virtually impossible to sink this show. Thanks to a strong cast and Doug Hughes's ingenious, effective production, WIND is well worth the ticket price.

As others have noted, Plummer is already giving a bravura performance as Drummond; it's a perfect role for his onstage affect, and there's a lot of nuance to his work. This is a Tony-contending performance, no question.

To my mind, Dennehy isn't yet giving quite as fine a performance as he'll develop: he's already doing the biggest thing right, which is avoiding the temptation to overplay Brady as a pulpit-thumping windbag. An actor has to play Brady as a man of genuine substance, and Dennehy is doing that. But Brady's collapse isn't yet as moving as I'm sure it will be by the time the show opens.

I liked but didn't love O'Hare's Hornbeck. He's hitting most of the right notes and I admire his way with Hornbeck's ironic flights of rhetoric, but there are places in the play where Hornbeck's brutal cynicism should startle or even shock the audience, and he's not yet taking full advantage of those opportunities.

As far as the other roles go, I have to agree with the people who criticized Maggie Lacey's Rachel -- the performance I saw tonight was artificial and unconvincing for the most part, though she did have a few good moments that might promise better things to come. She seems to be "feeling" the part well, but isn't doing a good job technically; she doesn't sound comfortable with the cadence of the lines. Benjamin Walker's Bert Cates has much to recommend it, and Byron Jennings does about as much as an actor can do with the Rev. Brown, given how two-dimensional it is.

This show definitely deserves a thumbs-up!

[EugLoven]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 2:38am

Totally envious of you Andy and WithoutATrace.
I've seen the movie and then picked up the play-script at my department office last week. Tore through it in one-sitting, in commemoration of its opening preview.
I love the play, moreso for its meaning and message and power-players, and only wish it'll be running when I set foot back in NYC.
I can't imagine what a thrilling experience it must have been to be part of the on-stage jury! And jeez... with all the man-shouting, I'm curious to hear the sound design!

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 3/21/07 at 3:15am

So I'm guessing you would reccommend the onstage seats Foster?

They sound too good to pass up.

[AC126748]

Posted: 3/22/07 at 11:07pm

My review, based on tonight's performance:

For most people, Inherit the Wind will always be that stodgy little play they read in their junior year of high school. Those who hold this opinion have obviously never seen it on stage. In its current Broadway mounting, capably directed by Doug Hughes, it proved to be one of the most enthralling and captivating evenings of theatre I've ever had. I'm sure it helps that this production is headed by two of the greatest dramatic lions alive, Christopher Plummer and Brian Dennehy, who are truly offering a master class in the true technique of acting. Dennehy's fiery and self-righteous Matthew Harrison Brady is matched toe-to-toe by Plummer's riveting Henry Drummond (I see another Tony on his mantle come June). Their courtroom scene, including a blistering interrogation of Dennehy by Plummer, are the kind of edge-of-your-seat moments that are largely missing on Broadway today. Sharing the stage are Denis O'Hare, whose eternal schtick is finally appropriate as yellow journalist E.K. Hornbeck, and the invaluable Byron Jennings, rousingly channeling Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell as the holier-than-thou Reverand Brown. The other star of the evening is Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee's truly marvelous text, which simply dances out of the mouths of these actors. Quite a feat for a play now largely relegated to high school classrooms and drama club presentations.
TSnob