#26
Posted: 6/9/23 at 11:45pm
A really fascinating play... Juliet Stevenson's performance is amazing. I would highly recommend going. A great evening of theater.
Icke's THE DOCTOR Starring Juliet Stephenson at the Park Avenue Armory — Page 2
#27
Posted: 6/10/23 at 9:59am
Can anyone speak to the physical production? The stuff I've seen there is always visually impressive, so curious about this
#28
Posted: 6/10/23 at 10:47am
I'm used to the Armory building out seating in more of a box shape directly in front of the stage, but this was more of a bowl shape with a much gentler rake. I'd describe the set itself as The Lehman Trilogy crossed with A Doll's House, with a circular backdrop (this time wood-paneled, evoking a conference room) and some simple tables in the center that remain fixed during the performance save for some subtle turntable movement. You'll need to be paying attention to the dialog to fill in all the scenic detail, and for me, it worked perfectly.
Updated On: 6/10/23 at 10:47 AM
#29
Posted: 6/10/23 at 12:43pm
I forgot to add there's a grid of fluorescent lamps hovering over the stage, similar to LOVE at the Armory earlier this year. And needless to say, the cavernous space of the Armory adds a lot to the production in lending an intense, oppressive sheen to everything.
#30
Posted: 6/10/23 at 12:47pm
Thanks! I love that space!
#31
Posted: 6/11/23 at 12:42am
RippedMan said: "Thanks! I love that space!"
I don’t always love that space but this totally worked. Terrific show
Sister George
#32
Posted: 6/18/23 at 11:54am
I have a spoiler question about some things we learn quite late in the play.
Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content
My question -- how did other audience members understand details of Dr Wolff's relationship to the person named Charlie, whom we see her talking to when she is at home?
Toward the end of the play, we find out that Charlie is dead, having taken their [no gender assigned to Charlie] own life after an Alzheimers diagnosis. And that Charlie did this when Dr W was not around, which is a source of added grief to Dr W.
My question: I understood all this to have happened in the past, before the events of the play take place. And to have been included by way of somewhat explaining something about Dr W. (As to exactly what and how -- I won't go into that in this question.) Which meant that Dr W's conversations with Charlie were really internal interactions with her remembered, now-gone partner.
Someone else who saw it, however, didn't see it that way, and thought that the death of Charlie had happened after Dr W's whole crisis and loss of her professional position.
#33
Posted: 6/18/23 at 1:11pm
VirginiaK said: "I have a spoiler question about some things we learn quite late in the play.
Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content
"
My interpretation —
Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content
Charlie died a bit before the play began and always exists as a memory. In the first scene it very much looks like she’s there, but Sami never acknowledges her and Charlie is always in a white light. If Charlie died during the action of the play, it would’ve been a far larger moment.
#34
Posted: 6/18/23 at 1:22pm
VirginiaK said: "I have a spoiler question about some things we learn quite late in the play.
Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content
My question -- how did other audience members understand details of Dr Wolff's relationship to the person named Charlie, whom we see her talking to when she is at home?
Toward the end of the play, we find out that Charlie is dead, having taken their [no gender assigned to Charlie] own life after an Alzheimers diagnosis. And that Charlie did this when Dr W was not around, which is a source of added grief to Dr W.
My question: I understood all this to have happened in the past, before the events of the play take place. And to have been included by way of somewhat explaining something about Dr W. (As to exactly what and how -- I won't go into that in this question.) Which meant that Dr W's conversations with Charlie were really internal interactions with her remembered, now-gone partner.
Someone else who saw it, however, didn't see it that way, and thought that the death of Charlie had happened after Dr W's whole crisis and loss of her professional position.
Toward the end of the play, we find out that Charlie is dead, having taken their [no gender assigned to Charlie] own life after an Alzheimers diagnosis. And that Charlie did this when Dr W was not around, which is a source of added grief to Dr W.
My question: I understood all this to have happened in the past, before the events of the play take place. And to have been included by way of somewhat explaining something about Dr W. (As to exactly what and how -- I won't go into that in this question.) Which meant that Dr W's conversations with Charlie were really internal interactions with her remembered, now-gone partner.
Someone else who saw it, however, didn't see it that way, and thought that the death of Charlie had happened after Dr W's whole crisis and loss of her professional position.
I've seen The Doctor in both London and NYC . It's become one of my favroite plays, so I'll happily discuss!
Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content
I agree with your idea. I view the Ruth and Charlie scenes as Ruth communicating with a memory. I think the suicide happens before the primary incident, so Ruth materializes Charlie as a sense of comfort during the backlash. Also worth noting is that Sami never sees nor speaks to Charlie despite always being in Ruth's home.
When Charlie asks Ruth to tell the institute about their relationship, not only does Charlie want Ruth to be proud of a potential sexuality, but Charlie is also encouraging Ruth to openly discuss what happened (the suicide). At the end of the play, when Ruth is sitting down with the priest, she finally confesses the circumstances around Charlie's death.
#35
Posted: 6/18/23 at 2:44pm
Haven't seen the production yet, but this is an excellent piece of criticism by Jesse Green.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/15/theater/the-doctor-review-juliet-stevenson.html
#36
Posted: 6/18/23 at 10:27pm
It’s an astonishing performance and a thrill to see Juliet Stevenson on stage in NYC.
btw, can someone please correct the mispelling in the subject box of this thread?
Updated On: 6/18/23 at 10:27 PM
#37
Posted: 6/19/23 at 1:13pm
it was really worth my time and emotions
#38
Posted: 7/3/23 at 11:13pm
Saw the show tonight and was impressed. My husband is stuck on the song (pre-recorded) at the beginning of act 2 when Charlie and Ruth were dancing. What’s the name of the song?
#39
Posted: 7/16/23 at 7:20pm
I saw The Doctor last night. It’s the first show I’ve seen at the Armory since Yerma. I found Yerma astounding. The production design alone was worth whatever I paid back in 2018.
I thought The Doctor was merely okay. I’m only slightly familiar with Icke’s work, but I found myself, as the themes of race and identity started cropping up throughout Act I, hoping against hope he was not a white man. But alas.
The show was very well acted, particularly by Juliet Stevenson, and moved at a quick clip. I thought the set left much to be desired. The wood-paneled wall was very clearly some kind of cheap laminate that was bubbling up in places. The set revolved very slowly I think twice during the show to absolutely no added effect. The only production element I found captivating was the debate (see photo in NYT article above).
I must also add that…
Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content
when Ruth gets out of the cab and absolutely sprints three times around the stage I was enthralled. It’s the only time I’ve felt like that in a theatre. Not sure I can describe it. Juliet stunned in that moment and in a few others.
I don’t regret seeing it, but I found the race, gender and antisemitic elements were very heavy handed and didn’t amount to much in the end.
#40
Posted: 7/16/23 at 8:37pm
Saw this last night. I enjoyed it. I feel like it's a little too stuffy. They throw every social tension, or division in this play, and then some. I don't think it's being received as well as it did in London. It seemed the audience liked it, but they didn't jump out of their seats for it. No critics pick from Jesse Green either.
#41
Posted: 7/16/23 at 11:10pm
This. Was. Excellent. - and on par for Icke. Taught, intelligent, electric with interesting direction and adaptation. The audience was invested - you have to listen - and you could hear a pin drop.
One of the best shows of the year so far.
#42
Posted: 7/22/23 at 6:53am
Rush tickets ($38) are ridiculously easy to get. No excuse not to see this. Thought the second act was a bit contrived but it’s always hard to stick the landing. Juliet is astonishing and incredibly fit for her age.
#43
Posted: 7/24/23 at 9:51am
steven22 said: "Saw the show tonight and was impressed. My husband is stuck on the song (pre-recorded) at the beginning of act 2 when Charlie and Ruth were dancing. What’s the name of the song?"
I think you mean “Start a War" by The National
#44
Posted: 8/11/23 at 7:39pm
I agree with Vulture's review on this: https://www.vulture.com/2023/06/theater-review-the-doctor-park-avenue-armory.html
Also, the loud drumming was unnecessary. It didn't really add anything to the play.
The gender/race swap was confusing more than anything.
The TV panel "interview" was ridiculously bad.
Broadway Flash said: "Saw this last night. I enjoyed it. I feel like it's a little too stuffy. They throw every social tension, or division in this play, and then some. I don't think it's being received as well as it did in London. It seemed the audience liked it, but they didn't jump out of their seats for it. No critics pick from Jesse Green either."
#45
Posted: 8/11/23 at 7:50pm
First time I’ve ever walked out of anything at intermission in 29 years of theatregoing.
You can always count on me 🎶
#46
Posted: 8/11/23 at 8:49pm
Apparently Stevenson has been out - and will be until Monday.
It's a great piece of theater.
#47
Posted: 8/13/23 at 2:30pm
BorisTomashevsky said: "First time I’ve ever walked out of anything at intermission in 29 years of theatregoing."
I wanted to do that too. I'm glad I stayed for the second act when the pieces of the concept began to fit together. Agreed that this is one of the best productions of the year that I've seen.
#48
Posted: 8/17/23 at 4:52pm
Juliet Stevenson won't be back for the remainder of the run.
Updated On: 8/17/23 at 04:52 PM
#49
Posted: 8/17/23 at 9:56pm
yyys said: "Juliet Stevenson won't be back for the remainder of the run."
A shame. She's brilliant. Having only seen it with her, I can't really imagine it with another actor in the part...
#50
Posted: 8/18/23 at 5:27am
It’s not my place to say more, but Juliet is a dear friend and this entire situation has been grave and well out of her control. She is devastated to be missing the end of the run, and normally has impeccable attendance.
"I know now that theatre saved my life." - Susan Stroman
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95