#1
Posted: 10/10/14 at 10:29pm
I'm really enjoying it! I'm so glad they filmed it. Is anyone else watching?
Is Anyone Else Watching "The Nance" Right Now?
#2
Posted: 10/10/14 at 10:42pm
I am watching it too! I like it, glad I decided to catch it! I love it when they record these shows and broadcast them after they close so those of us who missed it have a chance to see it.
#3
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:02pm
For anyone interested, they are rebroadcasting it on Monday morning at 2:30am.
#4
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:05pm
^ I was just going to ask. I was out this evening and forgot to set the DVR. Will do so for the repeat. Thanks for the heads up.
#5
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:14pm
It's already online, too, btw.
http://video.pbs.org/video/2365342346/
I'm recording the stream on my computer, and will watch that as soon as it finishes to make sure there are no hiccups while the stream is still available.
http://video.pbs.org/video/2365342346/
I'm recording the stream on my computer, and will watch that as soon as it finishes to make sure there are no hiccups while the stream is still available.
#6
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:40pm
Just finished watching it. This was my first time seeing the play, and I watched it cold without knowing anything about it.
I liked it. I felt some of the vaudeville could have been excised, but I didn't mind it too much. It's interesting to see how being gay would have affected someone during that time period. All that we have from that period is highly censored and filtered through the prejudices of that time. I found it fascinating to have Douglas Carter Beane reach back to the 1930s and pull out what such persecution and such an environment of shame and hatred might do to someone's psyche, and its implications for what sort of life one could feasibly lead.
Basically, I was left feeling incredibly GRATEFUL for being alive in this day and age. This broadcast was especially poignant and prescient for this week in particular with the news of late re: gay marriage.
I liked it. I felt some of the vaudeville could have been excised, but I didn't mind it too much. It's interesting to see how being gay would have affected someone during that time period. All that we have from that period is highly censored and filtered through the prejudices of that time. I found it fascinating to have Douglas Carter Beane reach back to the 1930s and pull out what such persecution and such an environment of shame and hatred might do to someone's psyche, and its implications for what sort of life one could feasibly lead.
Basically, I was left feeling incredibly GRATEFUL for being alive in this day and age. This broadcast was especially poignant and prescient for this week in particular with the news of late re: gay marriage.
Updated On: 10/10/14 at 11:40 PM
#7
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:40pm
Really enjoyed it. Would have really have liked to see the nude scene. That must have been such a treat in the theatre.
#8
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:50pm
I got to attend opening night, and never made it back, so I only saw the nude scene from the booty side of the house. But yeah, it was rather delightful.
#9
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:56pm
I absolutely loved it. After it ended it got me thinking about where we live today. About how more accepting society is about homosexuality. Also the fact that you don't know how great you had something until it's gone. I found it hilarious yet heart breaking.
#10
Posted: 10/10/14 at 11:57pm
I wish there had been some advance notice! I'd surely have watched it.
At least it's online!
At least it's online!
Keeping BroadwayWorld Illustrated
#11
Posted: 10/11/14 at 12:00am
Just finished burning it to dvd.
Poster Emeritus
#12
Posted: 10/11/14 at 12:13am
Roxy, what program do you use?
I have Voila but wondering if there is an easier way.
I have Voila but wondering if there is an easier way.
#13
Posted: 10/11/14 at 12:21am
Glad it is online, I'm looking forward to seeing the show again with Nathan's whole performance. When I saw it in the theatre, his understudy took over about 20 minutes into the first act (although the understudy was very good and I really loved the show).
#14
Posted: 10/11/14 at 1:07am
The way the camera avoided the nudity was ridiculous more distracting than if they would have just shown a little skin and moved on. Other than that and some additional shoddy camera work I enjoyed it. It's such a shame that they don't release these shows on DVD.
#15
Posted: 10/11/14 at 1:10am
The nude scene couldn't make up for that performance.
#16
Posted: 10/11/14 at 1:23am
It's just amusing that a show dealing in censorship was so sloppily censored for television.
#17
Posted: 10/11/14 at 1:27am
I didn't find it sloppy at all. It reminded me of the cover of The Graduate a bit.
We all know what's going on, we just can't see it.
We all know what's going on, we just can't see it.
#18
Posted: 10/11/14 at 2:44am
Just finished the first act and I think it's just okay. Nathan Lane is excellent as always, and this role suits him to a tee. The first scene at the automat was extremely well executed, and the first burlesque act was hilarious. However, the show lost a lot of steam and the plot just isn't very intriguing. I also found the rest of the burlesque numbers very unfunny after the first one and Jonny Orsini is either portraying a really poorly drawn character or is giving the worst acting performance I've ever seen. I will give another report when I finish the play.
#19
Posted: 10/11/14 at 4:09am
Finished the second act and wow, what a downer of a play. It really just completely shifted tone and theme in the second act and not for the better. The end result is a play that couldn't decide what it wanted to be, and didn't succeed at anything really. The characters weren't well built enough that you really cared about them and the humor felt increasingly bitter and forced as the show progressed. It also never ended up saying anything about anything and just kind of complained about the way things were. None of the characters were particularly two dimensional and they all just didn't work well together. It was just way too heavy handed and just left a bad taste in my mouth. Not only that, but because you didn't connect with any characters, the horrible downer of an ending didn't make you feel sad but just empty. Could not recommend.
Updated On: 10/11/14 at 04:09 AM
#20
Posted: 10/11/14 at 7:09am
"I also found the rest of the burlesque numbers very unfunny after the first one and Jonny Orsini is either portraying a really poorly drawn character or is giving the worst acting performance I've ever seen."
I disagree with Fantod's first point, but agree with his second. As a result the romance at the center just did not work, which took a bite out of how effective the play could be dramatically.
I will give Orsini, who continues to be hired, the benefit of the doubt and assume the role was just not well written, the result of Beane being overcome by sentiment. If so, future productions of the play could benefit from an edit. This doesn't seem likely to happen, however, since it has been broadcast as first presented for posterity.
I disagree with Fantod's first point, but agree with his second. As a result the romance at the center just did not work, which took a bite out of how effective the play could be dramatically.
I will give Orsini, who continues to be hired, the benefit of the doubt and assume the role was just not well written, the result of Beane being overcome by sentiment. If so, future productions of the play could benefit from an edit. This doesn't seem likely to happen, however, since it has been broadcast as first presented for posterity.
Updated On: 10/11/14 at 07:09 AM
#21
Posted: 10/11/14 at 7:52am
I'd love to hear what people make of that effect just before the final curtain? What did that mean?
#22
Posted: 10/11/14 at 7:52am
I think the play most certainly knew what it wanted to be. Chauncy had to fall in love to learn things about himself and his community. He had to let his guard down and be vulnerable in order to change.
I saw it 4x on Broadway - one time was actually at the taping for PBS. I loved the play, as well as Lane's performance. Huffman is also rather fearless in this.
I haven't watched the broadcast yet, but had to chime in that I disagree.
I saw it 4x on Broadway - one time was actually at the taping for PBS. I loved the play, as well as Lane's performance. Huffman is also rather fearless in this.
I haven't watched the broadcast yet, but had to chime in that I disagree.
"I know now that theatre saved my life." - Susan Stroman
#23
Posted: 10/11/14 at 8:12am
I skipped on B'way for an entirely unfair reason: Nathan Lane fatigue. I'm sorry I did, because he gave one of the great performances of season and probably his career. If the role was tailored to him, he mined it for all it is worth, which is considerable. I, too, found the burlesque sequences in act one too long (maybe repetitive), and wished it was tighter. But the character, the milieu and the story are worth the investment. I wish I had a better handle on Orsini's character. On a single viewing, I found a lot of inconsistencies. He was barely literate in the opening, someone out of IRONWEED. Going for a job as a Super. But in no time at all, he was something of a bon vivant, articulate, with a vocabulary and gay lexicon that didn't track with his first scenes and sometimes (to my ear) to the era. What made Ned appealing in the beginning -- his blue collar naivete (to a point) -- was substituted by a (more PC, even if not by design:) self-aware and sociopolitically evolved character once the play developed. I'm willing to accept Beane's concept: that he was a young man ahead of his time, his fully self-accepting psyche a very positive, contrary trait in a very repressed world, to make a point that some gay people have always been confident. But I didn't see him change on stage. It was somehow between the scenes. Again, this was one viewing with Friday night fatigue a factor, but I couldn't fully understand his rather Herculean leap from the guy who turns up and the one who leaves.
But the final scenes were wrenching and ultimately Lane's triumph. I've felt I've seen everything he has to offer, but last night was very impressed with the nooks and crannies in this performance. I hope we see more of this Lane, and maybe a little less Max Bialystock, once ONLY A PLAY leaves. He was powerful, and the performance deserved to be filmed. I am personally grateful that it was.
(Anyone else think Cady Huffman -- awfully good -- looked eerily like Alexis Smith in some moments? I kept seeing her in 3/4 profile.
But the final scenes were wrenching and ultimately Lane's triumph. I've felt I've seen everything he has to offer, but last night was very impressed with the nooks and crannies in this performance. I hope we see more of this Lane, and maybe a little less Max Bialystock, once ONLY A PLAY leaves. He was powerful, and the performance deserved to be filmed. I am personally grateful that it was.
(Anyone else think Cady Huffman -- awfully good -- looked eerily like Alexis Smith in some moments? I kept seeing her in 3/4 profile.
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
Updated On: 10/11/14 at 08:12 AM
#24
Posted: 10/11/14 at 8:59am
I could not agree with you more about Lane's performance. He was extraordinary. I have long felt that Lane, for all his success, is a very underrated actor. I look forward to seeing him in THE ICEMAN COMETH next year.
#25
Posted: 10/11/14 at 9:28am
I woke up not trusting my own reactions to Ned, the Orsini character, and revisited the Times review, which at least partially backed up what I said above:
"...In its offstage scenes “The Nance” adheres to a period sensibility in less felicitous ways. Though they have a sexual and political specificity that would have been verboten in the 1930s, they also bring to mind the clichés of showbiz soaps from that era, in which alcohol, temperament and self-hatred drive a talented star to the skids.You fully expect the virtuous Ned, who is too good (and good-looking) to be true, to exclaim: “Don’t you see? You’re throwing away happiness with both hands!,” and he all but does..."
Yes, what I called "too PC" Brantley points out as too good to be true. The saintly Ned is so evolved, he skips right over the 40's, and especially the 1950s, to speak in post-Stonewall speak. If only he were just an ordinary guy, not bathtub eye candy, just young(er) and lost. Wouldn't it be more believable and just as moving? He's whole profile, the looks, the buffness, the savvy way with come-on later in the play just don't add up. It's a serious flaw, but in a way it doesn't damage a premise and evocative portrayal of the era. Or Lane, who is superb, period.
"...In its offstage scenes “The Nance” adheres to a period sensibility in less felicitous ways. Though they have a sexual and political specificity that would have been verboten in the 1930s, they also bring to mind the clichés of showbiz soaps from that era, in which alcohol, temperament and self-hatred drive a talented star to the skids.You fully expect the virtuous Ned, who is too good (and good-looking) to be true, to exclaim: “Don’t you see? You’re throwing away happiness with both hands!,” and he all but does..."
Yes, what I called "too PC" Brantley points out as too good to be true. The saintly Ned is so evolved, he skips right over the 40's, and especially the 1950s, to speak in post-Stonewall speak. If only he were just an ordinary guy, not bathtub eye candy, just young(er) and lost. Wouldn't it be more believable and just as moving? He's whole profile, the looks, the buffness, the savvy way with come-on later in the play just don't add up. It's a serious flaw, but in a way it doesn't damage a premise and evocative portrayal of the era. Or Lane, who is superb, period.
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
Updated On: 10/11/14 at 09:28 AM
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95