Is Anyone Else Watching "The Nance" Right Now?- Page 2

[AC126748]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 9:28am

I watched it last night, after seeing it shortly after its Broadway opening. And the televised version mostly confirmed my feelings about what I saw in the theatre. It's an interesting, largely well-written play with some rough patches. The ending does not achieve the effect I imagine Beane was going for. Lane's performance is close to perfect. He really is an underrated actor--capabale of so much.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 9:40am

Can anyone tell me: I can't find it listed: How is this titled?

[AC126748]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 9:46am

My DVR listing has the program titled "Live from Lincoln Center" and the episode titled "The Nance Starring Nathan Lane".

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 9:57am

^ That's how these will always be listed on your DVR.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 10:08am

Thanks! Waaah....I'm not showing any listings!

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 10:09am

FWIW, Tivo incorrectly insisted it was Sweeney Todd.

[AC126748]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 10:12am

Dramamama, you can watch it via the PBS website if your local affiliate isn't airing it.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 10:23am

Thanks, I just really prefer my TV screen....I'll give it a few more days before giving up and resorting to my little computer screen!

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 12:55pm

Apple TV has a PBS icon that streams it?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 1:21pm

Thought I would try once more. Can anyone explain the final effect of the whatever it was breaking above the stage?

[broadwaybabywannabe2]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 1:45pm

I have it on DVR and was only able to watch the first 20 minutes so far...and I love NATHAN LANE...he sort of reminds me of his acting in THE LISBON TRAVIATA...which was my first viewing of NATHAN LANE when he brought that play to the MARK TAPER FORUM, many years ago...and I fell in love with him then...and still am..

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 8:51pm

Whether you liked the play or didn't is irrelevant. God bless PBS for bringing this to the TV screen. This is the kind of PBS I grew up on!

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 9:08pm

Henrikegerman, still nobody has answered your question. I would like to know also. At first, I thought that it fell on Nathan killing him, but I know that can't be correct. But the way he put his hands up, that was my first thought. Does anybody know?? I thought Nathan was terrific in this (and I am not a big fan). I regret not seeing it live, but the PBS special came awfully close to perfection. Some of the Burlesque numbers seemed redundant watching on tv, but live it must have been great.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/11/14 at 10:54pm

If this wasn't the worst play I ever saw, I don't know what was.

The first two scenes are okay, and a few burlesque numbers. But that second act lasted longer than the Depression.

And it wasn't nearly half as fun.

Ba-dum ching.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 12:24am

I loved this play.

[D2]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 8:53am

"Whether you liked the play or didn't is irrelevant. God bless PBS for bringing this to the TV screen. This is the kind of PBS I grew up on!"

^^^ THIS ^^^

I'm with PJ about THE NANCE, btw, but I'm thrilled PBS filmed and broadcast it. I'm also thrilled with the new "Theater Close Up" series showcasing off-Broadway plays they've created. Bringing less high-profile productions to a public that would NEVER get the chance to see these plays is a brilliant move, and very much, as Borstal pointed out, the PBS I grew up with.

Updated On: 10/12/14 at 08:53 AM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 8:56am

Well since no one is telling me and ArtMan what that confounding thing was at the end (perhaps because no one has a clue), I might as well weigh in on the rest of the play.

At times it's light years politically more compelling than it is dramatically, but even politically it's a mixed bag. The dialogue is frequently tritely obvious and the comment on the action through burlesque is similarly flat (and easily begs compison to far better plays).

The "killer fruit" as nance premise is a great one and as patly on-the-nose as Sylvie's "your Republicans are as reliable as my Communists" line is, the subtext - which deserves more artful dialogue, in fact the message was already delivered loud and clear several scenes earlier by the action itself - is an important and resonant one. (By the way, Cady Huffman may well be an even more underrated actor than Lane is.)

The play's formidable political ambitions are trumped, not only by poor execution, but by the cliche domestic conflict. In a gambit both cheap and doctrinaire, Chauncey's non-monogamy is attributed to his being a self-loathing queen. Sexuality is a lot more complex than that, Mr. Beane.

I agree the second act lasted longer than the Depression, Joey. But the worst play you've ever seen? I'd hardly go that far.





Updated On: 10/12/14 at 08:56 AM

[Auggie27]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 9:24am

Joey's post reminded me that the first two scenes promise a very different, and better play. Before the relationship is freighted with prognosticating politics, it's real and engaging. And then we get a FOLLIES wherein a piece of "Loveland" is inserted throughout. That's what I felt, as if we were held hostage to all of the pushed irony. We quickly get the central conceit, the minstrel show aspect, so to sustain, the burlesque stuff needs to top drawer. It ain't. And boy, is there a ton of it. As I posted above, it's ultimately the overwriting of Ned that bothered me the most. If he had simply remained ... simple ... rather than been forced to carry The History of Gay Relationships on his broad shoulders, he could've been poignant.

Updated On: 10/12/14 at 09:24 AM

[Up In One]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 10:48am

"Well since no one is telling me and ArtMan what that confounding thing was at the end (perhaps because no one has a clue)",

My take on it is he will always be a frightened man looking over his shoulder. The same way he froze up at the Automat. Here the company is moving out of the theater so anything can happen. It did and he jumped. That's his life in a nutshell.

[mikem]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 12:31pm

henrikengerman and ArtMan, there was a thread about the ending of The Nance while it was playing, linked below. At the end, a chain falls from a light fixture (the PBS filming did a terrible job in showing what actually happened). In that thread, SomeoneinaTree2 notes that Jack O'Brien discussed this in an interview. SomeoneinaTree2 said, "Basically his intent was to show the collapse of the vaudeville tradition that was falling to pieces around Chauncey's ears, with Chauncey too frozen in his spot on the stage to get out of the way for it."

The end could have been better written and directed to make it more clear what actually happened and what it was supposed to mean. Even in the theater, it was confusing.

The interview that SomeoneinaTree2 is referring to is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ2_tj4sAJg . I haven't watched it myself, but if someone can point out where the discussion of the ending is, that would be great.




The Nance ending

Updated On: 10/12/14 at 12:31 PM

[Auggie27]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 12:44pm

I loved the idea of the ending, and in the original thread much appreciate the concept of the final image being evocative of several aspects of the play (again FOLLIES comes to mind). It was badly shot for TV, alas, making an already ambiguous if inventive bit of direction incomprehensible. I don't know why it wasn't given a more straight-on angle.

[ggersten]

Posted: 10/12/14 at 11:41pm

There are excerpts on the PBS website, but this link is for the full(er) discussion about the play on the PBS website.
Lane, Beane and O'Brien chat

[A Director]

Posted: 10/13/14 at 2:37am

The main problem with The Nance is Mr. Beane's ambition is greater than his talent. Chauncey is sort of an interesting character was is surrounded by almost paper thin characters. Joan and Carmen are thankless roles and are in the play because Beane decided he needed three women in the show. Sylvie is a bit more interesting, but her function is to be a foil to Chauncey. Cady Huffman was very good in the part. Efram is in the play because for the sketches an another man is needed. Ned is a very under written character who comes across as white bread. I think Jonny Orisni did the best he could with the role.

There are too many burlesque sketches. Is Mr. Beane auditioning for a Sugar Babies revival? It didn't take long to catch on that the sketches were being used to comment on offstage life. Mr. Beane keeps beating us over the head.

The opening of the second act made no sense because based on Chauncey in the first act the speech came out of left field.

The last scene between Chauncey and Ned had little impact because we didn't see enough of their relationship after the first scene. Their coming home late scene came out of left field.

The play should have ended after the Hortense bit. We know the theatre is going to close, so there is no need to have a scene with everyone saying good-bye. We could have scene the others leaving in silence with Chauncey all alone onstage. The lighting instrument dropping was silly and didn't convey what the director thought it did.

It would be nice to see Nathan Lane in a better play, one that forced him to stretch as an actor.

[A Director]

Posted: 10/13/14 at 2:37am

The main problem with The Nance is Mr. Beane's ambition is greater than his talent. Chauncey is sort of an interesting character was is surrounded by almost paper thin characters. Joan and Carmen are thankless roles and are in the play because Beane decided he needed three women in the show. Sylvie is a bit more interesting, but her function is to be a foil to Chauncey. Cady Huffman was very good in the part. Efram is in the play because for the sketches an another man is needed. Ned is a very under written character who comes across as white bread. I think Jonny Orisni did the best he could with the role.

There are too many burlesque sketches. Is Mr. Beane auditioning for a Sugar Babies revival? It didn't take long to catch on that the sketches were being used to comment on offstage life. Mr. Beane keeps beating us over the head.

The opening of the second act made no sense because based on Chauncey in the first act the speech came out of left field.

The last scene between Chauncey and Ned had little impact because we didn't see enough of their relationship after the first scene. Their coming home late scene came out of left field.

The play should have ended after the Hortense bit. We know the theatre is going to close, so there is no need to have a scene with everyone saying good-bye. We could have scene the others leaving in silence with Chauncey all alone onstage. The lighting instrument dropping was silly and didn't convey what the director thought it did.

It would be nice to see Nathan Lane in a better play, one that forced him to stretch as an actor.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 10/13/14 at 9:17am

I am a hopelessly smitten fan of this play, and of Lane's performance, AND of Jonny Orsini's as well. Saw it twice on Broadway, wept and laughed and sat slack-jawed each time. As a straight play it came closest to capturing the magic push and pull of realities that a great musical gives. I found the pendulum swing from book scene to commenting vaudeville scene to song number to in-one scene to monologue in a spotlight very thrilling in a CABARET sort of way.

Yes, there were overwritten parts, less than captivating examinations of the Communist Party in 1938, etc., but all of that fell away for me in the face of its rock-solid depiction of a very believable love story. My first boyfriend (born in 1949) was no Nathan Lane, but he was certainly cursed with that sense of inferiority and internalized homophobia that told him he didn't DESERVE a decent person to love and be loved by. Those final scenes with Chauncy and Ned landed brilliantly for me. And then comes the Hortense act, surely the greatest scene in the play. I agree with those who said the play should have ended right there. We know the theater is closing and their vaudeville family is scattering to the winds, so why show it?

As for the PBS filming, firstly it was cruel to film all wide shots of John Lee Beatty's gorgeous set from what looked like the 2nd balcony. Horrible. The rest being shot in closeups was a mixed blessing. You could see all the wonderful acting choices in a way I never could in the theater. But you could see all the weaker choices up close too. The voices were often still pitched to hit the jokes to the back row of the theater, something that never works well on TV. And no, I never thought that swinging light effect that ends the play had EVER worked, not either time in the theater, and certainly not on screen

But ya know what? I didn't care about any of that. As others have said, what a blessing to have a complete record of what for me was the last thrilling new play to open on Broadway.







Updated On: 10/13/14 at 09:17 AM