JOHN PROCTOR IS THE VILLAIN Reviews- Page 2

[Mr. Wormwood]

Posted: 4/15/25 at 12:03am

There's so many well-reviewed new plays this year. English, The Hills of California, John Proctor, Oh Mary and Purpose were all very well received and could easily be the five nominees but that's not counting something like Stranger Things or Dorian Gray getting in on the back of its technical achievement (like Harry Potter in 2018)

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 4/15/25 at 7:38am

DTLI Consensus: A-pluses all around as a talented ensemble cast and Kimberly Belflower slam the patriarchy. 

17 positive (including the NYT), 3 mixed, 1 negative.

https://didtheylikeit.com/shows/john-proctor-is-the-villain/

[theatergoer3]

Posted: 4/15/25 at 8:16am

Our five is set. I’d say Oh Mary is the front runner since it’s turned into a massive hit. However, the audience reaction to this when I went was euphoric at the end so I think it could compete. 

Definitely expecting acting noms outside of Sink now or unexpected nominations somewhere else. 

Nice to see some of the ST cast there as well. 

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/15/25 at 9:22am

Mr. Wormwood said: "There's so many well-reviewed new plays this year. English, The Hills of California, John Proctor, Oh, Mary!, and Purpose were all very well received and could easily be the five nominees but that's not counting something like Stranger Things or Dorian Gray getting in on the back of its technical achievement (like Harry Potter in 2018)"

Maybe. Although I can see a case where Stranger Things follows a similar trajectory to Network and Life of Pi where nominators recognize what a technical achievement it is, but question whether or not if it's even the best play. Dorian Gray could probably also follow The Audience and Prima Facie where it's only really recognized for the performances and design elements, but not as much the play itself.

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 4/15/25 at 11:46am

Has anyone seen it in NYC and DC who can comment on how it has changed?  The consistent raves this has received surprise me given the relative ho-hum nature of the Studio Theatre production I saw.  Casting certainly can elevate material, but I'm wondering if there are other factors in play.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/15/25 at 5:14pm

SteveSanders said: "Has anyone seen it in NYC and DC who can comment on how it has changed? The consistent raves this has received surprise me given the relative ho-hum nature of the Studio Theatre production I saw. Casting certainly can elevate material, but I'm wondering if there are other factors in play."

Did not see the DC production but I’d imagine direction would be a huge factor. Marti Lyons directed the production in DC and I remember she managed to suck life out of The Wolves, so I’m not sure she’d be the best for John Proctor either. 
 

Pacing, humor, contrast—little things like that can make a difference in a play like this feeling heavy and preachy vs lively, youthful, relatable (which Danya Taylor seems to be good at). 

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 4/15/25 at 5:39pm

MemorableUserName said: "The Wrap: Hofler is typically negative

‘John Proctor Is the Villain’ Broadway Review: Sadie Sink Deconstructs ‘The Crucible’

The “Stranger Things” star returns to the stage in yet another play about white male toxicity

https://www.thewrap.com/john-proctor-is-the-villain-broadway-review-sadie-sink/

"

As a critic, I sometimes wonder if playwrights ever go to the theater. If they did, they would know that contemporary plays are replete with strong female characters and it is equally replete with villains who are invariably white, straight and male. I’ve written that sentence almost as much as I’ve written that playwrights invariably cast journalists as villains (who are often white, straight and male) in their plays and musicals.

Ebert’s white, straight and male teacher is probably the most charming of that growing, crowded field of villainous characters. Watching “John Proctor,” I was reminded of Pauline Kael’s review of the film version of “The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie,” and how Maggie Smith’s character is a fascist but she’s also the only interesting teacher at the school.

Ditto Ebert’s teacher. Ebert delivers this production’s only compelling performance, and when he leaves the stage, I could only wait for his theatrical toxicity to return to give me something to watch.""

Robert Hofler is an extremely bitter failed writer whose books never sold and he has nothing but contempt for anyone younger than him receiving any modicum of success. The Wrap should not be giving this toxic fool a platform on which to spew his venom. No surprise at all that his was the only negative review. 

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 4/16/25 at 6:09pm

“A Critic Misses the Point: A Response to Robert Hofler’s Take on 'John Proctor is the Villain”

https://www.onstageblog.com/editorials/2025/4/16/a-critic-misses-the-point

[KevinKlawitter]

Posted: 4/16/25 at 9:14pm

Matt Rogers said: "MemorableUserName said: "The Wrap: Hofler is typically negative

‘John Proctor Is the Villain’ Broadway Review: Sadie Sink Deconstructs ‘The Crucible’

The “Stranger Things” star returns to the stage in yet another play about white male toxicity

https://www.thewrap.com/john-proctor-is-the-villain-broadway-review-sadie-sink/

"

As a critic, I sometimes wonder if playwrights ever go to the theater. If they did, they would know that contemporary plays are replete with strong female characters and it is equally replete with villains who are invariably white, straight and male. I’ve written that sentence almost as much as I’ve written that playwrights invariably cast journalists as villains (who are often white, straight and male) in their plays and musicals.

Ebert’s white, straight and male teacher is probably the most charming of that growing, crowded field of villainous characters. Watching “John Proctor,” I was reminded of Pauline Kael’s review of the film version of “The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie,” and how Maggie Smith’s character is a fascist but she’s also the only interesting teacher at the school.

Ditto Ebert’s teacher. Ebert delivers this production’s only compelling performance, and when he leaves the stage, I could only wait for his theatrical toxicity to return to give me something to watch.""

Robert Hofler is an extremely bitter failed writer whose books never sold and he has nothing but contempt for anyone younger than him receiving any modicum of success. The Wrap should not be giving this toxic fool a platform on which to spew his venom. No surprise at all that his was the only negative review."

A mediocre critic being very snarky and bitter about someone named "Ebert" is a little on the nose.

The Wrap has some great film critics - why is their theatre critic like this?