Johansson Wows Broadway Critics?

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 12:14pm

Johansson's 'enchanting' Broadway debut
Jan. 25, 2010, 3:55 PM EST
WENN

Hollywood actress Scarlett Johansson has enchanted theatre critics with her Broadway debut -- reviewers have labelled her performance "perfect."

The "Lost in Translation" beauty is currently starring in Arthur Miller's "A View From The Bridge" opposite Liev Schreiber, playing a 17-year-old girl in 1950s New York.

The opening night at the Cort Theatre on Sunday was a star-studded affair with celebrities including Hugh Jackman, Naomi Watts and "Heroes" actor Zachary Quinto filling the aisles.

And Johansson has emerged triumphant, garnering a swathe of glowing reviews for her turn.

USA Today critic Elysa Gardner writes, "Johansson - in a brunette wig - (makes) an enchanting Broadway debut in Arthur Miller's sobering fable... Only afterward will you likely realise the actress's youthful sensuality and capacity for good-natured goofiness constitute a perfect fit for this (role)."

Photos: Scarlett Johansson | Stars on Stage

The New York Times' Ben Brantley compared Johansson's performance to other stars who have appeared on Broadway in recent years, insisting the 25 year old outshone all her contemporaries.

He writes, "In recent years Broadway's stages have been littered with dim performances from bright screen stars, including Julia Roberts and Katie Holmes... By comparison, Ms. Johansson melts into her character so thoroughly that her nimbus of celebrity disappears."

While The Washington Post's Peter Marks adds, "The surprising achievement belongs to Johansson, who proves to be capable of far more than collaborating in eyebrow-raising star casting."






http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=454210>1=28101

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 12:17pm

I thought she did good, but I don't understand any rave reviews. Her character doesn't really stand out much, and the accent she has is actually very good, but she is a native New Yorker, so that couldn't have been that hard for her.

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 1:42pm

According to this article, this is Scarlett's dream come true.

Liev's, Jessica's and Scarlett's accents are excellent and set a perfect exposition for the play.


Scarlett's Dream Come True

[doubleentendre]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 2:05pm

I found her to be gorgeous, but completely boring. Maybe her performance changed in the week between the preview I saw and opening. But the performance I was at she was completely 1 dimensional and the epitome of a screen actress on stage.

The rest of the cast, especially Liev Schreiber, I found to be delightful.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 2:22pm

I thought she was radiant onstage and acted the part to perfection. One of the best Broadway debuts I've ever seen from a film actor.

[Pgenre]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 2:44pm

Why "Lost In Translation" star Scarlett and not, more appropriately, "Match Point" star, or, better yet, "Vicky Christina Barcelona" star, or, even, "Iron Man 2" star?

Why pick a 10-year-old film to describe her since she has done better, and more well-known, work since then? Weird/Bad writing.

P

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 2:45pm

It doesn't matter how easy it was for her to master an accent. That doesn't make her performance any less impressive. Why did there need to be a thread on this? She did a good job. Leave it alone. On occasion, movie stars can actually have talent. Shocking, I know.

Catherine, as a character, is not as showy as Eddie or Beatrice, but is certainly still difficult to play. She may not be explosive, but there is a depth the actress needs to go to to make the character believable. Obviously Scarlett did that well enough to earn herself raves.

[AC126748]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 2:58pm

Her rave reviews were more than deserved. She makes one of the most assured Broadway debuts I've ever seen. You'd think she'd been acting on the stage her entire life.

[Testing1232]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 3:25pm

It has to be pretty hard for her sharing the stage with the acting chops of Schreiber, but she really does a very nice job !

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 3:58pm

"Why pick a 10-year-old film to describe her since she has done better, and more well-known, work since then? Weird/Bad writing."

It came out in '03 so it's only 7 years old... ;p lol

But I actually think it's her best film to date, so I probably would have written the same thing.

[Perfectly Marvelous]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 4:13pm

Also, maybe more people associate her with that movie than the others listed.

I haven't seen the play yet, but it's nice to hear she's getting positive reviews. I hope the rest of the run is successful for her.

[Pgenre]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 4:13pm

Well, it just seems that MATCH POINT and VICKY CHRISTINA BARCELONA are higher-profile and better known films, both written/directed by Woody Allen and recipients of Oscars, GGs, etc. Plus, MATCH POINT is Woody's most financially successful film ever and it certainly made more $ and is better known than LIT.

I guess since it was her breakthrough role that is why it is that way in the article.

Heck, I even love her in Woody's SCOOP (though I'm sure I'm alone!).

P

[fflagg]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 5:50pm

Her best film perf is GIRL WITH A PEARL EARRING.

[allofmylife]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 6:35pm

I think the best performance she gave was in the interviews with Woody Allen pre and post the films she made with him. Here was a 21-year-old girl holding her own with, arguably, one of the best writers and directors in the last 50 years. She matched him barb-for-barb and took no guff. THAT was a brave performance. I think Allen adores her, not because she's a fresh young face but a knowing old soul.

Also, it says something interesting when some of the people on this board make such sweeping comments as "she was colorless" or "she was out-of-her-depth" after Scarlett got rave reviews from some very tough critics and other, perhaps older voices on this site who have actually seen the show relate how good her performance is. I guess either (1) theater is totally subjective, or (2) you got issues, baby.

[snarkywannabedreamer]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 6:53pm

Lost In Translation also received Golden Globe nominations as well as Oscar nominations and wins. And she will forever be tied to that film because THAT is the film that made her a star and made it possible for her to have the star power or notoriety to be cast in those other films. Personally I think that film is quite beautiful and honest.

[doubleentendre]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 7:03pm

"Also, it says something interesting when some of the people on this board make such sweeping comments as "she was colorless" or "she was out-of-her-depth" after Scarlett got rave reviews from some very tough critics and other, perhaps older voices on this site who have actually seen the show relate how good her performance is. I guess either (1) theater is totally subjective, or (2) you got issues, baby."

Let me rephrase. I thought her performance was fine. But to have loved her as much as I do in the movies she's been in, I found her performance in this production to be lack luster in comparison to those around her.

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 1/26/10 at 11:15pm

I think she did fine, but that's it. Nothing to rave about, all I'm saying.

[Jane2]

Posted: 1/27/10 at 12:18am

"I guess either (1) theater is totally subjective, or (2) you got issues, baby."


Of course theater is subjective. Just as all forms of art are.

Issues? People have issues if they disagree with you and some critics? I hope that's not what you mean there.

In the beginning, I was fascinated by Scarlett. I first saw her in the film Ghost World. She's very interesting to look at, and the role she played, I thought, wasn't a stretch.

Then I saw her in Lost in Translation, where I again found her appearance very interesting, and the role, which she played well, was not a stretch.

Then came Girl with a pearl earring, and Match point, where I lost interest. I found her acting to be weak.

I still would give it another chance if I get the opportunity to see View.

[followyourbliss23]

Posted: 1/28/10 at 10:12am

great post jane. i feel the same way about both subjectivity and miss johansson . the quirky, quiet demeanor scarlett had in 'lost in translation' and 'ghost world' soon became boring and vapid.

i personally did not like her in 'view from the bridge' at all. i thought she had no depth or emotion (a problem i've felt she's had for a while now). my boyfriend and i were actually talking about this last night and he has a theory:

ben bratley's review compared scarlett to katie holmes and julia roberts. in comparing scarlett to other "gossip magazine celebrities" (actresses that are known more for their looks and star power than their actual talent) she does do a better job than others that have preceded her. however, she's still not as talented as some true actresses that have graced the great white way (laura linney, alison pill, etc). i personally would have LOVED to see zoe kazan in the role.

having said that, i thought liev and the rest of cast were fantastic (no surprise there) and the show is definitely worth seeing. i'm glad it got praised and hope it extends.