Posted: 3/1/19 at 12:51am
LesWickedly said: "Eighthours of Kushner’s contemporary text is much different than four hours of Shakespeare for me and I’m sure many others."
This.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 12:56am
Posted: 3/1/19 at 12:58am
Posted: 3/1/19 at 1:12am
A few twitter reviews if you search, including one that's quite negative towards the cuts to the script (particularly the title character) and the score. But it's a first preview, lots can change, and they have 5 weeks. And I'm sure Bill's at the back of the house doing rewrites every night... 
Posted: 3/1/19 at 6:16am
Posted: 3/1/19 at 7:32am
Just SomethingPeculiar said: "A few twitter reviews if you search, including one that's quite negative towards the cuts to the script (particularly the title character) and the score. But it's a first preview, lots can change, and they have 5 weeks. And I'm sure Bill's at the back of the house doing rewrites every night... "
I wonder if he stage doors.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 9:02am
Heard from 2 friends who were at the invited dress Wednesday evening. Started at 7:40ish, intermission after 2 hours, curtain came down at 11:10pm-ish. They said it did feel long. Performances were excellent but the direction was "too busy" and the Philip Glass was intrusive, frequently covering dialogue.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 9:35am
I expect the direction to split audiences. When Sam Gold directed Hamlet at The Public, there were many walk outs due to its contemporary style. I thought it was one of the best things I'd seen all year. You never know how people are going to feel about his direction style.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 9:55am
I'm surprised there aren't two intermissions, like there were for Hamlet.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 10:02am
My expectations were high going in. Maybe they were too high. At the end of the show, I thought it was good, but not as great as I had been expecting.
It felt like a first preview. I'm not going to be overly critical here because they play truly did seem like a work in progress last night.
On the positives, Jackson is her amazing self. Ruth Wilson is excellent and has an amazing turn as the Fool, her work in the first act on the dining room table is memorable. John Douglas Thompson does his usual fine work.
It would not surprise me in the least for people to love or dislike this show. along with the running time, the direction is going to divide people. The biggest problem for me was the language. It felt in contrast with the set, staging and costumes.
It felt long. At times it felt really long. The seating at the Cort certainly didn't help matters. I was on an aisle in the orchestra and was still uncomfortable. First act ran two hours, ended around 10:45.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 10:04am
Kad said: "I'm surprised there aren't two intermissions, like there were for Hamlet."
Thought the same. The show would really benefit from multiple intermissions or the use of a pause.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 10:33am
Gold's Hamlet was hardly as radical as it thought it was.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 12:03pm
I saw this last night and definitely feel this production will generate some strong opinions.
The biggest (easy fix) issue right now is the sound. While I actually loved Philip Glass’s score it often overpowered any dialogue which is a pretty big problem to have in Shakespeare. It seemed like a lot of the ensemble were not miched which need to change. While I enjoyed the score the added songs (I think there are three now) don’t add much and in an already long show, they should be cut.
I thought Glenda was good, though not quite great yet. Ruth Wilson as others mentioned comes off the best as The Fool. She was charming and funny. The rest of the cast careens from overacting (Regan) to downright awful (Edgar).
I actually really liked the use of deaf actors in Spring Awakening but here I do not think it works, especially how the SPOILER death of this character happens.
I think the set really hampers this show. It is a one set show which makes things much more claustrophobic and I kept yearning for something else to look at instead of that purple carpet! The King Lear at BAM a few years ago made good use of a real forest for the King to get lost in which worked for me much better than how that is handled here. I will say that the lighting is truly excellent and does a nice job of setting up spaces on a stage that changes very little.
Overall I’m sure this will improve over previews though I think they should consider adding another intermission. Two hours and ten minutes is a long ways to go. For those wondering the show started at 7:02pm and ended at 10:40pm. Intermission was at just about 9:08pm so the timing is fairly accurate, just note that this show doesn’t give you the usual 7-8 minute late start that most Broadway shows give you these days. I'd say waiting a month or so would be a very smart thing to do for this show even if my issues probably will still be there.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 12:20pm
Oh dear. I'm here for the length. King Lear is long. It's supposed to be long. And there's a LOT that happens. And you're supposed to be exhausted at the end. But. One set... that seems cruel.
Posted: 3/1/19 at 5:54pm
Can someone go into detail about how the deaf talent is utilized in the show?
Posted: 3/2/19 at 1:17pm
Posted: 3/2/19 at 2:34pm
One set shouldn't be a deal-breaker. Shakespeare was originally performed on a bare stage.
Posted: 3/2/19 at 11:57pm
Posted: 3/3/19 at 12:55am
Posted: 3/3/19 at 2:35pm
Anyone have any intel or had any luck with rush for this?
Posted: 3/3/19 at 5:47pm
Posted: 3/3/19 at 5:57pm
Depends how absorbed in the material. If bored shietless then 2hrs is an eternity.
For me, even 10mins with Mr Bill would be unbearable[ I remember horrendous school days with his works and never recovered].
Posted: 3/3/19 at 6:05pm
RippedMan said: "2 hours without a break?! Have you never seen a movie. "
Have you never noticed how you can leave your seat at a movie and return without causing much disruption? Try leaving a center section of. a Broadway show for a pee mergency. Not so easy.
Posted: 3/3/19 at 6:12pm
In addition, a movie has closeups, different angles, wideshots, etc. whereas watching a play in live theater is... just one sightline and that's it.
I wouldn't be surprised if some people doze off during those 2 hours.
I do plan on watching this play but will aim to get seats where I can at least see facial expressions. I watched Indecent from the balcony and front mezz at the Cort and front mezz was definitely worth the upgrade.
Posted: 3/3/19 at 6:40pm
Matt Rogers said: "RippedMan said: "2 hours without a break?! Have you never seen a movie. "
Have you never noticed how you can leave your seat at a movie and return without causing much disruption? Try leaving a center section of. a Broadway show for a pee mergency. Not so easy.”
Also, movie theater seats are wayyyy more comfortable. I’ll happily sit through a long movie, especially with reclining seats and a ton of food options.
