MARY JANE Previews — Page 2

"Performances including McAdams are the reason to go. The play itself does good character work but largely feels like a series of vignetttes at times."


In the original production, it was only after the midpoint that we realized the structural plan: no spoilers, but the play focuses on a particular chapter of the title character's life, and zeroes in for a kind of close-up of all that it entails, including those she meets as collaborators and/or obstacles. It's a beautiful sliver of a tale that might have bogged down in television movie details, but instead carefully highlights only enough minutiae to ground the story's reality. I loved the shape of the play, its economy, and decision to live in the present, not to spend stage time offering too much of an origin story. It sounds like this new staging has many of the elements in the first, and to me that's good news. .

Updated On: 4/7/24 at 10:28 AM

Tonight’s performance (4/10) also cancelled due to non-COVID illness.

PipingHotPiccolo said: "Have they not rehearsed understudies, or is this them not wanting to go on without McAdams? I have tickets for this weekend, very curious."

Scheduled understudy rehearsals are almost always after a show has opened. Understudies are, of course, expected to be memorized and familiar with the show as much as possible during the preview process- but actual physical rehearsals for understudies are always scheduled for after the show's opening night date.

COVID has changed the process and guidelines quite a bit, but for a show with only a week of performances under its belt it makes total sense that they would possibly need to use the canceled performance for a "put in" ESPECIALLY if this show in previews is in the process of re-blocking a scene or adjusting technical elements that physically effect how an actor executes a moment

But anyway, because this is two performances canceled? I'm thinking McAdams is unable to perform and they don't have any intention on this show ever going on without her.

Updated On: 4/10/24 at 09:40 PM

Understudy is going on for Rachel tonight (4/11) as well.

McAdams is out tonight. They canceled Tuesday and Wednesday entirely, but tonight the understudy is on. The understudy previously went on last week in a different role when McAdams was in.

gibsons2 said: "MemorableUserName said: "McAdams is out tonight. They canceled Tuesday and Wednesday entirely, but tonight the understudy is on. The understudy previously went on last week in a different role when McAdams was in."

What a mess... I'm thankful for that ticket protection I've purchased, at least it was an easy cancelation. I guess I'll be skipping this play altogether."

Is Rachel back in the show? and dumb question, at first in the original art her names was above the title and what I am seeing now is her name well underneath the title. Does that mean if she doesn't make a performance, the audience is not entitled for a refund as is customary when an actor is billed above title

VernonGersch said: "gibsons2 said: "MemorableUserName said: "McAdams is out tonight. They canceled Tuesday and Wednesday entirely, but tonight the understudy is on. The understudy previously went on last week in a different role when McAdams was in."

What a mess... I'm thankful for that ticket protection I've purchased, at least it was an easy cancelation. I guess I'll be skipping this play altogether."

Is Rachel back in the show? and dumb question, at first in the original art her names was above the title and what I am seeing now is her name well underneath the title. Does that mean if she doesn't make a performance, the audience is not entitled for a refund as is customary when an actor is billed above title"

The "refund rule" as I know it isn't about where the names are in the art, it's about where the names are on the Playbill title page/houseboard, upon which she has never been above title.

this a lovely little play that didnt really do much for me, though it has its moments and im glad i saw it. the bit of stagecraft trickery was a nice surprise, and quite a feat, but wasnt enough to really grab me by the throat like i want a play to do.

April Mathis and Susan Parfour both work wonders with small roles, reminding us what true theater acting can be. McAdams is good- more than good- in a tough role. Shes so likeable, beautiful and for lack of a better word, naturally pleasant-- but that seems like a bit of mismatch here given what her character is going through. Still, some of the scenes are written to naturally/organically, that is allows McAdams cheery disposition to make sense--I especially loved her banter with Mathis' nurse, and then that beautiful dialogue with the Hasidic lady.

No bad seats here (why are they closing the Friedman to renovate? its in great shape) but I was halfway up the mezz and think I would have preferred more intimacy here from orchestra. Then again, i was underwhelmed by the play, so I'm glad i didnt shell out $$$ here.

Comparisons are odious, but Carrie Coon was devastating in this role, the last scene has stuck with me for 5+ years, her playing so understated and recognizably real: we know this woman, whose seeming fragility - she's both beleaguered and resilient - is matched by an internal pilot light that glows steadily in the face of untold crises. I've heard that McAdams is fine, but the role is a quiet tour de force, a young mother like no other in recent memory, beautifully constructed. I hope the production comes together. The play deserves it.

Updated On: 4/19/24 at 09:12 PM

I’m seeing this tomorrow, rear orchestra, how is the sound? Earlier preview reports indicated it was hard to hear some of the dialog at times.

I was in the third row mezzanine this afternoon and heard everything fine. I wanted to love it, but I just thought it was fine, the religious types weren’t entirely clear to me. I thought Rachel did a nice job, it’s a terrific role, I’d probably prefer her to win the Tony over Sarah.

It’s a hard one, and I feel like you can do so much with it. I wish I saw Carrie Coon in it.