MAYBE HAPPY ENDING Reviews- Page 60

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 9/5/25 at 9:42am

“As has repeatedly been stated, the industry refuses to consider talented Asian actors for many other roles that any talented actor (regardless of ethnicity) could be eligible to play.”

How do you know the industry refuses to consider them? Just because someone doesn’t end up in a role, that does not mean they weren’t considered. 

[John Adams]

Posted: 9/5/25 at 10:44am

MemorableUserName said: "Funny how that only applies in situations to keep roles available for white actors.  [...] But when it's a robot in South Korea, anyone should be allowed to play it!"

Yes, exactly.

That decision was intentionally and purposefully made by the creators of the show, long before any of this controversy began.  (see: Creators Respond to “Maybe Happy Ending” Casting Controversy)

The article makes many valid points regarding the temporary replacement of an AAPI actor with a white actor, including:

"Ultimately, I don’t think the outrage is about Andrew Barth Feldman as a performer. He’s clearly talented and a wonderful human being. And I believe the decision came from a mix of practicality, star power, personal connection, and artistic trust. But this moment, and this reaction, is about more than one actor. It’s about patterns. It’s about perception. It’s about how fragile progress can feel.

And for a lot of people, it’s personal."

I agree with every point they make in the article.

What I am troubled by is the possibility that the reactions to the decision are equally as "wrong" as the initial casting decision. In other words, "two wrongs don't make a right". (FYI: I would love to know not only WHO made the decision, but WHY they made it. It's kind of maddening that no one is stepping up to provide that info.) 

So... I guess (for me) the question at hand is: Should the purposefully designed intentions of the creators of the show be ignored and disrespected, or should the voices of those who are personally wronged by the "patterns" and "perceptions" mentioned above that this casting decision exemplifies take precedence.

No one is going to come out a "winner" in this situation.

[kdogg36]

Posted: 9/5/25 at 11:19am

Way earlier in this thread, I said that, although I'm squarely on the side of those disappointed by the casting decision, I think people of good faith can find themselves on both sides of this question. Since then, unfortunately, people of very bad faith have been sucking all the oxygen out of the room as far as the other side goes. I thank John Adams for providing some sensible arguments for that side of the debate.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 9/5/25 at 11:54am

fray3 said: "I went to see maybe happy ending around two weeks ago, and it was amazing. I know people are all talking about the drama with ABF, but since this thread is called MAYBE HAPPY ENDING reviews"

This is the place to post them, unfortunately! I saw this a few days ago with Andrew and Helen and it was really wonderful. Andrew, I believe, was the youngest Evan in DEH years ago, and he is very comfortable on stage. Their chemistry was excellent, he is in great voice especially during "Never Fly Away", and people seemed incredibly excited to meet him afterwards. I love the new key art with their backs, I think long term it works since many people will be playing these roles both in New York and on tour. For those not interested in seeing Andrew, Steven and Christopher are covering all weekend and next Fri/Sat as well.

[Luminaire2]

Posted: 9/5/25 at 2:15pm

There’s a video going around from Darren’s “last” curtain call, where he brought Andrew on stage, said many nice things about him, thanked him for doing this big favour for him, and passed the charger along to him. 

[uncageg]

Posted: 9/5/25 at 4:57pm

Luminaire2 said: "There’s a video going around from Darren’s “last” curtain call, where he brought Andrew on stage, said many nice things about him, thanked him for doing this big favour for him, and passed the chargeralong to him."

 

It was posted here on Monday the 1st. Page 56 comment #1380.

 

[John Adams]

Posted: 9/5/25 at 7:29pm

Sutton Ross said: "I saw this a few days ago with Andrew and Helen and it was really wonderful. Andrew, I believe, was the youngest Evan in DEH years ago, and he is very comfortable on stage."

I remember (very distinctly) his performance at The Jimmy Awards in 2018. He was nominated for his performance in his High School's production of Catch Me If You Can and his solo performance at The Jimmys was so, SO very impressive. I could not believe he was only a high school student.

2018 was the first year I watched the Jimmys online. Since then, I've watched The Jimmys every year. I compare every solo performance (male or female) to his by how close, or beyond the soloist comes to recreating that same level of excitement and interest I felt watching Feldman.

 

Updated On: 9/6/25 at 07:29 PM

[John Adams]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 6:56am

Something uplifting to distract from the name calling:

 

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 10:27am

"For those not interested in seeing Andrew, Steven and Christopher are covering all weekend and next Fri/Sat as well."

Has this been posted/confirmed elsewhere? I find no announcement. 

[MemorableUserName]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 12:28pm

John Adams said: "
So... I guess (for me) the question at hand is: Should the purposefully designed intentions of the creators of the show be ignored and disrespected, or should the voices of those who are personally wronged by the "patterns" and "perceptions" mentioned above that this casting decision exemplifies take precedence.

If the purposefully designed intentions of the creators of a show are disrespectful and feed into inequity and industry-wide ill effects, even if that wasn't the intended effect, then no, they shouldn't be respected or given a pass. Even if in this instance the creators weren't deliberately trying to hurt anyone, I don't believe simply saying "That's what the creators wanted" can be used as a blanket excuse. It ignores the fact that creatives are (for now) human beings, and human beings are fallible. They're also not operating in a vacuum. Where is the line? If other creators' intentions ARE deliberately disrespectful and ill-intended, if they set mandates that were deliberately racist/sexist/anything, would they still get a pass because "That's what the creators wanted"?

Even beyond the theater, we live in a world where, just because the cause is innocuous, that doesn't excuse the effect. In most instances, if someone breaks something without intending to, something was still broken. If someone physically harms someone without intending to, someone was still harmed. (I feel like there's a show about to open on Broadway about that very thing...) The intentions may be mitigating but the very real effect still has to be contended with. People seldom say, "Well, they didn't mean it to be bad so the thing that happened wasn't actually bad after all."

The article you linked to eloquently details how, no matter the thought process that went into them or the intentions behind them, the creators' decisions fed into the same excuses the industry has used not to cast Asian performers for years. That making shows more relatable and universal means making them whiter, in a way that seldom applies in reverse. (Funny that making the characters universal meant giving them non-Asian names, as if real-world global South Korea-based companies aren't shipping products with more Korean-sounding names worldwide...) That white performers are supposedly easier for audiences to relate to, or place themselves in their shoes (or "anthromorphize" when they're robots...), or see as romantic leads than Asian performers.

And yes, too often those arguing for or justifying Feldman's casting are those unaffected by this issue, or prioritize one person's feelings over the very real hurt thousands have expressed, or are (perhaps unintentionally) doing the same thing the creators did: promoting whiteness as universal. Those who argue that "anyone" should be allowed to play this supposedly non-race-specific role without arguing that every other non-race-specific role should be open to Asian performers is simply saying that white performers are more relatable. (I've asked several times if the people so vehemently arguing that this one white actor should be allowed to play this supposedly non-race-specific role are equally vehement that Asian actors should be allowed to play other non-race-specific roles. There's been far less urgency on that point.)

[Seb28]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 12:40pm

MemorableUserName said: "If the purposefully designed intentions of the creators of a showare disrespectful and feed into inequity and industry-wide ill effects, even if that wasn't the intended effect, then no, they shouldn't be respected or given a pass."

Their intentions are the ultimate way of creating true equity/equality. This is the only universal path forward. They have explained why into great detail. Also, the discussion about equity/equality has been moved to another thread a while ago.

 

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 12:44pm

“If the purposefully designed intentions of the creators of a show are disrespectful and feed into inequity and industry-wide ill effects…”

Disrespect and feeding into are in the eye of the beholder and are not the obligation of the creatives to tread around or ensure everyone’s safety. Perhaps what we need aren’t lobby signs that say “Trigger warning: show contains gunshots” but instead say “Trigger warning: show contains people with different skin color talking.”  Hmm… tastes like segregation to me!

”no matter the thought process that went into them or the intentions behind them, the creators' decisions fed into the same excuses the industry has used not to cast Asian performers for years.”

Best to just not write a show then. Fire all the actors (especially the Asians!!!) immediately. No more shows shall ever be written by anyone. 

From now on, to ensure no one gets offended by anything, we shall have rooms full of monkeys write the shows. “It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times.”

https://imgur.com/a/RtYi7B4

[Ensemble1726583963]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 1:11pm

Auggie27 said: ""For those not interested in seeing Andrew, Steven and Christopher are covering all weekend and next Fri/Sat as well."

Has this been posted/confirmed elsewhere? I find no announcement."

It's posted on their Instagram and confirmed by the actors. 

[Dom P]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 4:34pm

PaigeTurner2 said: "Auggie27 said: ""For those not interested in seeing Andrew, Steven and Christopher are covering all weekend and next Fri/Sat as well."

Has this been posted/confirmed elsewhere? I find no announcement."

It's posted on their Instagramand confirmed by the actors."

He's at TIFF 2025 with Poetic License this weekend.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 7:22pm

Contractual out. I get it. Thanks.

[MemorableUserName]

Posted: 9/6/25 at 10:58pm

It's interesting that, rather than promote one or both of the understudies for two months, the producers invited so much controversy in order to cast someone who wasn't even available for the first two weekends of his run. (And for all the talk about how his real-life relationship with Shen would be a sell, they ultimately only went on together four times in the first week.)

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 2:32pm

Subject-related replies please Dani. 

[AC126748]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 5:11pm

MemorableUserName said: "It's interesting that, rather than promote one or both of the understudies for two months, the producers invited so much controversy in orderto castsomeone who wasn't even available for the first two weekends of his run. (And for all the talk about how his real-life relationship with Shen would be a sell, they ultimately only went on together fourtimes in the first week.)"

We're really grasping for things to complain about at this point.

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 5:22pm

AC126748 said: "MemorableUserName said: "It's interesting that, rather than promote one or both of the understudies for two months, the producers invited so much controversy in orderto castsomeone who wasn't even available for the first two weekends of his run. (And for all the talk about how his real-life relationship with Shen would be a sell, they ultimately only went on together fourtimes in the first week.)"

We're really grasping for things to complain about at this point."

Thank you, another voice of sense.

And those understudies would never ever be promoted. Not because they’re not good enough. But because they’re too valuable where they are. 

[MemorableUserName]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 5:26pm

AC126748 said: "MemorableUserName said: "It's interesting that, rather than promote one or both of the understudies for two months, the producers invited so much controversy in orderto castsomeone who wasn't even available for the first two weekends of his run. (And for all the talk about how his real-life relationship with Shen would be a sell, they ultimately only went on together fourtimes in the first week.)"

We're really grasping for things to complain about at this point."

Who's complaining? Anytime he doesn't show up is an opportunity for one of the people who should have the role to play it.

[PipingHotPiccolo]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 5:33pm

MemorableUserName said: "It's interesting that, rather than promote one or both of the understudies for two months, the producers invited so much controversy in orderto castsomeone who wasn't even available for the first two weekends of his run. (And for all the talk about how his real-life relationship with Shen would be a sell, they ultimately only went on together fourtimes in the first week.)"

Yes, its just FASCINATING that the producers cast the lead's boyfriend who is a talented stage veteran himself with an incredible voice and who happened to have done readings of the show in the past- what a WILD decision! 

I completely understand why this casting frustrated some people, and think Asian American representation on Broadway is a worthy topic of focus/discussion, but the idea that Feldman was some crazy reach by the producers, is just comically obtuse.

[MemorableUserName]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 5:50pm

Did you learn your reading comprehension skills from Boris and Seb? No one's claiming it was a reach.

Just pointing out that the producers were so desperate to get that white stage veteran who had (wow!) done readings (really??? Whole readings???)  over the Asian veterans of the show who had actually performed the role multiple times that they were willing to accept he was unavailable for several of his early dates...when it would be performed by those pesky Asian performers who are only good enough to play it when the white guy is unavailable.

[Seb28]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 6:30pm

MemorableUserName said: "Anytime he doesn't show up is an opportunity for one of the people who should have the role to play it."

Have you read the actual role description? The production team deliberately wanted this robot role to be able to be played by all ethnicities. And they have explained exactly why. Not 1 race "should" play the role. So please stop your blatant racism and apologize. Thank you.

This is what the production team says:

We wrote a show about robots so we could engage more intimately with the most basic human questions of love and loss, creating the roles of Oliver and Claire to be avatars of these universal questions. They were meant to be products created by a global company, and so never bore Korean names, not even in the Korean version of the show.

Throughout the American development, we tried various approaches to casting. At some points along the journey, we cast the roles explicitly as Asian, thinking that it might help make the setting more quickly apparent. However, on seeing that, we also were not satisfied. To say that seeing *any* Asian actor on stage “quickly suggests Korea” seemed not only like a stretch, but regressive, or even offensive to the uniqueness of Korean culture.

The robot roles are ethnically undefined, and our Broadway casting breakdown reflected this. The actors were cast because they fit the roles. In Oliver/Darren’s case, it was his ability to project boyishness and innocence, with a not-leading-man-broadway-belt style of voice.

Over the last several years, we have been heartened to see shows excitingly making gestures toward universality with expansive casting, and rightly gave opportunities to actors from identity categories who previously had few options. With Maybe Happy Ending, we wanted to write a show in which every role could be played by an Asian performer, but without the intention that the robot roles always would be.

[YankeeDani]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 10:43pm

Is Boris a  moderator? WTF why did my post get removed?

 

 

 

[PipingHotPiccolo]

Posted: 9/7/25 at 11:32pm

MemorableUserName said: "Did you learn your reading comprehension skills from Boris and Seb? No one's claiming it was a reach.

Just pointing out that the producers were so desperate to get that white stage veteran who had (wow!) done readings (really??? Whole readings???) over the Asian veterans of the show who had actually performed the rolemultiple times that they were willing to accept he was unavailable for several of his early dates...when it would be performed by those pesky Asian performers who are only good enough to play it when the white guy is unavailable."

Right, casting Andrew Barth Feldman for a 2 month stint, who did readings of the show and is the leading lady's real life partner, and who is a proven leading actor himself, is a DESPERATE move by the producers. Its actually shocking that producers EVER need to cast anyone because the understudies are always right there and thats how it usually works, right?

AGAIN, there is so much space to be irritated the producers didnt take more care about the Asian American representation here, without coming off just plain silly and these arguments--and especially the digs at Feldman--are silly at best. 

By the way, you said "no ones claiming it was a reach" and then said the producers were "desperate" to cast a white guy, so I'd lay off the insults about other peoples intelligence here, but you do you.

Updated On: 9/7/25 at 11:32 PM