M. BUTTERFLY Previews- Page 4

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 1:31am

FutureDirector said: "GavestonPS,It's not the testimony Song gives in the court that's we'll stage (the staging of that looks rather high schoolish actually), its the one that he gives to the chineese government before being sent to the labor camp."

Then, technically, that is an "interrogation", not a "trial". (The two words may be synonyms in English dictionaries, sometimes, but they are distinct elements of jurisprudence in a Communist country.)

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 1:48am

I've never been much of a Taymor fan.  Her work tends to be far too self indulgent for my taste.  She does create stunningly beautiful stage pictures and effects, but her productions rarely come together to form a cohesive piece, IMO.  I've heard from actors that have worked with her that she doesn't give much rehearsal time to the actual acting or storytelling when she directs, which had me worried about this show.

And I was right.  I saw it a couple of nights ago and it kind of fell flat for me.  She's clearly trying to rebrand herself as a serious director who can do an acting driven piece, but the set is just ugly and the actors are giving just serviceable performances.  She just wasn't the right director for this.  Also, Clive Owens is good and all, but he's a mind-numbingly boring choice for this part.  He gives a perfectly fine performance, but there are definitely other actors out there that would have been better and more interesting.  When you have a character that the whole show is based around, it's probably best to cast someone that isn't so bland. It's just a really sloppy production of a great play.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 1:54am

SNAFU said: "Having worked with Taymor in the past, she is not an actor's directer. Even Anthony Hopkins publicly blasted her for that. She sees a production as almost non-sequitur visual vignettes. Story telling and character driven work is not her forte. She likes to hold things at a dstance and admire them. Anything with feelings and human interactionshe tends to not be interested in.

"

If anyone were to go back and check my first posts in this thread, s/he would find predictions just as dire as the reports we are now hearing. I'm not bragging; in fact, I am almost clueless as to what will run and what will not.

But even Taylor's responses in interviews reveal why she is wrong for this play!

She is part of an unfortunate tradition over the past two decades in which directors are taught they are visual--as opposed to theatrical--artists. And Taymor is also a critic's darling--"Look! A female auteur!" = "Look! A talking dog!".* She can lose $100 million of other people's money without being assigned the blame unless and until the critics turn on her.

-------

* Many of my favorite directors are women and my work has been directed by women more often than not. My "talking dog" reference is to the media's approach to a few women, not to female directors as a whole. (Or even to Miss Taymor. I think she has limitations, obviously, but I'm not calling her a dog.)

[devonian.t]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 4:09am

Gaveston, your comments are as spot-on as ever, but, having explored Noh theatre at length, it is my understanding that audiences do not "pretend" not to see stage hands dressed in black; this convention is so ingrained that audiences claim to actually NOT see stage crew, and can gasp in wonder as scenic elements move "magically".  I know I am not from that culture, but that is what I've been assured.

I haven't seen this production of M.Butterfly, but it seems like they haven't got the ritualistic nature of Noh theatre to work for Western eyes, perhaps?

PS This is not meant to be an excuse for self-indulgence or incompetence!

[After Eight]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 6:02am

GeorgeandDot said: "When you have a character that the whole show is based around, it's probably best to cast someone that isn't so bland."

Yes, Clive Owen was somewhat short on oomph. But then, the character is something of a wallflower, and I believe the actor  conveyed that well.  It is only in the world of the imagination that the character truly comes alive, and I really liked how Owen described his first visit to the opera as a boy and the wonderment it inspired in him. Here he flowered, here he glowed with the discovery of rapture. As the run progresses, with a little added energy, I think he'll be just fine in the part.

[Miles2Go2]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 7:13am

SNAFU said: "Ripped, I have always found Lion king to be very schizophrenic. On one hand it tells a Disney story and it is then laced with Taymor art installations and stage pictures. Yes, it is still raking it in. Good for Disney, Good for Taymor. Personally I found it, after the first 10 minutes and a couple of scenes throughout, to be quite boring. I might be alone in this. I found her earlier off-Broadway work much more appealing.”

I took my parents to see the touring production of The Lion King the first time it toured through Tulsa. Even though it was unpopular to say so at the time, I remember thinking it didn’t live up to my expectations. Also, I leaned over at intermission and asked my mom (who had never seen the movie) if she knew what was going on plot-wise. She had no idea, but loved the visuals. Of course, my mom was likely in the very early stages of undiagnosed (at that time) dementia so that may have played a part, but I only asked her because even though I’d seen the movie, I detected that someone coming to the show as a novice would be totally lost. That seems like at least partially a director-fail. 

 

[Miles2Go2]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 7:15am

When considering which shows to see next month on my 5-night NYC trip, I considered this show. I ended up going with 6 musicals instead. So glad I dodged this bullet. 

[SNAFU]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 7:52pm

I have worked with and directed Bunraku style puppets (I have as stated before worked with Julie on many productions). The performers in black does work very well when the are performing a character well. The same way people follow the Avenue Q puppets with the performer visible. It is not a convention you have to be see 9or in this case, not see). It just happens. Sometimes it doesn't work. It depends on what it is used for. If it is to move flats, it has to be done gracefully, hopefully when the performers onstage are drawing your attention away.

 Julie has, for the most part, always been the darling of critics. Sometimes I do find it head scratching (Green Bird anyone?). She keeps finding work though and getting butts in seats.

[Sivan2]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 10:53pm

Newb here. I'm glad I read the reviews here. I'm going back to NYC for a brief 4 night stay. I wanted to see Phantom of the Opera (saw it as a kid and while I have never cared for most musicals, I loved it) and A Bronx Tale (one of my favorite movies and I love anything about wise guys). 

 

I figured I could maybe see 3 productions. M Butterfly was one of them that I was 50/50 about. I love Clive Owen and the concept of this sounds interesting but when I watched the trailers on Youtube, I was bored. It appeared boring and pretentious. I thought it was just me not getting it. Someone on here mentioned the rush tickets. You think this would be available before every performance if you go when the ticket office first opens? I would consider going if I got a rush ticket but if it was at the end of my stay. Part of me thinks though that I would be bored and leave before intermission. 

[FrankieSay]

Posted: 10/14/17 at 11:32pm

Don't see it.

[BalconyClub]

Posted: 10/15/17 at 1:55pm

From the full balcony Saturday night, the sight lines were good and the words heard.  A great value for $39 for seat G1 in the top row.

I liked the gray panels, as I interpreted their use as a cell for both lead characters. From reading previous posts, the panels are now handled better.

A variety of colorful scenes are revealed during the performance - some muted while others boldly red.

[Valentina3]

Posted: 10/15/17 at 4:36pm

"A variety of colorful scenes are revealed during the performance - some muted while others boldly red."


For people who did see the show earlier in its run, are these colors newly added or just something which were always there but not striking enough to mention? All the early previews have described the sets simply with "dull", "grey", and "drab" definitions.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 10/15/17 at 5:40pm

Sloppy. Sloppy sloppy sloppy sloppy. That’s the only word I can use to describe this production. Oy vey. This is a MESS. I had countless problems with what I saw onstage at the Cort today, but every single problem I had can be traced back to one thing. That one thing is the direction

Julie Taymor has done some real damage here. This was my first introduction to this play, and while the text of the play seemed very strong, I think it has been completely muddied by poor directorial choices. I will start with the acting. Clive Owen seemed lost at sea. The performance he was giving did not read in the balcony at all. Jin Ha gave a remarkable performance that was the sole glimmer of hope in this dud.

The set was unattractive, cheap looking, and distracting. Countless panels are haphazardly thrown together over and over again to create different locales, but the panels movements are awkward, and they never align properly. Considering Taymor is at the helm, I thought there would at least be a couple pretty stage pictures, but there are none to be found.

This is a total miss in my book from a directorial and production standpoint. However, I will say that I did find the text and story of the play to be very solid and engaging. I can only imagine how great this play must be when it is not in the hands of a misguided director.

[nycward]

Posted: 10/15/17 at 7:28pm

So I was there this afternoon as well and I had a decidedly different opinion on the production. First, I will say that our TDF tickets were Orchestra, first row on the side aisle. We were sitting next to a script PA and had a brief chat about the script changes and tech issues that are occurring during this first full week of previews. I suspect that this very close perspective may have helped me enjoy the production far more than the previous poster did who was in the balcony. After hearing of the tech disaster all week on this board I found the show ran rather smoothly. Yes, a few times the panels didn't align that smoothly but all in all I went with the concept. Moving panels are very much a part of the classical Chinese theatre mes en scene and the difference between the bright colors of pageantry alternating with the metallic grey panels representing the literal prison in Paris and the colorless world of Mao's China worked in concept. It was indeed rather repetitious and in no way will anyone go out of that theatre humming the scenery but I accepted it. I found the play to be reasonably taught and engrossing and I found all of the performances to be solid. I did see the original production 30 years ago and remember John Dexter's brilliant concept and indeed this one is inferior but again, I went with it. Was it my proximity to the stage with all that massive legroom while watching the intimacy of Clive Owen's and Jin Ha's work? Perhaps. This production just might need a closer perspective than a Broadway two level balcony can provide which again is a legitimate criticism of the production. Finally,  I do have to say that the audience response was very strong. Yes, the requisite standing O but a very loud and vocal reaction as well. I was pleasantly satisfied with the production considering all of the negativity that I hear in this thread. Looking forward to see what the critical response will be.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/15/17 at 7:50pm

I was in the front of the balcony and had no problem with it so I’m not sure if being closer will change anyone so perception. I really did find it to be a beautiful and moving show that’s going to get sh*t on solely because of people’s ideas of Taymor.  

[JBC3]

Posted: 10/16/17 at 5:11am

Jordan Catalano said: "I was in the front of the balcony and had no problem with it so I’m not sure if being closer will change anyone so perception. I really did find it to be a beautiful and moving show that’s going to get sh*t on solely because of people’s ideas of Taymor.

This is interesting as I agree that Taymor can spark a reflexive backlash similar to John Doyle.

Others have noted specific elements of the staging and acting that did not work for them though.  It sounds like you did not experience those the same way or found them less problematic? I am on the fence about seeing this production.

[Robbie2]

Posted: 10/18/17 at 10:47pm

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 10/19/17 at 10:32am

The panels even look crooked in their production shots.

[hork]

Posted: 10/19/17 at 11:19am

Jordan Catalano said: I really did find it to be a beautiful and moving show that’s going to get sh*t on solely because of people’s ideas of Taymor."

Or maybe they just don't think it's a good production.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/19/17 at 11:31am

I mean...or not. 

[hork]

Posted: 10/19/17 at 12:00pm

Jordan Catalano said: "I mean...or not."

I'm going with yes.

[LxGstv]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 9:59am

Saw this last night and didn’t think it was nearly as bad as mostly everyone has been saying around here... it probably did help to go in with low expectations though... it was my introduction to M. Butterfly, that probably helped too.

I didn’t find the panels to be annoying or ugly, it actually worked for me, I’m usually annoyed by stagehands walking on stage to set something up, but I thought it actually worked brilliantly here, the whole thing flowed very nicely.

All I have to say to people not planning to see this because a couple of opinions here, just go see it and judge for yourself. I’m glad I didn’t skip on this one, even if the staging isn’t a gorgeous as the original that someone posted a photo here, it’s still a very good play.

[BroadwayLuv2]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 6:36pm

RUSH REPORT 

Rushed today.  I got to the theater at 9:20 and was first in line. The second person arrived at 9:35 and said she had been there the day before at about the same time and was 8th in line but couldn't get tickets as they only distributed 11 seats. At 10 am today there were 5 people in line.  I got 2 seats Orchestra Row AA Seats 101 and 102.  

I noticed online that the seating chart for the Cort has 11 seats in Row AA, so I'm guessing the 11 seats they do for Rush are these seats. 

[nycward]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 6:43pm

BroadwayLuv2 said: "RUSH REPORT

Rushed today. I got to the theater at 9:20 and was first in line. The second person arrived at 9:35 and said she had been there the day before at about the same time and was 8th in line but couldn't get tickets as they only distributed 11 seats. At 10 am today there were 5 people in line. I got 2 seats Orchestra Row AA Seats 101 and 102.

I noticed online that the seating chart for the Corthas 11 seats in Row AA, so I'm guessing the 11 seats they do for Rush are these seats."

My TDF tickets last Sunday weret AA 1,3 on the aisle. I enjoyed the show quite a bit from that vantage point.

 

[Mediamaven2]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 6:47pm

Do post back what you thought.  Going to see this soon. Interesting to read the mix here.