Posted: 10/23/15 at 2:55pm
Rosie O'Donnell is actually an inspired choice for Annie Wilkes. She's everything from camp, to funny, to warm and fuzzy, to truly frightening and overpowering.
Not that I don't love Laurie Metcalf.
Posted: 10/23/15 at 4:26pm
And add some songs and dances! One, two, kick, turn! Turn, turn, kick, turn!
Posted: 10/23/15 at 4:44pm
I assume that some of this crowd is familiar with the unauthorized musical demo.
Who will stop those dirty birds
Stop those dirty birds
From singin' them dirty words...
Posted: 10/24/15 at 1:25am
Saw the show tonight. I had a good time. It's a hoot. Did it reach the terror of the film? No. However it is very quirky and funny and it does create tension nicely. It's a fine production and Metcalf is really wonderful. I'm not sure why Bruce signed on-he doesn't get much to do. Would I ever pay 300 for orchestra? No but someone will. Get yourself a standing room ticket and enjoy. It ended about 9:50. The staging, sets and music are wonderful.
Posted: 10/24/15 at 2:55am
Thanks for joint the boards, Mr. Willis.
Posted: 10/24/15 at 3:14am
Thank you, it's great to be on here. It's fun to read some of your wrong opinions about my very good performance.
Posted: 10/24/15 at 9:30am
Tacky tripe. A "thriller" devoid of thrills, chills, or vitamin pills for Bruce Willis. Slack, slow-paced and sluggish. Laurie Metcalf certainly deserves something more worthy of her talents. The set design was handsome and effective.
Posted: 10/24/15 at 10:06am
Posted: 10/26/15 at 11:43am
I saw this on Saturday night. The set is incredible. Loved Laurie Metcalf, she did not play the character "just like Kathy Bates", but also didn't throw out everything that Bates had done in developing the character. Bruce Willis was fine, but then again his character is pretty one dimensional. I would give it 3 stars out of 4.
Posted: 10/26/15 at 12:05pm
This is at least the second stage version, and what's always been a challenge is creating a large enough character in Paul to match the outre persona of Annie. Film allows us access to Paul through eyes, the smallest movement, a few carefully modulated demonstrations of pain. He's a writer, he lies in a bed, he has to speak to Annie, but since the ending is a foregone conclusion, the role is limited. It's basically a get-the-monster story. No real reversals. If the story took a turn -- if this man found something in Annie to respond to, unexpected compassion, it might transcend the melodrama that is its limitation. But it's a straight shot trajectory, and Paul goes through little other than being tortured and getting the hell away from this woman. Kathy Bates made a persuasive case for a modicum of audience empathy -- I remember her meatloaf dinner touching me the first time I saw the scene. If she's not recognizably human, she could be a misogynistic fantasy villain. A stage edition might get inside these two people, fine other colors, if only in passing. But at a taut 90 minutes, it's aiming to distill both the novel and film and (only) provide thrills. That's fine. For many, that's enough. But I have a feeling Willis, whatever his technical deficiencies, is trapped in the character's limitations.
Updated On: 10/26/15 at 12:05 PM
Posted: 10/26/15 at 12:47pm
I still hope the creators of this show will have the courage to swap the familiar "hobbling" scene from the film with the chainsaw and blowtorch horror from the book to end Act 1 on a note people will actually be talking about. Perhaps when Stephen King comes to visit he can install some guts into the production. This is theatre after all, not sanitized TV.
Posted: 10/26/15 at 12:58pm
Well the play is only 90 minutes with no intermission (the hobbling scene occurs probably a little over an hour into the piece), so they don't need a big cliffhanger ending for an act break. Also, I don't they would ever consider losing the hobbling scene because it's the one big moment many in the audience are looking forward to; Metcalf received applause just for bringing out the hammer.
Posted: 10/26/15 at 1:05pm
Okay. But wouldn't it be more dramatic - riveting - for the audience when instead of coming out with a hammer as expected Laurie comes out with a chain saw and starts it? Definitely beats the chandelier drop in Phantom!
Posted: 10/26/15 at 1:33pm
Not to be that person but has anyone attempted the stage door for this yet? Has Metcalf come out and does she sign/pose? Also is it ridiculously crowded?
Posted: 10/26/15 at 1:52pm
Oh, I'm definitely not trying to argue that artistically it doesn't get worse than simply copy and pasting a film directly to the stage, but this creative team is attempting to just that. If that's the goal then they've succeeded and won't be looking to make altercations to any of the iconic film moments.
Posted: 10/26/15 at 2:05pm
I stage doored for Laurie after the Other Place. She was very quiet and introverted, almost awkward. She's a working actress and I feel the attention feels odd. The crowd is a mob scene for Bruce so I would say this is not the show to meet Laurie.
Also a woman yelled "hi Bruce" during his final monologue. White trash skank.
The show does generate empathy for Annoe especially when Paul is plying her with his charms. You realize how lonely she is.
Posted: 10/26/15 at 2:12pm
Oh, it was the second preview? My bad. I could have sworn they started on Wednesday night, not Thursday.
In any event, to Auggie’s point, I don’t think Paul can ever match Annie in size, but his character doesn’t have zilch to do. Watching the comatose and choiceless Willis, I couldn’t help but think of James Caan’s Paul, who nearly from the outset – or at least as soon as he realizes he’s dealing with a dangerous foe in Annie, which is very early on – is manipulating her (or desperately trying to, to varying degrees of success) as much as she’s controlling and torturing him. That’s the character dynamic that’s missing here – and one any halfway decent actor can play that from that stage and this script.
But since Bruce doesn’t do that, you’re right – it just becomes a case of Paul “going through it,” until the inevitable conclusion.
I will say that in the moments Willis’ performance required all physicality and no speaking, I was totally compelled. Those scenes of him struggling his way through and around the house were great; there was palpable tension. For once, the audience in the front of the mezz was on the edge of their seat out of fear, not because they were straining to hear him. The interplay of the rotating set, the music, and Paul pushing his own limits to survive finally gave the character some stakes. But sadly, for the other 90% of the show, he had to contend with the dialogue.
Posted: 10/26/15 at 6:10pm
Tom5 said: "Okay. But wouldn't it be more dramatic - riveting - for the audience when instead of coming out with a hammer as expected Laurie comes out with a chain saw and starts it? Definitely beats the chandelier drop in Phantom!"
Just to clarify, in the book she doesn't use a chainsaw, she uses an axe (which the previous stage adaptation of this did use, according to an actress friend who did it at a small summer stock several years ago). In a later scene she uses an electric carving knife on another part of his body. It is revealed that Annie went to get the chainsaw after the final fight with Paul, but she never made it back to the house with it.
Posted: 10/27/15 at 1:42pm
I think Bruce was just fine-it's not a showy role, which again surprised me he chose it for his debut. His physicality is impressive and adds genuine tension.
I think Bruce's choices were very good in helping the audience humanize Annie. He was sweet to her, even when he was in peril.
Caan was greatly aided by close-ups in cinema, that are not afforded to Willis. I enjoyed Bruce and think he did a fine job. I was in the back of the orchestra and had no trouble hearing him.
Posted: 10/29/15 at 11:44pm
I really didn't like this play, even though I wanted to. No fault on the production. Willis and Metcalf were well cast, and the set was really well done. It's just the script. I didn't feel sympathy for Paul at all. I wouldn't have cared at all if Sheldon was killed 1/2 way through the show. Metcalf is working hard to turn this crappy adaptation into something worthy of Stephen King's story, but it still falls flat.
Posted: 10/29/15 at 11:52pm
I thought it did its job, and I enjoyed it. Goldman did an admirable job of making it theatrical, and the very good design helped enormously. What I was shocked to find missing was the most chilling element of the story: what Annie did as a nurse. I won't go into details here, but it's what takes it from suspense into horror for me. It's hard to tell in (basically) a live two-hander, but it could have at least been a scene between Paul and Annie once the **** hits the fan and she knows he's been snooping? Metcalf was brilliant. She was able to hit the horror camp side and still make the character sympathetic and sad. Many laughs, but the right kind. It's pure pulp entertainment. The audience behavior was the worst I've ever seen, but I guess it makes sense. They were there for a movie they've already seen.
Posted: 10/30/15 at 12:24am
I agree about the nurse storyline and the audience. Took flash photos, videos, talked, laughed at every line, ate and coughed throughout the whole show.
