Mary Louise Parker's absence

[lightinthepizza2]

Posted: 3/8/09 at 11:07pm

A friend and I were supposed to see 'Hedda Gabler' on Tuesday, March 3rd, before finding out right before entering the theater that Mary Louise was absent for that performance. According to the box office ticket agent that night, she didn't show up because of 'family problems.' Does anybody know the specifics?

[dramamama611]

Posted: 3/8/09 at 11:20pm

While I'm sorry you didn't get to see her....you are asking about her personal and private life. So you joined BWW just to scrape up some dirt on her? Tsk, tsk. It's none of our business.

[B3TA07]

Posted: 3/8/09 at 11:21pm

Maybe it's personal.

[ChristopherDurangFan]

Posted: 3/8/09 at 11:21pm

Yeah, what the hell?

[lightinthepizza2]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 12:09am

Ew

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 12:29am

I would have loved to have seen her u/s. Just because I've seen MLP twice now and plan to see it with her again. Just for a different take.

[mormonophobic]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 12:33am

A quick glance at Broadwayunderstudies.com has nothing listed for her, so I'm assuming there was some sort of emergency. Strange though that it isn't on there even for that one performance. Either way with or without her this production was basically doomed from the start. As odd as it is since he had just come from The Seagull, this production seemed to lack any real direction. While Parker turns in one of her most boring performances to date, even Michael Cerveris and those in supporting roles seemed to just walk aimlessly across the stage. The way I could really tell was that the following day I saw Uncle Vanya where a play that was only nine years younger felt as alive as could be. And in the cast even Cyrilla Baer in a small role as Marina really put forth the effort. I don't really know how to describe it other than that one production seemed so alive that at any moment one of those books could come flying at you or that swing could hit you right in the face. Yet even at the height of the drama in Hedda Gabler, not once did I feel connected. The only moments that had me completely involved in the production were when Hedda was playing with her guns in the first act and that was just because the shot was so loud and startling. And this is coming from someone who thinks Mary Louise Parker is extremely talented and someone who LOVED her as Harper in Angels in America and watches Weeds religiously. That being said, while it was nice to see her on stage, her absence doesn't really make or break a play that has been broken from the get-go.

Oh and despite her less-than-stellar performance, I do love what I've read on here about her responding to critics. It kind of reaffirmed my respect for her. :)

[dramamama611]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 5:12am

B'way Understudies is FAR from a definitive source. From my understanding they rely ON the understudy to let them know about their known appearance. It's not like the show itself calls in and tells them who is out for the show.

And to the OP...what the hell does your "EW" mean? You are the one that started the thread that was a bit distateful...no one else said a thing that merited your response.

[lightinthepizza2]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 8:48am

Ew especially to you

[dramamama611]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 9:55am

Oh, of course. THAT explains it.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 11:45am

She has 2 small children; I don't think "family problems" has to mean something scandalous.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 2:02pm

This is ridiculous. You were told she had "family problems". This was accurate. You do not need to know the specifics, just as she does not need to know the specifics of why you can't go to work one day.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 2:12pm

One of her children took ill.

[teka21]

Posted: 3/9/09 at 7:44pm

The nerve of that kid!