"The main crux of most of the story revolves around a person believing his family represents something meaningful about The American Dream/Epic and, to me, reeks of the classic white Boomer mindset that dominated culture for a long time..."
I get the meaning here and find it descriptive of the (sub)genre rather than a necessarily pejorative critique of the intentions and execution. And as a boomer myself, I'm old enough to remember I Never Sang for My Father by Robert Anderson, which in many ways is the same story, certainly genre-adjacent, i.e., white American introspective therapy with a father-son oedipal prism, minus photographs. Worth noting, Anderson's drama lasted on Broadway a half a season, January 25 - May 11, 1968. It starred Hal Holbrook, Alan Webb, Lillian Gish.
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
It seems like the evaluation criteria here for what is either a positive or a negative review is whether a pull quote can be extracted out of context that can serve as a graphic marker of either praise or a pan.
I find the site's capacity to evaluate critical opinions to be rather iffy.
It’s such a weird play. As I posted the other night the themes of the play are more interesting and resonant than the actual play itself, but I do respect what they tried to do with it even if the end result wasn’t entirely successful.
Auggie27 said: ""The main crux of most of the story revolves around a person believing his family represents something meaningful about The American Dream/Epic and, to me, reeks of the classic white Boomer mindset that dominated culture for a long time..."
I get the meaning here and find it descriptive of the (sub)genre rather than a necessarily pejorative critique of the intentions and execution. And as a boomer myself, I'm old enough to rememberI Never Sang for My Father by Robert Anderson, which in many ways is the same story, certainly genre-adjacent, i.e., white American introspective therapy with a father-son oedipal prism, minus photographs. Worth noting, Anderson's drama lasted on Broadway a half a season, January 25 - May 11, 1968. It starred Hal Holbrook, Alan Webb, Lillian Gish."
I saw that play in a Boston tryout and was probably too young to appreciate, it the acting was superb. There was a movie released for which both father and son received Oscar nominations, Melvyn Douglas and Gene Hackman. I was old enough to appreciate the story, and thought it was excellent. A recommended viewing if you can find it.
No, I don’t think so. A large portion is spoken directly to the audience and to the never seen person running the projector.
However, as I’m typing this out I’m realizing that a film version would require major changes to the script in both dialogue and structure which could actually work in its favor.
It seems like the evaluation criteria here for what is either a positive or a negative review is whether a pull quote can be extracted out of context that can serve as a graphic marker of either praise or a pan.
I find the site's capacity to evaluate critical opinions to be rather iffy."
The site definitely skews positive, since they are trying to "promote" theatre. I believe the rating is chosen by 2-4 people reading scoring each review independently. Would be interesting if they collabed with critics, for critics to provide their own ranking (for critics who would like to do that).
I thought she was terrific. She didn't not appear to be struggling for lines, but she did appear thoughtful and honest about what she was saying. There were times that I felt it was her story as much as the others'.
I think it's about much more than the fear of your parents' death, although that is certainly a major theme. I think it also addresses our changing definition of success and a generational view of the father's role in the family. I would say "what makes a man?" is a significant theme.
I was at today's matinee and will echo many thoughts here, the play is very slight. Burstein's role is mostly narration, but his final monologue is lovely. Wanamaker doesn't have much to do, but at least she's not going up on her lines as it seems happened in previews.
The main reason I'm posting, however, is to single out Adam Grupper, who (per stage door chatter) found out at 12:30 that he was going on for Lane at the matinee. I'm not sure if it was his first time in the role, but it fit him like a glove and he was arguably a more convincing old man than Lane would've been.
Ironically I also saw Grupper as Tevye when he understudied Burstein (his onstage son today). Definitely an industry stalwart and another example of covers saving the day post-shutdown
Fordham2015 said: "The main reason I'm posting, however, is to single out Adam Grupper, who (per stage door chatter) found out at 12:30 that he was going on for Lane at the matinee. I'm not sure if it was his first time in the role, but it fit him like a glove and he was arguably a more convincing old man than Lane would've been. Ironically I also saw Grupper as Tevye when he understudied Burstein (his onstage son today). Definitely an industry stalwart and another example of covers saving the day post-shutdown"
I saw a Tweet that Grupper went on Friday night too, but a few minutes into that performance they had to cancel it due to a burst pipe in the theatre. Quite a weekend over there!