PRAYER FOR THE FRENCH REPUBLIC Previews- Page 2

[Skip23]

Posted: 12/22/23 at 12:51pm

Here’s another one that I’m surprised was transferred to Broadway. I found it long, slow, too ponderous and totally forgettable. Oh well. 

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 1/7/24 at 5:38pm

I saw this play earlier this week and I agree with a lot of what this board has said both in this thread and in the off-Broadway thread.  My main takeaway was that this was a play that I liked quite a bit and actually managed to make the 3 hours fly by, and I do agree with the comparisons to Inheritance people have made in the past too.  The dialogue overall was great and felt like actual dialogue real people would have, especially in the family squabbles.

My main issue comes with the structure of the play.  I still don't see a compelling reason for Patrick to be the narrator (or for the play to need a narrator at all, really) and I actually found the actor for Patrick to be the weakest and unable to deliver the gravitas of the closing monologue (I think the monologue itself is somewhat clunky but it still felt like he wasn't quite up to the task).  And when he's part of the family argument, his viewpoints are so bullheaded that he seems like a stand-in so that Marcelle would have a character in direct conflict with her; while I could understand intellectually why he felt the way he did, I never empathized with him and I wish he had been given a bit more space in the show to flesh out his viewpoint a bit more.

The 1940s flashbacks were a bit of a mixed bag for me.  I think they do pay off in a way that lends weight, especially in Pierre's scene at the end, but I'm not fully convinced they were necessarily crucial to the show or couldn't have been done differently.  The way that the show flits between just presenting the scene as a flashback and presenting the scene as Patrick's interpretation of what happened seems inconsistent and messy to me.  And while I thought there were interesting moments of him interacting with the characters from 1944, it just didn't seem to fit in with the rest of the overall story, especially when I found the modern day family drama so much more compelling.

Molly is also an interesting character, and I feel like they almost set her up to fail a bit with how tone-deaf she comes off and her lack of self-awareness.  She does bring valid points, and I think her scene with Elodie in the club(?) was one of the highlights for the show, especially when she is self-aware enough to recognize that she has more learning to do and I really believe she is trying her best to do it (and it's nice to see that despite all of Elodie's bluster, she also isn't an objective viewpoint).  But because of the first scene, we already don't really like her that much.  Even the way that Marcelle explains the family tree to her (which I understand is partially for the audience's benefit) makes her out to seem "slow".

I don't know if others felt this, but in the beginning it seemed as if all the actors were acting on different wavelengths, like the style of acting didn't seem cohesive across the board.  I'm not sure if this is just how the characters were portrayed or if it was intentional, but it seemed to settle by act 2 (or maybe I just got used to it).  Molly in particular seemed to be played broader than a lot of the other characters.

My main disappointment with the show was really the ending.  I thought the "why do they hate us" discourse felt almost too on the nose and just spoke of the playwright's voice too much, rather than something that would organically come from the characters.  And I kept expecting the ending monologue and closing scene to be much more deep and meaningful than it actually was.  I didn't necessarily need there to be a specific lesson learned or a big takeaway message (I thought the discourse in and of itself was more the point of the play than anything), but it just felt like Harmon didn't really know how to end the play and wrote in some broad strokes inspirational text. 

That being said, I'd still recommend this play overall.  I thought the actors for Marcelle and Elodie were doing some fantastic work, and I did enjoy most of the other characters as well.  I had been a bit concerned going into this play that the 3 hours would feel torturous (especially since Leopoldstadt felt like it dragged to me), but I was really pleasantly surprised at how much I was really enjoying seeing the discussion and debate play out on stage, and it really made me aware of some of the global factors that Jews living in Europe might deal with.

[Theater3232]

Posted: 1/7/24 at 6:09pm

I heard from others that the curtain call is 3 hours 20 minutes from the time printed on the ticket.  Is that still the case? 

Updated On: 1/7/24 at 06:09 PM

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 1/7/24 at 6:12pm

That sounds about right to me, I just check and I texted my friend at 10:21 with a 7pm start, so give or take a few minutes.

[yyys]

Posted: 1/7/24 at 6:14pm

It started 10 minutes late today...was out by 5:10 so 3 hrs including two intermissions.

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 1/7/24 at 7:33pm

Wickedly funny, sharply written, thought provoking and entertaining I would put this on top of anyone's must see list. 

[Dreamboy3]

Posted: 1/8/24 at 9:53am

I agree with others that this play flies by, notwithstanding its length. The direction and a few of the performances were outstanding. And yes, it presciently depicts discussions that I have had over the past few months. But…I don’t think this is as incisive a play as Harmon’s best other work - notably Admissions.(Elodie’s big speech is performed really well but the analogous monologues in other Harmon plays are better.). I found Anthony Edwards to be a weak link but he is new to the cast and the role is tricky so maybe he needs more time. And Molly’s naiveté didn’t work for me.