PURPOSE Reviews- Page 2
PURPOSE Reviews
PURPOSE Reviews#25
Posted: 4/12/25 at 3:33am
Saw this tonight, I thought it was brilliant! I think the family drama is starting to become a bit oversaturated as a genre, but I love Jacob-Jenkins as a playwright, and even if act one dragged on act two felt much more dense and enjoyable! Kara Young really does brilliant work,always. Hopefully she snags a nom!
PURPOSE Reviews#26
Posted: 5/1/25 at 10:49am
A couple of my loved ones saw this last night and absolutely loved it, especially Kara Young's performance.
PURPOSE Reviews#27
Posted: 5/5/25 at 11:37am
Purpose has won the 2025 Steinberg/ATCA New Play Award. Given annually by the Harold and Mimi Steinberg Charitable Trust, in partnership with the American Theatre Critics Association, the award carries a $25,000 honorarium and is the largest cash prize awarded in American playwriting.
https://americantheatrecritics.org/branden-jacobs-jenkins-wins-2025-steinberg-atca-award-for-purpose/
PURPOSE Reviews#28
Posted: 5/5/25 at 12:46pm
Being thinking if this can win Play or Featured Actress at the Tonys
PURPOSE Reviews#29
Posted: 5/14/25 at 10:31am
Finally saw it. It ain't no Appropriate. I hope the Pulitzer win for this ambitious but confusing and flawed play doesn't sully the chances of John Proctor winning the Tony...
PURPOSE Reviews#31
Posted: 5/14/25 at 11:15am
Owen22 said: "Finally saw it. It ain't no Appropriate. I hope the Pulitzer win for this ambitious but confusing and flawed play doesn't sully the chances of John Proctor winning the Tony..."
I'm curious as to what you found confusing if you'd care to elaborate.
Broadway Legend Joined: 8/26/19
PURPOSE Reviews#32
Posted: 5/14/25 at 12:13pm
MadsonMelo said: "I mean... Oh, Mary! is winning."
Why is everyone so sure Oh, Mary! is winning? I mean, it sells really well, has recouped and really is a great vehicle for stunt casting, but the material cannot be compared to Purpose or Hills of California, or even John Proctor. Oh, Mary is just a fun skit with no depth. It's a all surface. What am I missing?
PURPOSE Reviews#33
Posted: 5/14/25 at 12:35pm
gibsons2 said: "Why is everyone so sure Oh, Mary! is winning? I mean, it sells really well, has recouped andreally is a great vehicle for stunt casting, but the material cannot be compared to Purpose or Hills of California, or even John Proctor. Oh, Mary is just a fun skit with no depth. It's an all surface. What am I missing?"
Apparently, everything critics, most audiences, and inevitably Tony voters see in it. If you just think it’s a skit, no one’s going to convince you it’s as brilliant as it is. Comedy like Oh, Mary! is actually as or more difficult to write than any of the dramas it’s up against, and a hell of a lot more original.
PURPOSE Reviews#34
Posted: 5/14/25 at 1:12pm
gibsons2 said: "MadsonMelo said: "I mean... Oh, Mary! is winning."
Why is everyone so sure Oh, Mary! is winning? I mean, it sells really well, has recouped andreally is a great vehicle for stunt casting, but the material cannot be compared to Purpose or Hills of California, or even John Proctor. Oh, Mary is just a fun skit with no depth. It's a all surface. What am I missing?"
It was the most critically acclaimed play of the season that has been running for almost a year in a way that has broke the zeitgeist of Broadway into a cultural phenomenon. It's a full flat out comedy that was a Pulitzer finalist and that says a lot.
PURPOSE Reviews#35
Posted: 5/14/25 at 1:52pm
SteveSanders said: "Owen22 said: "Finally saw it. It ain't no Appropriate. I hope the Pulitzer win for this ambitious but confusing and flawed play doesn't sully the chances of John Proctor winning the Tony..."
I'm curious as to what you found confusing if you'd care to elaborate."
SPOILERS
First off, the inorganic shoe-horning of the title's theme at the very end (!) -you know, telling not showing.. Didn't by it. i thought Naz's character was inconsistent and, for a lead character, had no clear "want" or, his "want" kept changing. He wanted to be a father? Since what point of the play did we know that until the very end (it may have landed better for me with another actor)? I was confused if Junior was actually bi-polar or faking everything in Act 2.So...was Morgan thinking of using the pills herself or temping Junior to stop her...? Cause both are indicated. I was confused on why Rashad directed the play so poorly (she was actually IN August Osage County!! THAT is how you direct a large dinner scene!) Rolled my eyes at Naz's answer to his Father's pointed question at the end (and was also confused by said answer). I had lots o'problems with Purpose.
PURPOSE Reviews#36
Posted: 5/14/25 at 4:15pm
Thanks for taking time to share some of your thoughts. I hope to one day see a different director's take on the material.
PURPOSE Reviews#37
Posted: 5/14/25 at 5:49pm
I saw this today & really enjoyed it. I did have one technical question. When Naz addresses the audience the lights go down and a spotlight follows him around the stage. This isn’t a true follow-spot, but a hung moving light. He moves around quite a bit and this light often didn’t keep up with him, leaving him in the dark for seconds at a time. My lighting design knowledge is 20 years old. What type of light is this and is someone remotely controlling its movement? Thanks!
Broadway Star Joined: 10/14/21
PURPOSE Reviews#38
Posted: 5/14/25 at 6:43pm
suzycat said: "I saw this today & really enjoyed it. I did have one technical question. When Naz addresses the audience the lights go down and a spotlight follows him around the stage. This isn’t a true follow-spot, but a hung moving light. He moves around quite a bit and this light often didn’t keep up with him, leaving him in the dark for seconds at a time. My lighting design knowledge is 20 years old. What type of light is this and is someone remotely controlling its movement? Thanks!"
Thanks for reminding me about this, I have the same question. I LOVED the show but was also baffled by how delayed his spotlight was! It came off as almost unprofessional to me. Would love to learn more.
PURPOSE Reviews#39
Posted: 5/14/25 at 9:36pm
ElephantLoveMedley said: "suzycat said: "I saw this today & really enjoyed it. I did have one technical question. When Naz addresses the audience the lights go down and a spotlight follows him around the stage. This isn’t a true follow-spot, but a hung moving light. He moves around quite a bit and this light often didn’t keep up with him, leaving him in the dark for seconds at a time. My lighting design knowledge is 20 years old. What type of light is this and is someone remotely controlling its movement? Thanks!"
Thanks for reminding me about this,I have the same question. I LOVED the show but was also baffled by how delayed hisspotlight was! It came off as almost unprofessional to me. Would love to learn more."
I had this same question. It made me hella nervous at certain points, like was someone controlling the spot having a stroke? I really wanted to turn around!
PURPOSE Reviews#41
Posted: 5/16/25 at 3:35pm
suzycat said: "I saw this today & really enjoyed it. I did have one technical question. When Naz addresses the audience the lights go down and a spotlight follows him around the stage. This isn’t a true follow-spot, but a hung moving light. He moves around quite a bit and this light often didn’t keep up with him, leaving him in the dark for seconds at a time. My lighting design knowledge is 20 years old. What type of light is this and is someone remotely controlling its movement? Thanks!"
I was at the same performance, and had the same thought. There was a few seconds where Jon Michael Hill was in total darkness, and another where the spot quickly jutted away from him. Not sure what was happening there.
PURPOSE Reviews#42
Posted: 5/25/25 at 6:01pm
Finally got around to seeing this today - absolutely loved it. Everyone in the cast is turning in exceptional performances. The play is a full-fledged 3 hours, but the afternoon simply flew by. Riveting and captivating. This has my vote for best play no question. Just remarkable theatre.
PURPOSE Reviews#43
Posted: 5/27/25 at 11:41pm
'Purpose' Had LaTanya Richardson Jackson, Broadway Cast 'Sh--ing Bricks'
https://variety.com/2025/legit/podcasts/purpose-latanya-richardson-jackson-broadway-1236410859/
PURPOSE Reviews#44
Posted: 5/30/25 at 10:31am
Branden Jacob-Jenkins on Overhauling Act II of ‘Purpose’
“You have to be intentional about the blue balls you’re creating for the audience.”
https://www.vulture.com/article/branden-jacobs-jenkins-purpose-appropriate-interview.html
Understudy Joined: 2/29/24
PURPOSE Reviews#46
Posted: 5/30/25 at 11:47am
Anyone know if the current cast is remaining through the extension? To be frank, I didn't love Lennix or Richardson Jackson, so I wouldn't mind the chance to see different actors in those roles.
Swing Joined: 3/30/25
PURPOSE Reviews#48
Posted: 6/4/25 at 7:00am
Sarah Paulson on 'Purpose' Writer Branden Jacobs-Jenkins: Truth-Teller
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/arts/sarah-paulson-purpose-branden-jacobs-jenkins-truth-teller-1236234444/
PURPOSE Reviews#49
Posted: 6/4/25 at 7:07am
For ‘Purpose’ Cast, Navigating Revisions Became a ‘Juggling Act’
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/03/theater/purpose-branden-jacobs-jenkins-broadway.html?unlocked_article_code=1.MU8.XCbV.mhzOOrifn2uH&smid=nytcore-android-share
Videos
