Roundabout FINALLY has a hit on their hands (spoilers)- Page 2

[Brick]

Posted: 3/7/10 at 5:41pm

You're kidding, right?

Did you see the 2003 revival with Paul Newman? Why are they on ladders? Why is the set a backstage at the turn of the century? Most importantly, who is the person speaking to the audience and what does he have to do with anything?

These are brilliant devices that most productions don't question and try to make relevant to this specific production and and space. They just do it the same way everyone has done them.

Again, I haven't seen this MENAGERIE. It may be terrible. But I think the approach to it sounds fresh and I'm interested to see what it brings to new light.

[lefty2]

Posted: 3/8/10 at 9:44pm

After Eight, I think I'm in love with you. You sound like someone who is well-read and can tell a good play from a good production. The couple walking out in front of me commented that "I don't remember it being such a long slow play." IT'S NOT! But this production is.
Except for Ivey, the production was a disaster. The kids are in their mid 20's as written by Williams. When you have actors who look mid-30's playing the part, it changes the whole play. A 25 yr old who lives at home is quite different from a 35 yr old who lives with mommy. I've also never seen Tom played as a physical comedy part. It's like watching an effeminate John Ritter schitck up the role. His slow burn to the audience when Amanda says Laura doesn't think he is happy at home is well done. It is Bea Arthur worthy, but so completely wrong for the part. The whole thing is played like a sitcom. The scene where Tom has his pants around his ankles and is humping the bed while talking about the magician to Laura is as camp as it gets. If you want to see a campy show, go see this production. Also, the director guffawing at every single schtick and corny line delivery is terribly disturbing. So is his talking and checking his phone every 30 seconds during the show. I thought he was a drunk bum until I read others online saying it was the director. Looked up his picture, and it WAS him.

[After Eight]

Posted: 3/9/10 at 7:13am

Lefty:

Thanks very much for the kind words.

Your review saddens me, because theatre shouldn't disappoint its audiences. Why can't certain directors understand this? Probably because even if they do, they couldn't care less. In fact, it might please them all the more. These directors care more about their own egos than audiences or the play itself. It's disrespectful of the art they are supposed to serve.

Unfortunately, they are aided and abetted in this by critics and audience members of the "fresh ideas" school, who cheer them on in the name of being hip and cool.

Which leaves the rest of us in a bind. Either you stop going to the theatre altogether and cherish the memories of great productions past, or you go hoping to find something good to take away with you from misguided reinterpretations of classic works, or you just get enraged and vent on a chat group like this, knowing you'll be lambasted as hopelessly retrograde.

[Tom-497]

Posted: 3/9/10 at 7:47am

Regarding the director -- on Saturday night my wife and I were sitting two rows behind him and we agreed that he and his assistant, or whoever she was, were the most annoying couple we had ever run across in the theater.

He laughed extremely loudly at virtually nothing. At intermission, a woman scolded him and he put out his hand to shake hands with her, but she just sneered at him and said no, she didn't want to. And the assistant repeatedly would use her iphone as a light by which to write notes, seriously marring the enjoyment of numerous people and ruining the ambience of the candlelight scene, for example. Virtually everyone near them wanted to smack them.

I guess the director's behavior was somewhat excusable -- if that's how he laughs, that's how he laughs. But the woman with the phone was really awful and should have known better -- you can't expect audiences to take seriously the "no cell-phone" announcements when members of a production are bugging the hell out of others with their own phones for the entire night.

[darquegk]

Posted: 3/9/10 at 9:03am

There are, however, some plays that DO benefit from being reimagined. Anyone who has ever seen a production of Godspell staged as a replica of the original will tell you that it IS somewhat stale in its original staging as described "in the book" by MTI- that's why Stephen Schwartz tells you to customize and play around with the concepts and lines. Many directors, however, just don't do it.

[Sauja]

Posted: 3/9/10 at 4:04pm

OMG, that couple included the DIRECTOR?! Still love the play and love the production, but I actually thought at one point in the second act that I was going to go Martin McDonagh on the (apparent) assistant and her iPhone.