SAINT JOAN (2018) Previews

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 2:11pm

Final previews thread for the 2017-2018 season!

Previews for (what I believe is) the seventh Broadway revival of George Bernard Shaw's Saint Joan begin in a few days (Tuesday, April 3, 2018) at the Samuel J. Friedman Theatre. Starring Condola Rashad in the titular role, Saint Joan is set to officially open on Wednesday, April 25 for a limited run currently through Sunday, June 10.

Who's going?! 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 2:12pm

I’m going later this month, and I’m looking forward to it!

[BeingAlive 2]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 9:58am

I am so excited to hear reports about this!! Condola has quickly become one of the most exciting actresses for me. Also reread the play and it truly does hold up magnificently. So excited to see what Daniel Sullivan does with this. 

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:05am

Wow, what a season for Shaw and his fair ladies.

[Bwayfan292]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:09am

Really looking foward to this one, hopefully this is the show that lands her a tony.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:24am

Bwayfan292 said: "Really looking foward to this one, hopefully this is the show that lands her a tony."

She's not winning a Tony this year.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:26am

Bwayfan292 said: "Really looking foward to this one, hopefully this is the show that lands her a tony."

It'll be tough to beat what Glenda Jackson is doing over at Three Tall Women. But I'm eager to hear how she is as Joan.

[Bwayfan292]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:29am

TotallyEffed said: "Bwayfan292 said: "Really looking foward to this one, hopefully this is the show that lands her a tony."

She's not winning a Tony this year."

I know, just wishfull thinking

[RippedMan]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:45am

I follow the set designer on instagram and the sets is like these huge, long cathedral bells. Looks cool! 

[cjmclaughlin10]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 9:24pm

Can you post a picture?

Looking forward to early reports!!!!

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 9:46pm

Here's a look at the set Scott Pask posted on Instagram...
https://www.instagram.com/p/Bg7LFg-HFdu/?taken-by=scottpaskstudio
https://www.instagram.com/p/BhHU2JCHcO7/?taken-by=scottpaskstudio

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:58pm

Anyone there tonight?

[BroadwayBeebe]

Posted: 4/3/18 at 11:59pm

I have front row for tomorrow and I’m curious to hear thoughts.

Updated On: 4/4/18 at 11:59 PM

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 12:04am

I was at the first preview tonight and did not care for this at all. I thought Daniel Sullivan’s of the Little Foxes last season was so wonderful, but I don’t think he connected nearly as well with the material here. It felt like each of the six scenes (plus epilogue; no prologue) was directed by a different person. Scene 2 at the Royal Court was so awkward and buffoonish. Parts of it almost verged on slapstick; it was like an SNL skit of an American theater group trying to put on a BBC costume drama. Scene 6 (The Inquisition) was played fairly straight-forwardly, but the Epilogue swung back to almost multi-cam sitcom territory. 

Much fault also needs to lie with the play itself, which is often too talky for its own good. Shaw seems much less interested in telling Joan’s story than wanting to expose hypocrisy and corruption in the church and politics, which is all well and good, but Joan often doesn’t even feel like the main character. Sure, she’s talked about an awful lot, but the play is rarely told from her perspective, but rather from that of the church. 

Because of all this I’m afraid the actors were often a little at sea, or at the very least weren’t performing in the same play. Walter Bobbie and Patrick Page came across well in Scene 6, but there’s just so much chatter that works against them. I didn’t care for Rashad’s performance in act one, but I thought she was much better in act two. 

I thought often of 1776 while watching Saint Joan. Both are long, drawn out history plays that everyone in the audience already knows the ending to, but 1776 remains exciting and thrilling despite this fact. Will that declaration actually get signed?! Here it was like, get on with it! Never before have I so rooted for an innocent to be burned at the stake. The inquistion just goes on and on forever without much tension. It was like Shaw had to hit that three hour mark or he thought his audiences wouldn’t get their money’s worth. 

My advice would be, if you’re a big fan of the play or Rashad, to wait until after opening to get tickets so Sullivan can iron out the tone and the performances can gel together. 

[DeepVSexyWitch2]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 12:12am

Was there tonight as well. It's totally fine, if a little draggy. I thought Rashad was good in the first act and great in the second. Everything else is a little unmemorable. Feels like the director saw his group of great actors and said "I'll get out of their way." and it doesn't bode well. Scenes have little movement, everyone is plopped down in one place, and the final scene of Act 1 had so little tension I couldn't believe there was anything at stake. Rashad deserves better. 

[TheGingerBreadMan]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 12:46am

I’m disappointed to hear these early reactions; I had high hopes for this one. Hopefully it will tighten up and performances will improve throughout previews.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 12:48am

I wasn’t there. But have to say that a director can only mold and shape what they are given - from what the actors bring to it and the script itself. Sounds like a dud. I love Rashad, and the marquee and design. So disappointed to hear it’s so boring.

[A Director]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 2:27am

WhizzerMarvin said: "

Much fault also needs to lie with the play itself, which is often too talky for its own good. Shaw seems much less interested in telling Joan’s story than wanting to expose hypocrisy and corruption in the church and politics, which is all well and good, but Joan often doesn’t even feel like the main character. Sure, she’s talked about an awful lot, but the play is rarely told from her perspective, but rather from that of the church.

Did it ever cross you mind that this was Shaw's choice?  Shakespeare called his play Julius Caesar, but it isn't about him.  In Henry IV, Part Two, the title character and Prince Hal have few scenes!

[Dancingthrulife2]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 5:31am

You must have not been cast as the fiddler in Fiddler on the Roof.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 5:50am

A Director said: "WhizzerMarvin said: "

Much fault also needs to lie with the play itself, which is often too talky for its own good. Shaw seems much less interested in telling Joan’s story than wanting to expose hypocrisy and corruption in the church and politics, which is all well and good, but Joan often doesn’t even feel like the main character. Sure, she’s talked about an awful lot, but the play is rarely told from her perspective, but rather from that of the church.

Did it ever cross you mind that this was Shaw's choice? Shakespeare called his play Julius Caesar, but it isn't about him. In Henry IV, Part Two, the title character and Prince Hal have few scenes!"

Ha, of course it was Shaw’s choice. I’m just saying I didn’t like it! Or is this play, by virtue of having the name Shaw attached, rendered so infallible that we dare not criticize it? 

Since when has Henry IV ever been presented as a star vehicle for the actor playing Henry? Everyone knows the real star of the play is Falstaff. Likewise, no producer has ever tried to sell a ticket to Gypsy by putting the actress playing Louise over the title. 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 7:39am

For those who were there last night, what were your thoughts on the set design? It looks interesting based on the pictures...

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 8:43am

I thought the set was interesting, if a bit overwhelming. Definitely memorable though- 20 years from now if someone asks me about this revival, the thing I’ll remember is the set.

[mikem]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 9:00am

I don't think it's strange that one would walk into the Friedman thinking that the play was centered around Joan.  The advertising for this production is focused on a close-up of the face of the three-time-Tony-nominated actress playing the title role, with no one else and nothing else in sight. 

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 9:21am

And to clarify, it’s not like Joan is some minor character, it’s just that the play is not told from her perspective, but rather from the men who viewed her as a threat and orchestrated her demise.

For example, Scene 4, a very loooooong scene in which Joan does not even appear (except to set out of the wings at the end to give the end of act one a button), could easily have been written with Joan in the room instead.

It’s not like I think Shaw is some hack (he’s not), nor is he a misogynist, but there’s an irony to Joan lamenting about how all these unfit men are judging her and controlling her life when she has not be granted first-person perspective in her own play.

[Theater3232]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 9:43am

Total snoozer like those you usually see in the American Airlines Theater.  To be avoided at all costs.  Show was 3+ hours and is pure torture to sit through.

For those of you going to see the leading actress, I think you'll be quite disappointed.  She was very one-dimensional for the vast majority of the show.  And I had never even heard of her before this.

Many in the ensemble cast were very poor "actors" as well.  You got the feeling this was the first time many of these people were on a professional stage.

Updated On: 4/4/18 at 09:43 AM