Should I go see Equus, before its run ends?

[james2008]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 5:32pm

I've seen mixed reviews, so I figure you people here, know your stuff. Is Equus worth the hype? Or should I spend my money on something else? I did see Anna Camp in The Country Girl and loved that, but this is obviously a different type of experience by far.
And this is what it says in my local theatre review, it's very cryptic, can anyone explain what this means to me please.

"Equus 2008 Broadway, NY: Overall Equus is a 6/10, in this reviewers humble opinion. It was fun to watch, minus some obvious low points, the lead actress has body grooming inaccuracies (WTF?) and Richard Griffiths comes off more like a relic of theatre life's past, he's too old for the role, and it shows."

Obviously I added the wtf because I don't get that at all. Probably one of the stranger blurbs I've ever read...

[Weez]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 5:39pm

If I were you, I'd try to see it after the run ends. That's when the best performances are.

Facetious and unhelpful responses aside, I can at least account for the WTF; Anna Camp apparently has a pubic wax that many reviewers find TOTALLY inaccurate to the '70s and SO off-putting that it ruins the play for them while demonstrating to the readers that they were obviously kinda missing the point. Really, if it all that stands out for you from That Scene is the state of Jill's pubes, you're watching it wrong.

[Scripps2]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 5:52pm

There are good reasons for criticising Equus but those quoted from your local rag are not amongst them; Equus is a much better play than that quotation is a piece of criticism.

Equus: 7/10
Local rag commentary: 3/10

[willep]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 6:16pm

Personally, I loved it and would recommend it.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 8:39pm

I can't imagine how Griffiths is suppose to be to old for the part. I found him mesmerizing.

Actually, Anna Camp's Brazilian Wax (or whatever it is called) did rather stand out to me...just as it did in Hair. Historical inaccuracies....bothered me as much as a cell phone would have in either of those shows. (Ok...maybe I'm exaggerating a tad here.) Did it take away from the beauty of he show itself? For about 10 seconds...maybe less.

Go, see. It's amazing. I'd be happy to send you my entire review from my blog if you are interested. I could PM it to you or post it here if others are interested.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 8:41pm

I found it to be very mediocre.

Griffiths made it worth while for me but still he wasn't necessarily worth the price of admission. And I paid half price. It felt stale to me...and I was hoping for it to be fantastic. It just wasn't.


Here are my original thoughts on it:
And then I saw EQUUS at night. And again, I was surprised by my reaction. But this time it was a different reaction. I didn't love it like many of the posters on here and many other people seem to.

I have always had MAJOR problems with the play itself which is the trick in reviewing revivals. The material is basically a non-factor, at least in its technicalities. But this production just seems to highlight the plays weaknesses as opposed to highlight its strengths. There are moments where the emotions and tensions really work together but they aren't very frequent. The opening scenes are beautifully stark and well-acted and involving and the sequence before the end of the first act is also memorable. But everything else is kind of just underwhelming.

The direction, by Thea Sharrock, is obviously "there" but a bit dormant and never really takes the ideas that it introduces to the extents it could. I apologize if my thoughts on EQUUS are a little disjointed but that is just how I felt about the show itself. It was very disjointed.

I really loved Richard Griffiths' performance and I have to say I wasn't bowled over by Daniel Radcliffe. Maybe it was because I had heard he was so spectacular and he's just ... not. He's fine, sure, and he's really giving the role his all but he's a bit unengaging to watch, at least for me. I also particularly liked Anna Camp and Kate Mulgrew. The artistic aspects of the show (the lighting and sets and costumes) are exceedingly beautiful.

My feelings for EQUUS are very mixed. I keep bouncing back and forth between enjoying it and finding it somewhat pretentious. So, for now, that's where I'll stay. In the middleground.

**1/2 out of ****

Updated On: 12/14/08 at 08:41 PM

[willep]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 8:42pm

dramamama, I would be interested in reading your review. Could you PM it to me?

As I said, I loved the show, I thought it was incredible. and apparently I saw far back enough to not even notice the, uh, wax-job...I honestly paid no attention to the private parts of either of them.

[sleepyguy1717]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 8:45pm

I find Equus to be HIGHTLY overrated, but I'm in the minority there.

I would see any show you get the chance to see really.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 9:07pm

willep: pm to you

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 9:23pm

I thought it was gorgeous, actually. Imperfect as both a play and a production, but intense, disturbing, riveting and utterly gorgeous. I seem to be in the minority on that, since most people I know were far more mixed-to-negative about it, but I would say definitely try to see it... for what it's worth.

[willep]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 10:14pm

luvtheEmcee, I agree, it is very beautiful.

All this talk about it makes me really wish I could go see it again...

[TimesSquareRegular]

Posted: 12/14/08 at 10:19pm

Absoultely see it - a mesmerizing play, with some stunning performances.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 12:24am

I woould strongly urge you to go see EQUUS before its run ends rather than after it ends. I mean, I don't want you to be disappointed.

[kate2]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 12:29am

You should definitely see it! My father and I were sucked in from beginning to end. Radcliffe gives an incredible performance! There are mixed reviews for Griffiths, but I thought he was great in the role. To prevent regretting it later, absolutely see Equus before it closes.

[james2008]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 12:51am

Wow, thanks for all the advise guys. I think I may go see it after all.

By the way, just picked up the sunday edition of that local paper that had the review I posted in it, and apparently my local reviewer was so offended at Anna's decision to be "modern" that he felt the need to ammend his blurb from last week to include this:

"And shame on the director for allowing an actress to appear on stage devoid of any sign that shes a woman and not a girl."

And this reviewer is like 70. lol

I wonder how Anna feels about her lack of pubic hair sparking so much controversy. lol

[willep]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 1:00am

Glad to hear you decided to go, I for one, really want to go again before it closes if I can afford it. I hope you enjoy it! I'll be interested to hear your thoughts after you see it.

Haha, yeah I wonder what her thoughts/feelings on the matter are...

[james2008]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 4:25am

who knows maybe she reads this board lol (ya right)

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 4:31am

The 70 year old may not realize the trend of today's younger generation as to the pubic region. And I do agree with him/her...but it didn't ruin my experience; just took me out of the moment.

There are discount codes available for all but Saturday night performances, I believe...and probably not during Xmas/New Year's week

[geekgirl06]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 4:33am

I'm glad you have decided to see it. It is definitely worth seeing once, and while it isn't a stellar play, this is an interesting production even if it isn't the best.

And about the pubes... wow. As said previously, if that's what you are focusing on during that scene... then you have clearly seen this show waaaaay too many times.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 4:35am

Focusing and noticing are two different things.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 8:37am

Wouldn't surprise me if even Radcliffe reads the boards.

EVERYONE does.

[james2008]

Posted: 12/15/08 at 4:25pm

I guess I agree with "dramamama611". It's not a matter of it ruining the scene, but when something drastic is not period accurate, you kind of break the illusion, now in this case its something completly ridiculas like her lack of pubic hair, but it would be the same thing as if he were to whip out an ipod or something, it just doesnt fit with the story.

[james2008]

Posted: 12/16/08 at 12:24am

Oh, 2 other questions, anyone know when the show ends for good?

And have the understudies been called on for any performances that anyone has seen? Come to think of it, who is Radcliffes understudy, and Camps, and Griffiths? Anyone know? It must be so hard to be an understudy for Radcliffe and Camp, what with the nudity demands and all.

[willep]

Posted: 12/16/08 at 2:19pm

The show is scheduled to end Feb. 8th, but with all the other shows closing, I am a little worried about Equus' numbers...

As for the understudies, the only time that I know of that an understudy has gone on was this past weekend for Griffiths. Not sure why, but he took the weekend off. As for Dan, I think he will have to die before he misses a performance...his dedication is remarkable.

[james2008]

Posted: 12/16/08 at 4:17pm

yeah he seems to really love his work. its good to see.