joevitus said: "How strange to hear people praising segregation as "Broadway at its best.""
REALLY?
And just where did you hear people "praising segregation"? Certainly not from me, and "Broadway at its best" was my comment. Choose carefully the words you use.
Mike Barrett said: "This is 1 performance celebrating black artists, what on earth is the problem with you people? Is that really such an awful thing? "
You really need to pull it in a notch, dude. With all of the extra understanding and slack cutting I' m sure you hope people show you due to your own issues about which you've written, maybe you're not the one to be stridently and repeatedly telling everyone else how to behave. Telling people if they can't hold it in for 2 1/2 hours, maybe theater isn't for them? What a horribly insensitive thing to say.
UncleCharlie said: "Mike Barrett said: "This is 1 performance celebrating black artists, what on earth is the problem with you people? Is that really such an awful thing? "
You really need to pull it in a notch, dude. With all of the extra understanding and slack cuttingI' m sure you hope people show you due to your own issues about which you've written, maybe you're not the one to be stridently and repeatedly telling everyone else how to behave. Telling people if they can't hold it in for2 1/2 hours, maybe theater isn't for them? What a horribly insensitive thing to say."
Ya, also horribly insensitive to say that this performance is “segregation.” Not your words, but words of others on here. I need no validation from anyone here, but I am stunned and saddened at this thread. It’s despicable. I stand by all my comments, as well! You know the runtime heading in, no need to complain about it afterwards if it’s going to be an issue for you. It’s a long time, but if you don’t like the runtime, idk, don’t go? Lots of films are over 2 hours too, it isn’t the wildest thing.
UncleCharlie said: "Mike Barrett said: "This is 1 performance celebrating black artists, what on earth is the problem with you people? Is that really such an awful thing? "
You really need to pull it in a notch, dude. With all of the extra understanding and slack cuttingI' m sure you hope people show you due to your own issues about which you've written, maybe you're not the one to be stridently and repeatedly telling everyone else how to behave. Telling people if they can't hold it in for2 1/2 hours, maybe theater isn't for them? What a horribly insensitive thing to say."
Highland Guy said: "UncleCharlie said: "Mike Barrett said: "This is 1 performance celebrating black artists, what on earth is the problem with you people? Is that really such an awful thing? "
You really need to pull it in a notch, dude. With all of the extra understanding and slack cuttingI' m sure you hope people show you due to your own issues about which you've written, maybe you're not the one to be stridently and repeatedly telling everyone else how to behave. Telling people if they can't hold it in for2 1/2 hours, maybe theater isn't for them? What a horribly insensitive thing to say."
No personal attacks, please. Thank you
So "what on earth is the problem with you people" isn't a personal attack but my response to him reacting to that statement is? Good to know. Thanks for your feedback. Duly noted and filed.
I see this Monday and was really looking forward to it. Now with all this whatnot going on, I am quickly losing interest. I should have went with my gut and purchased a ticket to Tootsie.
ArtMan said: "I see this Monday and was really looking forward to it. Now with all this whatnot going on, I am quickly losing interest. I should have went with my gut and purchased a ticket to Tootsie."
See it. You can still have opinions on all of this but you bought your ticket. Go see it. It is a good play.
ArtMan said: "I see this Monday and was really looking forward to it. Now with all this whatnot going on, I am quickly losing interest. I should have went with my gut and purchased a ticket to Tootsie."
Absolutely see it. As I told O’Harris on Twitter, I still admire his writing and talent. I just think his condoning of cell phone use in the theatre - and bragging about said use - is ridiculous and sets an absurd precedent that affects ALL audiences and performers.
"I know now that theatre saved my life." - Susan Stroman
I find that article pretty problematic in the sense that journalists can’t say anything negative about the play or playwright without it being about race. I didn’t find the Riedel article one bit racist. It’s a pretty typical Reidel article. I just find this whole idea that you can’t say negative things because then it’s racist is really, really damaging to society.
uncageg said: "ArtMan said: "I see this Monday and was really looking forward to it. Now with all this whatnot going on, I am quickly losing interest. I should have went with my gut and purchased a ticket to Tootsie."
See it. You can still have opinions on all of this but you bought your ticket. Go see it. It is a good play.
"
I think what JOH wrote is reprehensible, but I absolutely think people should still see the work and judge it on its own merits.
I attended last night’s preview performance. For those concerned about logistics: The show started at 8:10 pm (no late celebrities, only average theater-goers) and ended at 10:15. As we were seated, the ushers informed the audience that the show ran 2 hr 20 min (obviously incorrect) with no intermission, so use the restrooms. We were also told that cell phone use was prohibited during the show and there was to be no recording of the show, particularly the nude scene at the end. Just before the show started we were instructed by the ushers to turn off our cell phones. The show played to a full house of multi-racial audience members who practiced traditional theater etiquette, were fully engaged with the play, and enjoyed it. There were no distractions. If people are concerned about unwanted distractions or bad audience behavior, those can’t be generalized to any specific demographic – they depend on any given audience members at any given performance. I don’t see this show attracting much of the tourist crowd who often break traditional theater rules of etiquette.
Some people told me that being an older white man, Harris was going to ‘preach to me.’ I didn’t feel that at all. Overall, I enjoyed the show. Knowing the premise of the play going in, I think I enjoyed the vignettes of the first act more, especially the funny or awkward moments because I felt like I was in on a joke. I’m not trying to give away spoilers here, so you may want to stop reading here.
The second act was interesting. It touches on important themes. I didn’t feel guilt, but more aware of the complexities race relations. There are many dynamics and variables that cause relationships to be dysfunctional, more so with interracial relationships, and not all of them are rooted in racism. The playwright did try to touch on some of these dynamics, but it came back to elements of racism. More empirical evidence and examination is needed to say that all unsuccessful interracial relationships are rooted in racism, and to blame it as the sole cause is a bit simplistic. Let’s face it, racism exists in many relationships, not just Black/white ones. Racism exists among African-American relationships if one partner is darker than his or her yellow-skinned partner. That fact that racism isn’t the only factor gets called out by one of the women who is in therapy when she comments on the credibility of the therapists and the therapy program itself. The psycho-babble spewed by the therapists calls attention to racist issues in a way that causes one to want to think more seriously about racism and not dismiss them because the session itself is more comedic.
The third act takes the play from a comedy to a drama and is the most raw and intense of the three acts. It certainly drew in the audience as one could hear a pin drop (if one had dropped). It’s an act that requires attention. Somehow I couldn’t help but feel that the woman in the act didn’t just loath her partner, but was also engaged in self-loathing (again, I don’t want to go into details to avoid spoiling the show for others who aren’t familiar with it). I could be very wrong, but that was my impression. There is a lot of complexity in the act that requires much reflection.
There’s a lot of discussion about how the play is controversial, but I didn’t think it was controversial at all. I wasn’t shocked or stunned, and it didn’t seem that anyone attending the show needed psychological intervention after the curtain call. The play is entertaining, sheds light on important social themes in a way that many of us haven’t thought about them, and with any luck, gets people talking about them in an intelligent and respectful manner. Harris sets the stage, if you will, and the audiences have a responsibility to further the conversation in objective and rational discourse. If you’re concerned about seeing the show because of all the comments made in this thread and others, don’t deprive yourself; GO! The play has its flaws, but it’s still worthy of your time.
sinister teashop said: "Thanksjagman1062 for yourmeasured and detailed review. I've been dawdling about getting a ticket but your review just made me pick up the pace."
Definitely go. If it's helpful to you, I just read that the show is starting a lottery fairly soon. I will be going to see it again on October 27 with different friends who asked me to go with them. I don't see many shows twice, but there are a lot of nuances and subtleties to this play that I want to go back and digest (or process, as often discussed in the show).
Curios if there’s a reason it’s intermissionless? 2 hrs 20 seems quite long. I know you can compare it to a movie but at least in a movie you can get up and go.
SouthernCakes said: "Curios if there’s a reason it’s intermissionless? 2 hrs 20 seems quite long. I know you can compare it to a movie but at least in a movie you can get up and go."
The running time is actually 2 hrs 5 min., and it moves rather quickly. It seems that the length of each act may have something to do with the absence of an intermission. The first act is roughly 40 min, the second act is roughly 1 hr 5 min, and the second act is roughly 20 min (I'm estimating). An intermission after Act One is too soon and one after Act Two is too late..
Really appreciate your comments, Jagman. Everything about the show has sounded not-good to me so far, but your take makes me hope my impressions are wrong. Would love to read the play. Can't find online a copy for sale of the issue of American Theater it was published in, and I don't live anywhere near NYC, so attending a performance myself is out of the question. Thanks for taking the time for such a detailed review (and doing that without spoilers was no mean feat!).
sinister teashop said: "Thanksjagman1062 for yourmeasured and detailed review. I've been dawdling about getting a ticket but your review just made me pick up the pace."
Same. Great perspective, Jagman. Despite JOH's nonsense, I definitely cant wait to see this.