Slave Play coming to Broadway in September? — Page 11

poisonivy2 said: "Is this a play where it's better to sit close or is far away okay?"

I was up in the last row of rear Mezz with the wall on our backs and we had no problems. I had my theatre binoculars just in case, and only used them once or twice to see their faces up close.

52889j said: "haterobics said: "Similarly, what shows has Madonna attended since Hamilton Off-Broadway? I can't recall any."

Sorry to drag this back, but it's too funny to not point out that Madonna did in fact seeSlave Play at New York Theatre Workshop:https://pagesix.com/2019/01/14/full-frontal-male-nudity-lures-madonna-into-off-broadway-show/"

I think the nude scene is over-hyped. I was in the second row of the orchestra and could barely see the nudity as the lighting is really dim. Besides, it comes at a very intense and absorbing point in the play. At no time is the nudity gratuitous and if you're really paying attention to the entire action, t's not a distraction. Sometimes the reporters who point out the nudity behave like they never left junior high.

Updated On: 9/19/19 at 03:05 PM

Bettyboy72 said: "Spoilers Below.

Saw the show tonight. It’s vey well done and thought provoking. I was planning to stop at TKTS to grab a ticket as a day ago there were a decent amount left. Got there at noon and there were none on the board. Went to the box office and was told the show was sold out except for a few single seats. The few people in front of me were picking up comps and when I got there tonight a guy was complaining that the person in front of him in line was picking up comps and had better seats that the seats he paid for. They must be papering the show to get the word out. It really deserves to be seen.

The actors are marvelous. The only possible acting Tony mods I can see are Joaquina (Kaneisha) and Annie (Alana). Both command the stage at times. Annie has a Julie White quality and really had the audience. She mastered the comedy. Joaquina has such a presence and gravity. Impeccable work.

I think it’s really sharp and insightful at times and other times it feels preachy and disingenuous. When the characters were speaking I was completely on board. When the therapists were speaking I found it less compelling. I didn’t find them as funny as the rest of the audience did. I think all of the actors are giving 110%. I did find the music obsession ritual an odd stretch and the overuse of the Rihanna song didn’t make a ton of sense to me.

I also was slightly disappointed that we get no follow-up on the couples who we’ve just spent an hour and 45 minutes with. So all the time we spent getting to know them was just to set up Kaneisha’s breakdown? I was hoping the last act would have all three couples in their quarters and give some insight into all of them.

Overall I found it well done and worth seeing. Thought provoking. I’ll be thinking about it for a while. To those who have seen the play do you think the final moments are Jim trying the fantasy again with Kaneisha to get her back to the place of feeling in control or a fantasy of how she feels in her mind when she is making love to him?"

Addressing your question about the final scene, I got the impression that Jim realized that he lost Kaneisha. He tried to give her what she wanted in the first act before he cut it short, so yes, he was trying to fulfill her fantasy, but I thought that he was also desperately trying to win back her love. I think Jim really loved Kaneisha and realized he lost her and was making a last ditch effort to make himself desirable to her again. When she rejected him during his intense lovemaking (actually, rape), he coils back in defeat. It drains him of emotion. When Paul Alexander Nolan came out for his curtain call immediately after that scene, he was visibly emotionally exhausted. I think Jim's efforts were driven by his love for her, but he didn't actually 'hear' her comments when she discussed her repulsion of him and his kind (and of herself for having allowed herself to love him). I read that Jim and Kaneisha are meant to represent all the couples in the final act, but it's not clear to me that each couple is truly represented.

I never felt that I was preached to, but I can relate to your feelings of the disingenuous nature of some content, particularly the therapy session because it's a stretch to try to simply very complex issues and blame them on a single source or factor.

Bettyboy72 said: "The actors are marvelous. The only possible acting Tony mods I can see are Joaquina (Kaneisha) and Annie (Alana). Both command the stage at times. Annie has a Julie White quality and really had the audience. She mastered the comedy. Joaquina has such a presence and gravity. Impeccable work."

I could also see Dustin (James Cusati-Moyer) getting a nom, too. I've only seen the invited dress so far (planning to head back after it opens to see any edits), but Annie, Joaquina, and him had equally crowd-favorite responses -- him quite possibly most of all, actually. I'm sure it helped that the audience was filled with professional theatre-makers/theatre students, therefore his many one-liners regarding his profession landed extremely well ("I said 'yes, and,'" brought the house down).

Honestly wouldn't be surprised if they gave Nolan a nom too. He gave a great performance and the difficult subject matter relating to his role certainly won't hurt his chances.

I think the play is very at home in the present. It addresses things that we know exist but just don't talk about.



**********SPOLIER***********







Dustin's rant about his partner and the neigborhood they lived in was so on target about a segment of the black male community. And to hear it coming from the white half of the couple was what made it so powerful. My jaw literally dropped when he was talking. To have that put out there was actually like "Thank You. Someone is addressing this". There are black gay men who will not acknowledge me in the presence of a white person they are interested me but will speak when there is no white male around that they are interested in. I called one guy I knew for years on the carpet about it as he had gone on a date with a white guy I was dating. He had no clue and interrupted a pool game we were having while ignoring me. The show gave me vivid flashbacks of that night. I told him off right there in the bar. This happened about 12 years ago and still happens.

Bettyboy72: Thanks for the Shoutout and validation!

I'm in the minority on this. I hated it and couldn't wait for it to be over. The best thing was the legroom of my $39 ticket in the rear mezz.

After missing this at NYTW, I finally had the opportunity to see this last night. It's a smart, very well acted and directed production, but not nearly as provocative or innovative as its hype suggests. It front-loads the "edgiest" content- the antebellum sexual stuff- into the first half hour. It then shifts and the meat of the piece, the largest part, its heart, reveals itself as something pretty conventional: the crucible ensemble play. You know, the play where a group of characters are placed in a controlled environment they cannot really leave (group therapy, an audition, a competition, etc) and then one-by-one have a major moment. The forward momentum is the fact that you know everyone will get a moment.

It's here that the play disappointed me as a piece of drama. Rhetorically, it's great. It is well-written and makes extremely insightful arguments about racial dynamics. But as a piece of drama... it's a letdown. It's an extremely contrived scenario that does not hold up to any sort of scrutiny, and the characters are less fleshed out people than they are vehicles for these arguments. It strains credulity that three characters each come to such profound epiphanies about their identities and themselves in rapid succession. Harris created an ideal situation for him to make pop-psychological and sociological arguments on his terms. And it gives the actors great showcase moments. But it feels just so... contrived and safe. The black characters' romantic partners are essentially straw men to be knocked down, while their therapist interlocutors are merely necessary for the action.

The last third of the play is the most intimate and raw, the only time we see the characters seem truly human. It's largely a stunning monologue by Joaquina Kalukango, and it's here that Harris' dramatic writing is strongest. It is poetic and evocative, suffused with pathos. But, of course, since this sequence is just Kalukango and Paul Nolan, it means the other characters are denied such humanity.

I could not help but think of two other plays this year that tackled similar themes, though I am loathe to lump these works all together- Fairview and Strange Loop. Of this trio of works by black writers that really interrogate what it means to be black and what it means to be black and live under white supremacy, it makes sense Slave Play is the one to go to Broadway. Its writer is the most charismatic... and the work, despite its hype, is the most conventional. Fairview made its point by deconstructing and then turning the form inside-out. Strange Loop was incredibly specific to the experience of its fat, black, and queer writer and used that to create a musical character study. But Slave Play is- depictions of some fetish-driven sex aside, and despite Harris' provocative posture- oddly accessible. I can't imagine anyone being made uncomfortable by its ideas, though I run in more progressive circles than many in a Broadway audience.

It is giving voice to ideas that aren't really heard on Broadway, and that itself is a big deal. It means it will reach a larger, more diverse audience than it ever could've off-Broadway. But as a work of drama, I can't help but feel it's weighed down by a very thin center.