THE GLASS MENAGERIE (2017) Reviews- Page 2

[MadsonMelo]

Posted: 3/9/17 at 10:24pm

Brantley was not having it.

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 3/9/17 at 10:36pm

You guys think anyone would be nominated for a Tony?

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 3/9/17 at 10:51pm

OMG. Catty Brantley is my favorite Brantley. Sorry for the show that it's not getting great reviews, but wow, what a delicious dish from the Times. 

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 3/9/17 at 11:20pm

Brantley is a bitter old queen who has never taken a chance in his life. His review is sickening. He should stick to masturbating, I mean reviewing revivals starring Chenowith. 

I know many people who appreciated and who really liked this revival and those I know who didn't were more mature than Brantley. 

Also he totally puts a spoiler in the review about one of the interesting and surprising stage effects. He's a dick. 

 

Updated On: 3/9/17 at 11:20 PM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 3/9/17 at 11:22pm

Cote's review in Time Out makes it seems like THINKS he should like show, so he's trying to piece together all the random pieces. Trying to explain why all the actors seem like their in different plays, like c'mon dude. Brantley seems spot on from what I've heard from friends.

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 3/9/17 at 11:23pm

Interesting just how divided these reviews are... You either hate it or love it, it seems.

Miss Field deserves the Tony nomination, no question. It will be a feat for anyone to rival her for the win.

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 3/9/17 at 11:35pm

I'm not surprised to see this divide critics, but I'm happy to see it not completely panned. I wasn't at all familiar with The Glass Menagerie before seeing this production and I found it well-done. If it's a little cold towards the beginning, I think the last half of this production in particular is quite beautiful, and it would have been a shame to see it totally disregarded. 

[10086sunset]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 8:10am

Went into this last night not knowing what to expect. At the end of the performance, I can see why the reviews are so divided. 

Thought Field and Mantello were very good. The rest does seem like a matter of preference.

Neon and Andy seem to be correct with the comments about Laura. The commentary should address this issue.

 

[AC126748]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 8:16am

I don't find anything bitchy about Brantley's review. It's a clear-eyed assessment of this production's many flaws. 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 8:52am

Agreed. Brantley's review is spot on.

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 8:58am

Unsurprised that the reviews are so divided, but I'm glad that some critics really took the time to grapple with the starkness of this production and came away appreciating it. Not that I'm saying the negative reviews are wrong, but there's seems to be a common thread among them of preciousness regarding Williams's text. Personally, I thought it was a breath of fresh air to see all of the poeticism stripped away, much as I appreciate non-poetic Shakespeare. Yes, it CAN be done where the lyricism and beauty of the text is untouched, but what about the characters? What about the humans who live in this piece? That's what Sam Gold's production unearthed for me: the flawed human beings behind the artifice.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 9:03am

Have to disagree with you there about "preciousness". What a condescending word. Gold's production is full of contempt for the text. The text is about Williams' actual family, these aren't made up, fictional, or stock characters. So to apply a scenario to them which is simply not drawn from the text (ie making the entire play about Laura's physical disability and not about what the play is literally about) is going to ruffle some feathers--- I don't think anyone is being "precious."

This one makes some of the aforementioned points about Laura:

http://theatermania.com/broadway/reviews/the-glass-menagerie_80281.html?cid=homepage_news

Updated On: 3/10/17 at 09:03 AM

[Skimbleshanks2]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 9:10am

BRANTLEY's review is spot-on. Wow.

[newintown]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 9:39am

I have to say I agree with Brantley here as well; I have nothing against "nontraditional" productions as a rule, but this one felt like a Comden and Green gag about bored dilettante theatre-goers embracing any nonsensical approach to an old work, as long as it's highly pretentious. The production felt (to me) like it was about Sam Gold and not The Glass Menagerie.

[Phillytheatreguy10]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 9:50am

I think it's a bit premature to suggest Field is a shoo-in for the Tony especially with some of the most anticipated performances yet to be seen this season.  People like Metcalf are waiting in the wings, and some great performances like Louise-Parker have already come and gone-albeit likely to be forgotten by Tony voters.  Still, Field's reviews are not knockouts across the board.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 9:50am

"The production felt (to me) like it was about Sam Gold and not The Glass Menagerie."

Agreed. And I don't have anything against non-traditional ideas either; Ivo Van Hove is one of my favorite directors.

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 9:55am

I wonder if the divisiveness of the production might lead to it getting completely shutout by the nominators.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 9:59am

Very likely, IMO, Jeffrey.

I found this review to be spot on as well:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/glass-menagerie-theater-984781

 

[AC126748]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 10:03am

neonlightsxo said: ""The production felt (to me) like it was about Sam Gold and not The Glass Menagerie."

Agreed. And I don't have anything against non-traditional ideas either; Ivo Van Hove is one of my favorite directors.

 

"

Whether or not I've liked or agreed with IVH's concepts, I've always felt that his ideas could be justified. Gold's simply cannot. They fly in the face of the text.

[10086sunset]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 10:24am

AC126748 said: "Whether or not I've liked or agreed with IVH's concepts, I've always felt that his ideas could be justified. Gold's simply cannot. They fly in the face of the text."

 

Well said, AC.

[AC126748]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 10:26am

Tumblr warriors are already calling the reviews clueless and anti-disability. Good lord, some people.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 10:50am

Wait, which reviews are anti disability? The negative ones or the positive ones?

[AC126748]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 10:58am

The negative ones, of course. "The critics are uncomfortable with disability" and hogwash like that.

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 11:20am

I'm too old for Tumblr, I guess. And too sane.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 3/10/17 at 12:34pm

I actually knew that some defenders of this production would be all about exaggerating Laura's disability as some sort of pro-disability rights statement. For me, once I saw a picture of Laura in a wheelchair on BWW I knew I wanted to avoid it. I once saw a college production of The Glass Menagerie where the director made Laura have a totally dead leg and stomp all over the stage and Jim needing to down a drink before having that scene with her. I felt it took away from the original meaning of the play. I wouldn't have so much of a problem with the change if I felt the play was written that way or if it didn't interfere with what I think Laura's issues and motivations were, but I felt that these changes takes away from the real power of Laura's internalized insecurity that ballooned and became exaggerated with age and further isolation. 

Updated On: 3/10/17 at 12:34 PM