THE ROYAL FAMILY Reviews

Can anyone tell me 1. if this is true, and 2. what the producers of this show or the nominators will do? I believe that I've read somewhere, perhaps in an article or in the official rules, that Tony elligability is based on who performed on opening night, unless, I'm supposing, the show's producers appeal. Does anyone know what will be done with Tony Roberts in this show since he probably isn't performing tonight (nothing has been said if he will or not)? Will he be selected as elligable, or will his understudy, or both?

Its a really wonderful show. Funny, touching, and beautiful. The set and the lighting are fantastic. Catherine Zuber's costumes are absolutely gorgeous. The cast is great and have really nice chemistry with one another. Jan Maxwell, Rosemary Harris, and the man who plays Tony are the standouts. I am so happy the Jan Maxwell has found this show because she really gets to showcase her great talents. Hopefully a Tony nomination or win is in the works for her. Rosemary Harris is funny and the closing moments of the show are very touching.

GO SEE THIS SHOW!

Even if it is superb, it will be long closed by the time Tony noms role around so it does have that working against it.

Just remember - Michele Pawk took the Tony for Best Actress for "Hollywood Arms" which was a limited fall run.

It might not happen often, but if a performance is THAT good and memorable, it has a chance.

---

Updated On: 10/8/09 at 02:22 PM

Well, it's been announced that Robers will be returning. I'm glad he is and I don't have to needlessly worry.

Second, Ed, there's also a 1970's filmed version of The Royal Family that has Rosesmary Harris. I've watched part of it, it's pretty good. I seem to have read that it was a filmed version of the 70s revival.

The Associated Press is a Rave:

"Director Doug Hughes has cast the show well all the way down the line. Check out the work done by the actors who play the Cavendish maid and butler, Caroline Stefanie Clay and David Greenspan. Despite only a minimum amount of time on stage, they do exemplary work in creating real characters.

But then Hughes never lets any of the actors descend into cartoons, which makes the play's surprisingly emotional ending all the more poignant — especially after all the frivolous mayhem that has preceded it.

That delightful turbulence is played out on designer John Lee Beatty's baronial set, a lavish duplex Manhattan apartment that probably could only exist in the theater. Don't tell the Cavendish clan. For them, on stage is the only life that's real."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091008/ap_en_re/us_theater_review_royal_family

*****

USA Today gives the show 3 Stars out of 4:

"Under Dough Hughes' sprightly direction, the other ensemble members all perform gamely, if less consistently. As Fanny's foolish, pompous brother, the excellent John Glover wins us over in spite of his role; as his cloying wife, Ana Gasteyer doesn't. Larry Pine is a tad pallid as Julie's wealthy, gallant love interest, while Reg Rogers is a bit overzealous as her brother, a movie idol with a talent for trouble.

None of this detracts, of course, from Harris' and Maxwell's star turns. Women wear the pants in this Family, and they're a joy to behold."

http://www.usatoday.com/life/theater/reviews/2009-10-08-royal-family_N.htm

*****

Variety is Mixed-to-Positive:

"There's a sentimental satisfaction in watching Rosemary Harris -- who played equivocating diva Julie Cavendish in the 1976 Broadway revival of "The Royal Family" -- still navigating the stage with grace and good humor, this time as the clan's proud matriarch, in the play's latest appearance. The rhythms of Doug Hughes' production are too uneven to make all its rewards equal, but George S. Kaufman and Edna Ferber's 1927 comedy about a New York stage dynasty retains plenty of charm for theater lovers. And while the ensemble work could be tighter, its lead performers rise to the occasion in sparkling turns."

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117941339.html?categoryid=33&cs=1

---

The Wall Street Journal is Negative:

""The Royal Family" is a backstage spoof that pokes fun at the flashy foibles of the Barrymore family, which were familiar to anyone likely to set foot in a Broadway theater in the '20s. It still has its amusing moments, but the element of satire (underlined by the fact that Reg Rogers, who plays Tony Cavendish, is made up to look like John Barrymore) is now dated past the point of easy recognition, and the humor dries up abruptly and unpleasingly when the plot takes a bathetic turn in the last act. Noël Coward knew better than to get soppy in "Hay Fever," the classic 1924 backstage farce on which "The Royal Family" is rather too obviously based, and I kept wishing that I were seeing that play instead of this one.

Doug Hughes, the director, appears to have encouraged his cast to try too hard, with results that not infrequently suggest a stageful of nail-driving carpenters. Fortunately, Rosemary Harris and Jan Maxwell manage to give neatly turned performances—Ms. Harris is stately and sardonic, Ms. Maxwell fey and winsome—that are just about worth the price of admission. So is John Lee Beatty's fantastically lavish set, whose expensive appointments include a staircase, a fireplace, two suits of armor and a grand piano. I enjoyed gazing at the décor even when my attention drifted away from the script, which was fairly often."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574457001553209162.html

---

Ben Brantley is Mixed-to-Positive:

"As staged by Mr. Hughes (“Doubt,” this season’s revival of David Mamet’s “Oleanna”), this “Royal Family” takes a while to find its natural rhythm and even then doesn’t always hold on to it. Not all the cast members seem equally at home in John Lee Beatty’s lush rendering of the Cavendish family’s two-tiered apartment, a deluxe playpen for grown-up babies. (Catherine Zuber has provided mouthwatering period costumes to match...

...Joe Orton, the great, subversive comic playwright of swinging London, insisted that farce worked only when played sincerely. Ms. Maxwell and Ms. Harris prove how right he was. Ms. Harris’s Fanny is an artfully subtle creation. Age hasn’t withered her, but it has subdued her, and the actressy poses of a lifetime have become gentle reflexes. You’re aware of the gap between eager spirit and weaker flesh, yet there’s a graceful continuity to every move Fanny makes.

Ms. Maxwell, whose supporting performances were the best things about the Broadway productions of “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” and “The Dinner Party,” gets the star role she has long deserved and fills it to the fingertips. Like Fanny, this Julie turns the hackneyed notion of “theater in the blood” into biological fact. Both women are wonderful paradoxes, people for whom artifice is truly natural, and as mother and daughter they communicate in a perfect private language to which we are allowed privileged access."

http://theater2.nytimes.com/2009/10/09/theater/reviews/09brantley.html

---

I'm so glad Rosemary Harris is showing up that nasty poster who ran to the board after 1st preview to cackle about how bad she was.

I can't wait to see this!

---

Rosemary Harris Hater!

---

John Simon is Mixed-to-Positive (giving the show 2 1/2 Stars out of 4):

"...As Gilbert Marshall, the solid businessman in love with Julie, Larry Pine has an easier role and performs it winningly. In lesser parts, we get adequacy, which -- except from Kelli Barrett as Gwen, the youngest Cavendish -- is good enough.

We live in times when even the nontheatrical royals have become, if not downright democratic, rather less than regal. Thus mere actors perhaps cannot be expected to reproduce easeful hauteur. Add to this that despite some funny bits, Kaufman had not yet reached the height of his comic gifts. So we get rather more competence than magnificence."

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601098&sid=agyy3ZiC44Ug

---

NY1 is mixed to positive:

"The Manhattan Theatre Club invites you to visit a time that, while fantastical, once existed. A time when actors behaved like aristocracy, they shunned Hollywood in favor of the stage, and plays had three acts, 16 actors, oh, and two dogs making a last-minute cameo. It's George S. Kaufman and Edna Ferber's 1927 showbiz comedy "The Royal Family," and it's a pleasant enough trip in the time machine.

...

Revivals are always a tricky balance between archeology and restoration, and "The Royal Family" scores above average. It's a tasteful banquet of nostalgia served up with class, with a horde of worthy actors still struggling to get on the same page."
Review and Video

hopefully Jan Maxwell will finally get that Tony she deserves!

I have to agree with this.
I saw it last night. I didn't "love" the play, but I did enjoy it. The characters were delightfully over-the-top (though I don't think that should have extended to the butler and maid...which it did). Jan and Rosemary gave fantastic performances. John Glover is always a treat to see. Ana Gastyer, while her character is quite annoying, has the ability to make an already-funny play even funnier.

Tony Roberts did have an awkward moment when his fellow cast members had to help him with his line; but hey, I'm impressed that he even went on after his medical scare this week. Good for him.

---