THREE TALL WOMEN Reviews- Page 2

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 3/30/18 at 1:55pm

IdinaBellFoster said: "It's a shame Mantello will lose the Tony again to more splashy work."

Likely to the director of a revival of a now classic he original starred in.  

 

[devonian.t]

Posted: 3/30/18 at 4:09pm

I sincerely hope not- directorially, AiA is messy.

[RussT2]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 9:30pm

Updated On: 4/1/18 at 09:30 PM

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 9:34pm

Isn’t John Tiffany the favorite for the Tony this year?

[JBC3]

Posted: 4/1/18 at 10:08pm

Updated On: 4/2/18 at 10:08 PM

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 4/2/18 at 4:49pm

I'm not usually a contrarian for its own sake, but I suppose this is the thread to post my take on the Saturday matinee I saw, notwithstanding the unanimous raves from the press. I certainly give raves to the beautiful set; it's transformation is practically worth the price of admission. I give raves to the skill of those 3 illustrious women to keep straight which iteration of repeated speech they're giving from endless scene after endless scene. More than that, I give huge plaudits to both Laurie Metcalf and Glenda Jackson (Allison Pill less so), for keeping me interested in where the damn thing was headed without hypnotizing me into a stupor. 

But sorry to say, those plusses weren't enough to salvage this long long afternoon of endless talk between 3 not very interesting women. Act I was especially insufferable; I couldn't wait for the blackout that ends it all. Act II held much more interest-- at least everyone was back in their full wits with the ability to do a proper postmortem of what went on before. But honestly, by the end of it I had very little idea of what we were supposed to take away from the show, other than a vague appreciation for ladies of a certain age to prove they've still got it. Sorry, Mr. Albee. Truly great plays (yours included) have proven that 2 hours in a theater can offer much much more.

[Synecdoche2]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 9:20pm

Glenda Jackson's performance in this will go down in history as one of the all-time greats.

The play, eh, not as much.

[Andy51]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 10:21pm

Hilton Als, unlike the other reviewers, is quite critical of this production.  While I'm still on the side of the raves, I do think Als offers an intelligent and interesting perspective.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/09/a-lost-opportunity-in-three-tall-women

Updated On: 4/4/18 at 10:21 PM

[Auggie27]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 11:15pm

Anyone who has seen this vivid, immediate production -- one that ignites this play with genuine intimacy and theatricality in ways its safer, more naturalistically earthbound premiere did not -- will not accept this bull****:

"Mantello has directed the actresses to play their roles as though they were, respectively, a sadistic, castrating drama queen, a dour, bitter spinster, and a disgruntled majorette. Thus they parade around Miriam Buther’s rather overdone set like angsty marionettes,.."

[wonkit]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 11:28pm

I am trying to remember: I do recall reading another review he wrote where (as in this case) he seemed to think that he was intellectually superior to everyone involved in the production. Those who can, do; those who can't write for the NEW YORKER.

[BJR]

Posted: 4/4/18 at 11:52pm

Saw this tonight and I agree it is simply stellar. The performances are luminous and the play came alive for me more than it has in any other production I've seen. And the theatrical gestures Mantello uses in the second half and end not only were stunning, but theatricalized the play's conflicts so powerfully.

I'd say Mantello is definitely getting a nod, though there are some ambitious productions this season that keep him from being an easy frontrunner. (I, for one, disagree ANGELS is a mess directorially, very much so.)

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 2:26am

Hilton, in the second act you saw sadistic castrating bitch, dour bitter spinster and disgruntled drug majorette.

I saw a wise dying woman gracefully embracing every part of herself young and old and good and bad, a woman in midlife fondly looking back, coping with the present (which is hardly spintsterhood, far from it, and characterized not by bitterness but by assuredly navigating domestic realpolitik without sacrificing her own joy) and spiritually wary of the future mistakes she is told she will make, and a young lady with set moral standards confronting a loss of even more innocence to come with both denial and terror.   A powerful triptych of life, holding a mirror to so many in the audience (which the set carries through), no matter their background, gender, sexual orientation or age.

Perhaps Als is projecting misogyny onto Mantello's Three Tall Women.  I see no evidence of it onstage.

Updated On: 4/5/18 at 02:26 AM

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 7:23am

That Hilton Als review is a mess. Of COURSE Albee wrote a comedy! The man was effing hilarious. Why shouldn’t Mantello mine the script for laughs if he has three actresses with an incredible capacity for having an audience eat out of the palms of their hands?

As to the point about Mantello feeling somehow morally superior, he never backs it up with any evidence, but describes exactly how this production gets Albee’s work so right in the very next paragraph. Like... huh?

And Miriam Buether’s set may be extravagant, but it’s hardly “overdone.” The play is about a very rich woman with expensive taste; her home (especially her bedroom) should reflect that. A’s not a real woman anyway. She’s an exaggeration of the kind of woman Albee’s mother was. Which makes the explosion of the self in act two all the more poignant in this production. What is really beneath the surface of all this posturing? And Buether’s set expands accordingly.

I’m happy to read critiques of this glorious production. I’m not knocking Als’s just because he didn’t care for it, but because he doesn’t seem to know exactly why he didn’t care for it and doesn’t really care to back up his claims.

Updated On: 4/5/18 at 07:23 AM

[Lot666]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 8:33am

What do you think the chances are of this extending? Telecharge says it will close June 24 and I won't have an opportunity until July 21. I've got one slot to fill and I'm leaning toward Straight White Men, but if Three Tall Women was still running I might consider that instead. Thoughts?

[wonkit]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 8:51am

Als always seems to be angry that he didn't see on stage what he expected based upon reading the play. I agree that he is projecting a lot more negativity onto the characters (and the actresses) than either Albee or Mantello intended. I also highly doubt that his opinion is going to dissuade anyone from seeing this incredible production.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 9:10am

wonkit wrote:  "I am trying to remember: I do recall reading another review he wrote where (as in this case) he seemed to think that he was intellectually superior to everyone involved in the production."

Not sure if this is what you are thinking  of, wonkit, but didn't Als piss a lot of people off with a review of last year's Sweet Charity?  I don't recall exactly what the debate was about that review but I recall an actor friend, a woman (in this case a salient factor), posting Als Sweet Charity review and that many people finding his take on the production condescending and the basis of his opinioin straining supportability for anyone familiar with the show itself and the production.

[theaterdarling]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 9:31am

henrikegerman said: "Hilton, in the second act you saw sadistic castrating bitch, dour bitter spinster and disgruntled drug majorette.

I saw a wise dying woman gracefully embracing every part of herself young and old andgood and bad, a woman in midlife fondly looking back, coping with the present (which is hardly spintsterhood, far from it, and characterized not by bitterness but by assuredly navigatingdomestic realpolitik without sacrificingher own joy) and spiritually wary of the future mistakes she is told she willmake, and a young ladywith setmoral standards confronting a loss of even more innocence to come with both denial and terror. A powerful triptych of life, holding a mirror toso many in the audience (which the set carries through), no matter their background, gender,sexual orientation or age.

PerhapsAls is projecting misogyny ontoMantello's Three Tall Women. Isee no evidence of it onstage."

My mouth was agape reading Als' review. Projection indeed. This is an absolutely beautiful, succinct counter to Als' views that I felt but could never have articulated as well. Thank you for this as well as your later comment. ColortheHours048 made fine points too.

[Smaxie]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 11:09am

The Als review is so ludicrous and purposefully contrarian, it's not worth bothering with. Your time would be better spent reading Michael Feingold, who is just out. 

Glenda Jackson Stands Tallest Among Edward Albee’s “Three Tall Women” 

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 12:24pm

“It depicts a mode of life shared by very few, but its sense of living has the fullness that gives a play an unmistakable claim to be called a masterpiece.”

That is a perfect way to describe this play. In its specificity, it is absolutely universal. God, I love this production so much. I can’t wait to go back and give it another viewing. I’ve been telling anyone and everyone to see it.

[wonkit]

Posted: 4/5/18 at 3:42pm

henrikegerman said: "wonkit wrote: "I am trying to remember: I do recall reading another reviewhe wrote where (as in this case) he seemed to think that he was intellectually superior to everyone involved inthe production."

Not sure if this is what you are thinking of, wonkit, but didn't Alspiss a lot of people offwith areview of last year's Sweet Charity? I don't recall exactly what the debate was about that reviewbut I recall an actor friend, a woman (in this case a salient factor), posting Als Sweet Charity review and that many people finding his take on the production condescending and the basis of his opinioin straining supportability for anyone familiar with the show itself and the production."

I actually went back to see which reviews Als has written that I actually read, and it was his review of van Hove's VIEW FROM THE BRIDGE that angered me. First, he acted like Arthur Miller's psychiatrist in discussing how the play came to be written. Nice try, but most playwrights aren't autobiographers in everything they create. If you thought that was true, Hilton, you would have to deny that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare. Second, he focused almost exclusively on the kiss between Eddie and Rudolpho (which is not a sexual kiss but an expression of dominance) and not the incestuous tension between Eddie and Catherine that drives most of Eddie's actions throughout the play. Als described the production as "romanticized masculinity" - something which I think the reviewer brought to his experience of the production. And that is why the characterization of the three women in the current review bothers me. Hilton is indeed projecting onto the play his own reactions to it rather than judging the production for its own voice.