TROUBLE IN MIND Previews — Page 3

I went tonight. I really enjoyed the evening. I actually was expecting an extremely heavy, intense play, and was surprised at how much humor and laughter there was. The acting was mostly excellent. I didn;t think Michael Zegen worked at the director. I feel like you need a real Hal Prince/Arthur Laurents type dickhead, and Zegen came across more like an officious assistant stage manager than a director who could make or break careers. Part of that is Childress's fault -- she does a good job of making characters come to life but the director's character isn't very consistent.

I also thought that Childress didn't know how to end the play. The play works better as a slice of life -- I loved the scenes of the actors rehearsing what they know is a bad play, and the themes of racial stereotyping and also roles running out for actresses of a certain age and even more so for black actresees of a certain age. But the final conflict seemed a bit contrived, almost like Childress wanted a showy climax but didn't quite know how to get there without a lot of heavyhandedness?

LaChanze and Chuck Cooper are amazing, and both can really sing. Also loved Jennifer Frances Duke.

I actually wrote a little review of Trouble in Mind:

https://humbledandoverwhelmed.blogspot.com/2021/11/ny-diaries-die-meistersinger-trouble-in.html

I actually sort of thought Wiletta's confrontation with Manners wasn't as effective as maybe Childress intended because I thought Wiletta was being unnecessarily confrontational to someone who didn't, after all, write the play.

It just seemed like Childress needed a big confrontation to end the play. But the thing is, the play's theme is that everyone involved knows it's a bad play. Everyone is going through the motions of pretending they're putting on "art" and they all know the play sucks. So why is Wiletta getting so angry with the director who is just trying to get the show on the road?

Manners is a ****for a million other reasons, but I didn't think Wiletta being so angry at him really worked.

With respect, I think you guys are totally missing the point of the ending, AND the point of Childress’ own obstinance.

This is isn’t about “playwrights vs. actors vs. producers” etc. Childress, to my knowledge, wasn’t objecting on the grounds of “playwrights are always right.” She was objecting to the CONTENT of the changes. Because she wanted to present the truth of her experience in full.

And so is Willetta - she’s not demanding the change simply because she wants the upper hand, or because she’s being mistreated in general. If you actually listen to the content of her objection - which is right there in the dialogue plain as day: she’s saying the character’s choice is not true to her experience as a Black woman. She objects to the notion that a mother would knowingly send her son to die. And that the white playwright is depicting this Black mother as naive and unrealistic.

You’re also missing the point of HOW this argument came to a head. It’s not just that Willetta was standing up for her principles. The director was saying that Willetta wasn’t playing the truth of the scene. He was hounding her, telling her to playing it “believably.” And Willetta says (paraphrasing) “because this is isn’t believable. It was written by a white male playwright without regard for the truth of the Black female experience.” She was at a roadblock. She literally couldn’t do what the director was asking of her. She could play the scene as written, but she couldn’t play it with the level of truth he wanted.

That’s why the play is so achingly relevant: it doesn’t matter whether Childress is the actor or the playwright in each of these 2 scenarios. The voices of Black artists need to be heeded when it comes to telling their stories. And it’s not only about doing what’s right, it will also lead to BETTER ART. Because the experiences will be portrayed with more depth and truth.

Updated On: 11/9/21 at 12:43 PM

I'm going to the Saturday matinee. Will I see anyone there? I would love to meet any of you IRL.

I saw the matinee yesterday and was also impressed. LaChanze clearly runs the gamut of emotions here - she gets to show off her comic side in Act I (she is REALLY funny), before becoming much more defiant in the crucial second act as she stands up for herself and her beliefs when she requests a rewrite of Chaos in Belleville. I see her getting nominated for Leading Actress in a Play next year.

There is not a weak link in the rest of this cast. Michael Zegen was very good as Manners - whatever problems he seemed to have early on in the preview process diving into this character are all gone now. Chuck Cooper was fine as per usual but really took flight with his lynching monologue in Act II. I had totally forgot Danielle Campbell was in this, and she was great as well.

For anyone asking / wondering about run time, the show began yesterday at 2:07 and let out at just about 4:15. I'm sure Roundabout will keep the 2 hrs 10 run time, seeing as the company's "freeze day" was on Friday. I also stayed for a post-show talkback with director Charles Randolph-Wright and the lighting designer, and got to ask a question.

All in all, a very fun night for my first trip to the American Airlines Theatre. I highly recommend you see Trouble in Mind, you only have until January 9.

Saw it Wednesday afternoon and spent the week thinking about the play and staging. Its genial, knowing, funny, first act has only flashes of the gnarly conflicts that follow; and then the piece coils and strikes with 2021's immediacy and prism, without altering a single word of the original text. To call it prescient denies 1955 America's ugly reality. Those were halcyon days only in the rearview mirror, and only for specific demographics, obviously. Yet what's shocking is the post-millennial nuance Childress brought to a central debate about cultural appropriation and artistic integrity. In the middle of Eisenhower era America. LaChanze, masterfully nailing the protagonist's initial accommodation and then slowly simmering outrage, gives a bravura performance that Childress would've surely cheered. And Chuck Cooper, playing an actor forever sidelined with thankless roles, is heartbreaking and heroic. Michael Zegan, as a director trapped in denial and entitlement is frighteningly recognizable. With theater's comeback volatile, the production isn't selling. If you're in NYC, see it, and hang on for where the play's trajectory takes its characters, and us.

chrishuyen said: "Any note on where either the $19.57 mobile rush seats or TDF seats are? Trying to decide if I should try for those or go with the $49 orchestra row N offer they're running right now"

I took advantage of the $19.57 and got center orchestra, row J. Great seat.