The Crucible Previews- Page 5

[abbagirl]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 1:42pm

I also got a rush ticket for tonight, around 11:45 today even. :) I also found out after the fact that I'd won the digital lotto for tomorrow, but thankfully since you buy online with a Ticketmaster code, was able to let my friend use my code to buy the ticket for tomorrow, yay! Side orch in both cases (although he also had the option of side mezz w the lotto).

[indytallguy]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 4:22pm

BroadwayNYC2 said: "Slow day at the internship"

Just perfect!

You win the day with this :)

[Juggalo12]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 4:36pm

Very suspicious. And they sound like the same person writing them. You're so right. Thanks for the observation. 

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 4:44pm

Not sure why the marketing team would feel the need to shill on this show: it's a production that will on its own be well attended, greatly discussed and expectedly divisive. This is a love / it hate it director. Shilling seems pointless.

 

Did anyone see the production last year at the Old Vic? It's available to watch on theatre on digital theatre.com. I know it was well reviewed but has anyone watched this broadcast?

Updated On: 3/2/16 at 04:44 PM

[Juggalo12]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 4:45pm

Looks like I won't be running to this. Thanks everyone for your honest and helpful reviews. This doesn't sound good at all. I was an admirer of AVFTB, but this sounds like a dud in comparison. And why does he have to repeat the same choice regarding the nonstop musical underscore and drum beats? I already saw this in AVFTB. I don't need it again. He should do something different...PS: I still haven't forgiven him for the double kiss in View. He has no right to radically change stories. Such alterations can drastically change the playwright's intentions. 

[scripps]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 6:15pm

How was Jason Butler Harner in this? 

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 6:32pm

PS: I still haven't forgiven him for the double kiss in View.

 

That was in the Michael Mayer version in the '90s.  It's not new.

[jasonbrody]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 7:26pm

I got in by myself to the first preview show last night.  Incredible.  Van Hove lived up to my expectations, which have been considerably built up since I saw A View from the Bridge in January.  The production is naturalistic and Brechtian at the same time – it lays the text bare in a way I’ve never encountered before and illuminates corners of it that I’d never considered and never noticed.  I have some questions about the set (not entirely sure I understand the concept here), but the score was stark as usual, and just as dramatic and powerful as ever.  The interesting thing about van Hove’s productions is that in the stripping down of the works, they’ve never been clearer. If I can find a way to get tickets again for the run, I’ll be re-visiting.
 

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 7:29pm

Don't you get out of work at 5? Do you get overtime? 

[PianoMann]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 9:30pm

I won the lottery today for tomorrow night's performance and I'm really looking forward to it, despite the mixed reaction here. I was a huge fan of Hove's A View from the Bridge so I'm going into this production with an open mind. Also thrilled to see this play on stage for the first time with such a terrific cast!

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 9:33pm

and just as dramatic and powerful as ever. 

 

This is the second production of his you've seen?

 

If I can find a way to get tickets again for the run, I’ll be re-visiting.

 

Not gonna happen.  It's sold out til next January.

Updated On: 3/2/16 at 09:33 PM

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 9:38pm

Jason Butler Harner is very good. Reverend Paris isn't exactly a scene stealing role,  but he along with the rest of the ensemble is first rate. I think even those who had misgivings about last night's first preview are in agreement about the strength of the cast.  

 

One other thing that I was thinking about today (and I have been thinking a lot about what I experienced last night)  is how interesting the show plays when it's in contemporary dress. The play takes on a different energy, that reminded me of something like The Exorcist.  It plays almost like a thriller.

 

I definitely look forward to hearing reports throughout the preview process, and will be catching this again later In its run to see how it evolves.

 

 

Updated On: 3/2/16 at 09:38 PM

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 11:11pm

Holy God, was that dreadful. One fun effects sequence (having no relation to Miller's scene) and a surprise animal cameo in a sea of ridiculous, flavorless, obstinate pretension.

 

The emperor has no clothes. 

[indytallguy]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 11:13pm

Just got out of this evening's performance which was ruined because of a production photographer sitting back with the production team including Philip Glass (last row orch) shooting still images throughout the second act. Every minute or two you'd hear the rapid clicking of multiple shots being taken. Absolutely inexcusable.

 

Other than that extreme annoyance, I was amazed at how quickly three hours went by, but the show definitely needs work. It will be interesting to see what changes are made during previews.  The ending felt anti-climactic and the curtain call didn't seem to work tonight.  People weren't sure the show was over or when to applaud.  I enjoyed Angels and A View from the Bridge so much that I'm hopeful this production gets polished to a similar level of quality.  Certainly a lot of talent on stage and some interesting ideas, but overall it felt like a bit too much shtick for me at this point.

[SomethingPeculiar]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 11:39pm

How is Philip Glass's original score?

Is the music recorded or are there live instruments like in King Charles III?

[indytallguy]

Posted: 3/2/16 at 11:49pm

SomethingPeculiar said: "How is Philip Glass's original score? Is the music recorded or are there live instruments like in King Charles III?"

 

Recorded.  I liked it and found it to be an effective addition for the most part. But then I like Glass in general.

 

[JBroadway]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 12:24am

I saw this tonight, and let me just start off by saying that I do NOT like this play, and I knew that going in. I've read it twice, and disliked it both times (though a bit better the 2nd time). I realize that it is a classic and I understand why, but I have always found most of it rather dull. 

 

So now onto this production. I had hoped that Van Hove would be able to take the more boring (IMO) sections and liven them up, but no such luck. Long sections of this production dragged like a dirge, just where I expected them to. On the other hand, the exciting climaxes of each act are quite well done. In particular I enjoyed Act 4 and the latter half of Act 3. The underscoring was way too much at times, but the musical shifts were used very effectively. The music at the beginning of each act was also used effectively. 

 

The performances were pretty strong. I wasn't a fan of Sophie Okonedo in Act 2, but found her to be much more interesting in Act 4. I felt similarly about Wishaw, who really hit his final moments in the play brilliantly. Ronan is excellent in my opinion, and a real highlight of the production. Gevinson was much better here than she was in This is Out Youth. Or rather, her loud and over-the-top acting style was more appropriate for this play than it was in the other. Bill Camp was excellent as Reverand Hale, and I would love to see him snag a Tony nom for this. 

 

This is a production that absolutely has bright flashes of brilliant direction, and in the end I'm definitely glad I saw it. I think the pacing will get better through the preview period, and the weaker moments will get worked out. I might return to see it again later in the run to see how it's developed, but realistically I doubt I will get around to it with everything else opening. If you can spare the time and money, I'd say see it, especially if you're curious what Van Hove has done with it, or want to see the great cast.

 

Went to the stage-door tonight, with very little luck. Ronan, Okonedo, and Wishaw all went out other exits, while the rest of the cast quickly darted out the stage-door. I perfectly understand, however, given how cold and windy it was tonight. I'd be curious to hear if Ronan et al will come out and sign in warmer weather. 

 

 

Updated On: 3/3/16 at 12:24 AM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 12:29am

Wonder why Glass was there if it's recorded? Are they gonna re-accord?

[Fantod]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 1:24am

This isn't performed sans intermission like A View From the Bridge, right?

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 2:16am

There's one intermission. I could have used two, with how slowly it was performed. 

[indytallguy]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 7:05am

RippedMan said: "Wonder why Glass was there if it's recorded? Are they gonna re-accord?"

 

I was thinking he might be making any musical changes to correspond to how van Hove may be refining individual scenes and/or to identify potential enhancements himself based on how he sees the music serving the script and the director's intention.  Since the show isn't frozen, the music very well may not be either.

 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 9:22am

ChildofEarth said: "This is disappointing to hear, as someone who taught The Crucible for *mumbles* years, I was looking forward to it. Sigh."

 

There is no reason for you not to look forward to it based on two comments by random people on a message board.

I don't particularly love THE CRUCIBLE, but I am a huge Van Hove fan and I very much enjoyed this production. I loved the way the paranoia and fear was highlighted, and the casting was pitch perfect. Tavi Gevinson was a pleasant surprise. Sophie is certainly doing her own take on Elizabeth, but I appreciated it.

My only qualms are technical, which I'm sure will be fixed soon.

 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 9:23am

Play Esq. said: "In fairness, and as already been pointed out, this was only the first preview.  Van Hove is known to drastically change his productions during previews.  "

 

I've never known that to be true and I've seen four Van Hove productions.

 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 9:23am

double
Updated On: 3/3/16 at 09:23 AM

[JBroadway]

Posted: 3/3/16 at 9:24am

For those who have seen it, I have a couple of questions, one practical and the other analytical. They both have to do with choices in the direction, so I put them under the spoiler tag just in case, but I don't think it would ruin the too much show if you wanted to read them before seeing it. 

 

1.

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

I don't know anything about animals and dog breeds and such, but that looked like a very real WOLF to me at the beginning of act 3 (?). Was that an actual wolf? Or do you think it was a dog that they picked because it looked like a wolf? If It really was a wolf that was definitely a first for me. Not sure why they included it, but it was interesting. 

 

2.

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

At the end of Act 1 Betty Parris actually lifted up into the air, and at the end of Act 3 we see the windows open and spoke and debris fly in and everyone seemed to stand shocked, seemingly at the hand of Mary Warren. Is Van Hove trying to imply that they actually were practicing witchcraft, and that real magical things happened as a result? Or is it not meant to be taken so literally? I really can't see how Betty floating in the air could imply anything else.