The Crucible Previews — Page 7

Just saw this tonight and I enjoyed it very much. I don't agree with everything, but I was utterly engrossed through the whole show and left with a lot to think about. This very much seems like experimental theatre. I love that. Being a limited engagement and some big names, they don't have to worry about selling tickets so much (I believe it's already selling quite well) and can afford to try new things.

I can see the symbolic references of the set, don't know if it's enough to base the whole show off it, but it's fun to try to guess where the reasoning came from. I think the institution represents the prison of your thoughts and how they can trap you from seeing the truth. The chalkboard seemed to be a way for the characters to transcend reality and escape into their minds. The school setting seems to represent the place where children have the most power. My biggest qualm is probably parts of the staging, some moves seemed unnecessary and cluttered, especially maneuvering around the desks in the opening scene. Also the size of the playing space proved challenging, as previously stated. I was Orchestra L and had trouble hearing in a couple of the more intimate moments when characters were facing SL. The space just seemed to eat their sound.

Someone also mentioned the curtain call and not knowing when the play was over. I thought that was amazing. You get so sucked into this world that when they line up for the curtain call it takes you a bit to shake off what just happened and return to the real world. The lack of an abrupt ending allows you to really process. It's sort of hard to explain, but it was a chilling moment.

I was very impressed by the cast as a whole. Ben Winshaw was the strong point to me, utterly compelling and passionate. I couldn't take my eyes off him. I thought Saiorse did well with what she was given, but forgot how little Abigail actually does in the play. The presence of her name is very much felt throughout the show, but the two scenes she's actually in leave her character quite one dimensional. I think she would have been better suited to play Mary, a much more intriguing role that develops and arcs. It could have shown her off better. Sophie was a standout as well, although I feel her state of mind in the final scene was a bit undecided. And of course Norton as Giles just breaks your heart. Some of the other cast members were stronger than others, but all seemed to gel well as an ensemble. I always thought this play could have done with a few less characters.

The effects I felt were very effective, no pun intended. I realize that they are not literally happening, but the way the play is done seems to blur the lines between what's really happening and what's in your heads anyways, so it didn't bother me. Seemed to be parallel to the fine line between truth and lies within the play.

Very much worth seeing and I'm interested to see how it will progress and adapt during previews. I don't know if I've seen something so risky from an artistic sense on Broadway in a long time.

Updated On: 3/5/16 at 02:26 AM

I enjoyed this more than View which I found to be too one note. This was more Shakespeare than Greek Tragedy- more challenging and with more dramatic tension. Even at 3 hours it didn't seem to drag. I also would take Whishaw's performance over Strong 's (speaking of one note). Saoirse was good and gorgeous in her part. Sophie was outstanding and is the heart and soul of the piece. This is really an ensemble piece and almost everybody held up their end. The multi-ethnic casting was interesting- sometimes appropriate, sometimes not. The effects were fewer than I expected from others accounts and livened things up when it could have started to drag. There seemed to be quite a few youngsters in the balcony who I am sure would never go near Miller if not for this production (and Ms Ronan's presence). Kudos to Ivo Van Hove and crew for breathing new life into this hoary old classic.

Updated On: 3/6/16 at 10:10 AM

Where have the rush and lotto seats been? How is the view?

I won one lottery ticket for Tuesday, March 8th. However when I entered the code
and chose 1 seat, Ticketmaster would not let me buy one seat. There were 22 open seats
but they were only in pairs. I tried to call but the phone lines close at 600pm.
Even though the email says I have until 1159pm to buy my ticket, it is impossible.
Extremely frustrated.

Ticketmaster does that in general unfortunately. Not just for this particular production. It could be any show.

Are there any photos of this production yet? Aside from the main publicity/cover art of Ronan?

To pit traditionalist against deconstructionist dramaturgy is pointless. There's no need to choose between them. Both approaches have their benefits and their challenges. If a classic play is worth staging then it can be well or poorly staged by observing conventions. And it can also be well or poorly staged by breaking them down.

I watched the movie version last night and was surprised how much it deviated from the text I read in high school. I actually thought it was dramatically stronger as a result.

I'm seeing this production next week, but I have seen productions where there is a suggestion of witchcraft (images or whatever) to give the audience a sense of being taken in by the hysteria just like the girls and some of their parents. It is an interesting idea but it does seem to undercut the idea that a false confession damned a person as much as any other lie - Proctor's whole reason for refusing to sign the paper for Danforth. Of course, most of the parents were motivated by a desire to acquire (ooh, it rhymes) the land forfeited when the witches were executed.

I saw tonight's performance and, in my view, it was pretty uneven.

The weaknesses

Ronan was mediocre at best in a crucial role. Okonedo, despite some nice moments, was sometimes weirdly mannered -- overacting in, perhaps, a failed attempt to portray her character's insecurity about her supposedly plain looks. Whishaw, who I really liked in The Hour, sometimes came across as a bit too petulant and, in Act IV, far too weepy. In fact, throughout Act IV in general, more stoicism would have gone a long way -- it became quite soggy and drawn-out for my tastes. Also, in every Act (as far as I can recall), the scoring was, at times, overwrought and even hokey.

The strengths

Most of the rest of the cast was good, with Norton and Hinds especially so. In fact, I thought Hinds was just about perfect for his role as a judge who mixes genuine religious belief with pompous self-interest.

Acts I and II were solid and Act III was terrific.

Slight Spoilers

Last, in regard to a couple of other points mentioned in earlier posts: The writing on the chalk board is something like "The Promises of Dutiful Children" or words to that effect. It's a list of things the kids should do: honor god, your king, your parents, etc. And it gets obliterated as the kids rebel in their grey, prison-like classroom.

As to the floating girl -- although I think I understand possible reasons why it does not need to suggest literal witchcraft, I still think it's a bad idea. I saw the show with someone from another country who was unfamiliar with both the play and US history. Because of the seemingly supernatural scene, that perfectly intelligent person thought that, within the world of the play, somebody must really be an emissary of the devil and thus found the storytelling more confusing than it (arguably) should have been.

Updated On: 3/12/16 at 02:39 AM

Does anyone have a run time on this yet? I know it'll change, but a roundabout number would be helpful

bwayphreak234 said: "^ It was three hours when I was there last Saturday.

"

Ooooof that's a bit long. Thank you!