The Inheritance - Previews- Page 2

[Dolly80]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 10:33am

standingovation79 said: "So I was at the first preview of the show last night, and I have to say, (cast withholding, it's previews they'll get better) this show is just flat out over hyped. The writing is just not special enough to be anything but trite. There's no central conflict so scenes go on and on without engaging the audience. And quite frankly there is just no real character development here. Sorry not sorry, Matthew Lopez is not the next great american gay writer....that takes revealing hard truths. there are none here that haven't been said before and this feels more like and exploitation of them than an honest dramatization.

And yes, it is previews, but the cast seemed like avatars...not a single performance to get behind, except maybe Paul Hilton's.

The star of the show IF ANY is Stephen Daldry's elegant direction/staging. The only reason to see it in my opinion."

Are you kidding? Kyle Soller? Andrew Burnap? 
I hope you are seeing Part 2 to alter that opinion. 

Posted: 9/28/19 at 10:45am

Well the writing certainly wasn't helping them any, but they both feel wrong the parts, too young, and not making engaging enough choices to be memorable. I'm not certain this has piqued my interest enough for the second park. I'm dissapointed for sure. heard great things about this.

[VotePeron]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 10:56am

Dolly80 said: "standingovation79 said: "So I was at the first preview of the show last night, and I have to say, (cast withholding, it's previews they'll get better) this show is just flat out over hyped. The writing is just not special enough to be anything but trite. There's no central conflict so scenes go on and on without engaging the audience. And quite frankly there is just no real character development here. Sorry not sorry, Matthew Lopez is not the next great american gay writer....that takes revealing hard truths. there are none here that haven't been said before and this feels more like and exploitation of them than an honest dramatization.

And yes, it is previews, but the cast seemed like avatars...not a single performance to get behind, except maybe Paul Hilton's.

The star of the show IF ANY is Stephen Daldry's elegant direction/staging. The only reason to see it in my opinion."

Are you kidding? Kyle Soller? Andrew Burnap?
I hope you are seeing Part 2 to alter thatopinion."


Is this truly going to become a “The Inheritance is a perfect play and every other opinion will be attacked” thread? This is going to be exhausting.

The hype around this play is ridiculously large - it is bound to disappoint people. I’m sure it’s a wonderful show. But people are allowed to not like it. 

[theaterdude2]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 11:08am

For those of you who have already been to the show, a seating question. 

I like to sit very close for all shows. How close can I get without craning my neck or missing anything on stage for this specific production/set/staging? Since I'm getting ready to book my seat, any advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

[forgetmenotnyc]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 11:38am

Sit as close as you can get. Set is not high & even descend s in the latter part

[inception]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 12:56pm

Updated On: 9/28/19 at 12:56 PM

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 4:53pm

Someone on the other board said it didn’t get out last night until 11:15. The show’s website says the running time is three hours and fifteen minutes. Why would it get out at 11:15 if it started at 7:30? Did they start late or have long intermissions last night?

Getting worried because my train home is at 11:17 from Penn next week.

Updated On: 9/28/19 at 04:53 PM

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 4:59pm

Matt Rogers said: "Someone on the other board said it didn’t get out last night until 11:15. The show’s website says the running time is three hours and twenty minutes. Why would it get out at 11:15 if it started at 7:30? Did they start late or have long intermissions last night?

Getting worried because my train home is at 11:17 from Penn next week."

Well, it’s  pretty common for first previews to run long due to, as you mentioned, a late start plus an extended intermission. Most shows usually start about 5-8 minutes after the time listed on the ticket so, knowing that, you’re already almost at 11pm for the running time. Throw in a 20-minute intermission plus some pacing kinks that will get worked out over time and it’s not so surprising it ended at 11:15. I’m sure they’ll work on the pacing as they settle in but that’s not extremely surprising to me.

 

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 5:42pm

It got out late because both intermissions ran incredibly long. It's safe to say the audience was overwhelmingly men and the restroom lines were insanely long. I've seen a ton of theatre and "gay" plays but it was the first time I've ever seen ushers telling men to use the woman's room towards the end of intermission with the lines for both being long.

The audience also laughed a lot more than the audiences in London, but god bless the actors for never holding too long and just plowing through, often at the expense of other jokes. 

[BroadwayLuv2]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 6:43pm

Any word on where rush tickets seat locations are?

[quizking101]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 6:48pm

BroadwayLuv2 said: "Any word on where rush tickets seat locations are? "

I posted above - For Tonight, I got Orch P-24 (extreme right). Thought I also kindly requested an aisle if possible given my size, so I’m not sure how accurate mine is in the greater rush scheme 

[sing_dance_love]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 8:50pm

Currently at 1st intermission of tonight’s preview. WOW. The staging, direction, and company of actors so far are thrilling. Very moving with a great command of pace and rising tension. Has flown by so far. Can’t wait for the rest!

[quizking101]

Posted: 9/28/19 at 9:17pm

Just had a stop down because of a lighting dysfunction during the first ten minutes of the second act. They’re fixing it now, but not sure how long it will be.

UPDATE: After 10 minutes or so, Stephen Daldry came out and apologize and explained the lighting board had a glitch and crash and the off-kilter lighting cues were impacting the actors, so they reset the lighting board and the rest of the act went without a hitch

Updated On: 9/28/19 at 09:17 PM

[clever2]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 1:25am

Okay. Real talk.

I saw tonight’s preview, and I am not having the religious experience promised me. However, there are pieces of the play that are magnificent, and they usually come during the last quarter of each act. Much of the rest of the play, while occasionally funny and entertaining in a soap opera kind of way, feels like a hybrid of Jeffrey, Lips Together, Teeth Apart, Love! Valor! Compassion!, and so many other gay plays that haunted stages in the 90s. In short, it’s often surface level writing. I was shocked. Especially following the almost pornographically positive responses it received in London. But when those act end moments come, it’s as if I’ve been transported into a different play. A wonderful, original, heart-stopping work of art, shimmering with beauty and carrying the emotional weight of a sledgehammer. And then I simultaneously feel manipulated by those moments. This begs the question: why are these moments the minority of the play? And why is the rest of the play so ordinary, predictable, and meandering? Even, dare I say it, awful. Much of the acting is excellent, most especially Andrew Burnap. Samuel H. Levine, on the other hand, is historically weak. What is he doing on a professional stage?

Updated On: 11/23/19 at 01:25 AM

[Owen22]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 2:34am

clever2 said: "Okay. Real talk.

I saw tonight’s preview, and I am not having the religious experience promised me. However, there are pieces of the play that are magnificent, and they usually come during the last quarter of each act. Much of the rest of the play, while occasionally funny and entertaining in a soap opera kind of way, feels like a hybrid of Jeffrey, Lips Together, Teeth Apart, Love! Valor! Compassion!..."

I couldn't decide if the ending was a tribute or just plain rip-off of "Love! Valour Compassion!"

 

[quizking101]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 8:49am

I saw last nights’ preview and more or less captivated by the whole thing. There seems to be some pacing kinks that they need to work out (the crashing lighting board could have played a role in that). Also, it took me about 10 minutes to really get invested in the play. At the beginning, I felt like I was getting a “Queer Eye meets Broadway” vibe with some of the character’s mannerisms, and the set didn’t thrill me at first because I felt it made it look like gay sketch comedy.

However, as the play went on, it found its footing in the dialogue, made me laugh hysterically at times, and then twists the knife in with some hard truths and stellar monologues. By the end of the whole play, it felt like the night had flown by and I was a puddle of messy tears

Kyle Soller is giving one hell of a performance and I felt the humanity of his character throughout. His character felt lived-in and weary, but still willing to grow and learn about the past. Andrew Burnap also did a fine job as an inherently unlikable/unsympathetic character. However, this takes me to a point I’ve been ruminating on. I do have a bit of beef with the lack of body diversity in this play. When I read the play, as written, I saw Toby as a rather grotesque character and imagined him not looking like he just felt out of Men’s Health magazine. That took quite a bit of getting used to, though I eventually got on board. I also thought Paul Hilton was unilaterally excellent as Walter/Morgan and I’m surprised people aren’t talking about him more.

All in all, I am eager to see Part II when it opens and then see the whole thing again.

Also, this play has officially my new favorite line ever from a play.
Eric: “There’s c*m in my ass and now we’re engaged.”
Toby: “Where’s the Cole Porter song for THAT?”

Stage Door: There were only about five of us. When the barricades were up, most of the cast kind of breezes on out but Jonathan Burke and Kyle Harris stopped to sign. They broke down the barricades shortly thereafter (but mostly because security wanted to just go home). Me and another older man hung around for a little while longer (breaking the rule of “It’s over when the barricades go down” - I know, and save your tsk-tsks for someone who cares. Never have I done that before), and we got a few more, including Andrew Burnap, Kyle Soller, Darryl Daughtry, John Benjamin Hickey, and Arturo Luis Soria. I would expect much stage dooring for a while mainly because of the length of the play and the fact that the actors are probably getting extensive notes after.

[OhHiii]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 10:11am

quizking101 said: "When I read the play, as written, I saw Toby as a rather grotesque character and imagined him not looking like he just felt out of Men’s Health magazine. That took quite a bit of getting used to, though I eventually got on board. "

 

So interesting that Toby is the one you picture as a character you saw as someone not in shape. In my experience, particularly in the NYC gay scene, it’s exactly those who look like they dropped out of Men’s Health who are more likely to act like Toby and are indeed grotesque. Disclaimer: I do not think that EVERYONE who is in shape is automatically an a**hole, but I’d say there’s some theatrical underpinning for having such a classically handsome, in-shape guy as arguably the most internally tortured characters in the play. 

HOWEVER, that is not to say that there shouldn’t be body diversity. It was my biggest gripe in London too. Glad to see there’s more ethnic diversity in this cast, though.

[Wick3]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 10:38am

Owen22 said: "clever2 said: "Okay. Real talk.

I saw tonight’s preview, and I am not having the religious experience promised me. However, there are pieces of the play that are magnificent, and they usually come during the last quarter of each act. Much of the rest of the play, while occasionally funny and entertaining in a soap opera kind of way, feels like a hybrid of Jeffrey, Lips Together, Teeth Apart, Love! Valor! Compassion!..."

I couldn't decide if the ending was a tribute or just plain rip-off of "Love! Valour Compassion!""

I wonder whether younger folks who are unfamiliar with those 90s plays (or even the novel Howards End) will find this play as 'life-changing' whereas folks who are familiar with those stories would find this play as a 'rip-off'.

 

[Dancingthrulife2]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 11:52am

I’ve been under the impression that this is going to be the next Angels but some people here obviously disagree. I love Angels but unlike many I find Perestroika a lot more satisfying and enjoyable than Millennium Approaches for its philosophical ambles and the depth they make room for. For those who’ve seen The Inheritance, how much do you think it resembles Angels? Should I lower my expectation when I see it in two weeks?

[SpookyFish13]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 11:53am

Can anyone verify if they have any advanced availability on TDF? I’m planning on going to see it in November and figured TDF would be the way to go. Was planning on seeing The Inheritance 1/2, Slave Play, and The Sound Inside and have heard that they’ve all been on TDF quite regularly.

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 12:30pm

Dancingthrulife2 said: "I’ve been under the impression that this is going to be the next Angels but some people here obviously disagree. I love Angels but unlike many I find Perestroika a lot more satisfying and enjoyable than Millennium Approaches for its philosophical ambles and the depth they make room for. For those who’ve seen The Inheritance, how much do you think it resembles Angels? Should I lower my expectation when I see it in two weeks?"

They're similar in length. Lopez has said this is a response to Angels (and the other gay plays mentioned in this thread) and there are obvious parallels and allusions to Angels especially some speeches in Part 2 that are almost directly from the mouth of Belize, but The Inheritance is more a straight forward story with less philosophy and heady ideas. Part 1 essentially builds the world for Part 2 to come in and shatter what you think you know. 

Angels is essentially Louis's struggle to cope with what is happening to the gay community around him and The Inheritance is George trying to understand and respond to the world Louis lived through while both being thankful we aren't going through that now and making sure we never forget.

People compare to to Angels because on the surface they're both two part plays dealing with gay men in New York dealing with the AIDS crisis and they're obviously in conversation with each other, but Lopez isn't setting out to write Angels 2: Back in the Gay Bar.

But to basically answer your question, I love Part 2 more than Part 1, same as with Perestorika.

[JBC3]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 1:17pm

Dancingthrulife2 said: "I’ve been under the impression that this is going to be the next Angels but some people here obviously disagree. Should I lower my expectation when I see it in two weeks?"

A colleague made a distinction between the two that I found useful:

Angels is graduate school level writing and thinking.
The Inheritance is undergrad.

The former is just more sophisticated on all levels, bu The Inheritance is still enjoyable theatre.

[BJR]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 2:23pm

I have mixed feelings about it so far. Very interested to see Part 2, though, as the end suggests it could really get interesting.

Exquisitely directed, acted and designed. Some transcendent moments and had the audience moved and audibly sniffling.

There is some self-conscious writing in it, as well, though. Long sections where I really hear the playwright in the room, not the character. I especially disliked the extended gay culture debate at the start of Act 2 (I think?). It's a conversation I've certainly had with friends and it's relevant, but it's also shoved in and stops the action cold for 15 minutes. It's an Op-Ed, not drama. When the next scene starts, and the older character remarks about how impressed he was with the talk, I thought, "Oh look, the story started again. They've could've cut that whole scene and from that one remark, I would have gotten everything I needed for the story."

Also, though, I reluctantly felt like it's yet another upper middle class white boy gay play. There are actors of color, but they're all the small parts. The central characters are three very pretty white boys, and a couple older white men. And while the characters may be middle class or even poor sometimes, every scene takes place in wealthy spaces. And if someone lacks for money, there's always luck or a very wealthy person there to provide. It acknowledges class openly, but then produces yet another play of well-off pretty white boys.

I just felt like I've seen this play before, but this is just the more ambitious and deliberately elegant version of it.

This sounds harsher than I mean it. Very likely Part 2 will win me over, but these were my reservations on Part 1.

[Bwaydreamer3]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 5:10pm

BJR said: 

Also, though, I reluctantly felt like it's yet another upper middle class white boy gay play. There are actors of color, but they're all the small parts. The central characters are three very pretty white boys, and a couple older white men. And while the characters may be middle class or even poor sometimes, every scene takes place in wealthy spaces. And if someone lacks for money, there's always luck or a very wealthy person there to provide. It acknowledges class openly, but then produces yet another play of well-off pretty white boys.

I felt the same way regarding the actors of color in the show. I haven't seen it, yet. But while I was reading it I kept fliping to the bway website and looking at the cast. I agree that some characters cant be poc, but most can and I hate that they didn't take the opportunity to cast that way. What I think is really interesting is that Toby is based off of a certain point of Matthew Lopez's (the playwrights) life. I'm on the second reread of the play and so far I don't see anything specifying that Toby can't be a poc. Hopefully time will tell and with more productions, more colorful cast will come. 

 

[OffOnBwayHi]

Posted: 9/29/19 at 11:43pm

Saw part 1 on Saturday. Went in with ver low expectations and was pleasantly surprised.

The biggest surprise is that the stage is COMPLETELY BARE. Minimum props and costume changes too. But you somehow see EVERYTHING! Amazing actors and direction. Bravo.

The story is very accessible and my seem basic to most. I enjoyed it and am anticipating part 2, although I must say I didn't find it groundbreaking or anything. It was a wonderful night and I don't regret spending the 3 and half hours in the theater. That alone says a LOT about this show. Skillful writing.

I repeat, this show is completely bare. Super minimum. And I still was tied up in it from start to finish. Quite the feat!!! Not the most moving thing I've ever seen, but mark my words: it's cleaning up at the Tonys in June. It will at least win best play. That writing is no joke.