#51
Posted: 11/2/14 at 8:23pm
Oh boo hoo. Looks like I will be missing this one. Whatever will I do.
Poster Emeritus
The River Previews — Page 3
#52
Posted: 11/2/14 at 9:16pm
If YOU don't see it, how can you know whether it is worthwhile or not?
I, too, cannot understand how you are distancing yourself from Broadway, if all you do is whine about it.
I, too, cannot understand how you are distancing yourself from Broadway, if all you do is whine about it.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#53
Posted: 11/3/14 at 7:30am
There's a very long and insightful article in The New Yorker on Jez Butterworth and his body of work, including some very interesting discussions on THE RIVER.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/10/nothing-2
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/10/nothing-2
Updated On: 11/3/14 at 07:30 AM
#54
Posted: 11/3/14 at 10:41am
Why would someone spend this kind of money on an actor who is mediocre, at best - who, I will grant you, has a lot of personal charm, but that's what his appearances on talk shows are for - to charm, and that's free.
#55
Posted: 11/3/14 at 11:00am
Really? (and I think he's better than mediocre)
Because people will pay BIG bucks to see him. That's why. Because they believe in his ability to get butts in the seats.
Because people will pay BIG bucks to see him. That's why. Because they believe in his ability to get butts in the seats.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
Updated On: 11/4/14 at 11:00 AM
#56
Posted: 11/3/14 at 5:05pm
How true! So says The NYTimes, even if based only on 3 performances to date.
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/a-quiet-week-at-the-box-office-for-broadway/?_r=0
>>
Despite the distractions of the weekend, Hugh Jackman proved once again that he is one of Broadway’s biggest stars. His new play, “The River,” written by Jez Butterworth (“Jerusalem”), grossed a relatively mighty $348,102 for its first three previews last weekend, all of which sold out. The gross is ever more notable because the producers, in an unusual step to promote affordability, are selling 40 seats at every performance for $35 each and another 80 for $95; they are making up for those low prices partly by selling some other seats at premium price levels of $275.<<<
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/a-quiet-week-at-the-box-office-for-broadway/?_r=0
>>
Despite the distractions of the weekend, Hugh Jackman proved once again that he is one of Broadway’s biggest stars. His new play, “The River,” written by Jez Butterworth (“Jerusalem”), grossed a relatively mighty $348,102 for its first three previews last weekend, all of which sold out. The gross is ever more notable because the producers, in an unusual step to promote affordability, are selling 40 seats at every performance for $35 each and another 80 for $95; they are making up for those low prices partly by selling some other seats at premium price levels of $275.<<<
Updated On: 11/3/14 at 05:05 PM
#57
Posted: 11/3/14 at 6:07pm
Jez Butterworth shares more insights on The River and The Man in this interview ( Q&A format) --
http://www.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/1060781/qa-with-jez-butterworth-the-electric-thrill-of-diving-into
http://www.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/1060781/qa-with-jez-butterworth-the-electric-thrill-of-diving-into
#58
Posted: 11/3/14 at 7:49pm
Jo,
Have you made yourself the self-appointed promoter of this show, as did Pal Joey for On the Town, and Buffalo Bill for The Last Shiip?
If so, be advised that the show doesn't need any more promotion; nor does this empty, pretentious bore deserve any. It's doing an excellent enough job on its own in reeling in the public; it doesn't need you baiting the hook any further.
Have you made yourself the self-appointed promoter of this show, as did Pal Joey for On the Town, and Buffalo Bill for The Last Shiip?
If so, be advised that the show doesn't need any more promotion; nor does this empty, pretentious bore deserve any. It's doing an excellent enough job on its own in reeling in the public; it doesn't need you baiting the hook any further.
Updated On: 11/3/14 at 07:49 PM
#59
Posted: 11/3/14 at 7:55pm
The whole thing sounds fishy to me
Barnum was right - there is indeed a sucker born every minute.
Barnum was right - there is indeed a sucker born every minute.
Poster Emeritus
#60
Posted: 11/3/14 at 8:11pm
But yet you just can't stop posting about something you don't care about.
#61
Posted: 11/3/14 at 8:13pm
Anyone try to get the rush tickets for the week today? Did they sell all 160 rush tickets in the morning or did they have some left over during the day?
#62
Posted: 11/3/14 at 8:44pm
I'm wondering the same thing, AntV. Any insight would be really helpful!
#63
Posted: 11/4/14 at 1:00am
Hugh Jackman - PERFECT.
Cush Jumbo - WOW.
Laura Donnelly - good.
sound design - spot on.
The play - What? The first two scenes, great. After that... Dull, over written, plodding and not the faintest idea what the author was trying to say.
It is well directed. Can't imagine a bad seat. There is a scene where Jackman stands at a table preparing a meal and I was pleasantly surprised at how carefully it was directed to have him work on every side of the table equally, yet without making it seem mechanical and an obvious choice.
Cush Jumbo - WOW.
Laura Donnelly - good.
sound design - spot on.
The play - What? The first two scenes, great. After that... Dull, over written, plodding and not the faintest idea what the author was trying to say.
It is well directed. Can't imagine a bad seat. There is a scene where Jackman stands at a table preparing a meal and I was pleasantly surprised at how carefully it was directed to have him work on every side of the table equally, yet without making it seem mechanical and an obvious choice.
#64
Posted: 11/4/14 at 1:13am
We agreed about 10 years ago never to use the phrase "spot on" on this site.
Twitter @NamoInExile
Instagram none
#65
Posted: 11/4/14 at 8:14am
I got there 10:10am on Monday and there was quite a line so I didn't think I'd get a ticket. The line kept moving so I stayed and even got a Sat. ticket by the time I got up to the window at 11:15am. Apparently the weekdays sold out first. If you get there by 11, you should still have a chance but any later, I wouldn't count on it too much.
#67
What does "over written" mean?
Posted: 11/4/14 at 10:19am
What does "over written" mean?
CHURCH DOOR TOUCAN GAY MARKETING PUPPIES MUSICAL THEATER STAPLES PERIOD OIL BITCHY SNARK HOLES
#68
Posted: 11/4/14 at 10:48am
I asked for 2 seats together and was told they were available. In my excitement i didn't ask for the exact seat locations. Doh! They only give you a paper that states your name and the number of tickets you requested. You have to pick them up the day of at will call 1 hour before and you must claim them with the id u showed at time of purchase. I figured the seat #'s would be on the paper they gave me but only realized they weren't after i had left. :/
Updated On: 11/4/14 at 10:48 AM
#69
Posted: 11/4/14 at 11:31am
Oh, right I forgot that they don't immediately give you the tickets. I'm sure you're seats are fine, though because that's a good theatre.
#70
Posted: 11/4/14 at 11:47am
In this sense, I use "over written" to mean that the script is very wordy, with exceedingly and unnecessarily elaborate language, more than the who and scene requires. The pay off is far less than the words would lead you to expect.
#71
Posted: 11/4/14 at 1:54pm
The sound design was SPOT ON in the London production as well.
"After that... Dull, over written, plodding and not the faintest idea what the author was trying to say."
Yes, yes, yes and yes!
"After that... Dull, over written, plodding and not the faintest idea what the author was trying to say."
Yes, yes, yes and yes!
#72
Posted: 11/4/14 at 4:42pm
Here so the thing.
MILD SPOILERS, KIDS.
The premise is interesting. The execution was a chore to experience. If/Then does a far more enjoyable job of a dual narrative.
I understand that necessities most action being experienced twice, slightly differently, but geez... Most of the action affecting the story takes place OFF stage and we experience it as a painfully basic written monologue that reads as a combination of narrative and descriptive essay on a grade level standardized test. "You said --------. I said -------. The water was very -----, ------ and ------." Then you have listen to a different version of the same thing from the OTHER character,
What was up with the red dress? The tension about the red dress, earrings and drawing... Then we see a character in a red dress and earrings being drawn... But then all of a sudden, this is a DIFFERENT dress earrings and drawings, because this character saw them too?!? Yet we never find out the truth about them...
That final scene... Okay. This plot, as shown, could have proved interesting if he was being tactical and manipulative, but then all of a sudden it seems as though he is genuine? Clearly something more deep is going on here, but what? It is never explained. The question is left open, but with a fizzle. An ambiguous ending worked wonders in a DOUBT, spawning debate and discussion and thought among the audience trying to discuss what the true course of events were. Here, it just fizzled and you say "I don't get it, not do I want to think hard enough to figure it out." Is it a character study? Absolutely. But to what point? The author plants a tree that bears no fruit.
MILD SPOILERS, KIDS.
The premise is interesting. The execution was a chore to experience. If/Then does a far more enjoyable job of a dual narrative.
I understand that necessities most action being experienced twice, slightly differently, but geez... Most of the action affecting the story takes place OFF stage and we experience it as a painfully basic written monologue that reads as a combination of narrative and descriptive essay on a grade level standardized test. "You said --------. I said -------. The water was very -----, ------ and ------." Then you have listen to a different version of the same thing from the OTHER character,
What was up with the red dress? The tension about the red dress, earrings and drawing... Then we see a character in a red dress and earrings being drawn... But then all of a sudden, this is a DIFFERENT dress earrings and drawings, because this character saw them too?!? Yet we never find out the truth about them...
That final scene... Okay. This plot, as shown, could have proved interesting if he was being tactical and manipulative, but then all of a sudden it seems as though he is genuine? Clearly something more deep is going on here, but what? It is never explained. The question is left open, but with a fizzle. An ambiguous ending worked wonders in a DOUBT, spawning debate and discussion and thought among the audience trying to discuss what the true course of events were. Here, it just fizzled and you say "I don't get it, not do I want to think hard enough to figure it out." Is it a character study? Absolutely. But to what point? The author plants a tree that bears no fruit.
#74
Posted: 11/5/14 at 8:42am
A friend did same-day rush last Saturday. She arrived at 8:45 a.m. and got two matinee rush tickets.
#75
Posted: 11/5/14 at 10:15am
Thank you Mamaleh -- I'm considering trying this weekend and this helps.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95