Thomas Kail to direct Michelle Williams, Tom Sturridge, and Bryan D'Arcy James in ANNA CHRISTIE- Page 3

[pathman2]

Posted: 11/27/25 at 10:17am

WldKingdomHM said: "Really I found her to be amazing along with Emma Stone, but she was stunning in Blackbird and deserved that Tony Award"

Tony Award for Blackbird? Nomination yes, win no (went to Jessica Lange). For me, Michelle Williams in Cabaret lacked the fun and charisma behind what makes Sally irresistible to those around her. Emma Stone nailed it though, she was an amazing Sally.

[n2nbaby]

Posted: 11/27/25 at 10:27am

Williams is the actress of our generation as far as I’m concerned, and I’m sorry to hear this is awful. I was really looking forward to it.

[two ladies tickets]

Posted: 11/27/25 at 2:49pm

The first preview was a very odd experience to be sure. The show felt very under rehearsed, almost like we were watching an early run through. And as others have stated; when the glass bottles started falling people thought perhaps it was a metaphor, but then when they had to stop, everyone realized that it wasn't supposed to happen. I'm not sure why the people on the payroll whose job it is to make sure things like that don't happen let that happen,  but as a rule you never put real glass on stage anywhere for that exact reason. My partner and I were fascinated by the fact that no one in the tech rehearsal process or dress rehearsal process ever thought that maybe they should do something about it. I would hate to think that last night was the first time they had the full set in place, but perhaps that was the case.
I went specifically for Brian D'arcy James, who was good but seemed a bit miscast. I wonder if he was a replacement for someone else? 

[Melissa25]

Posted: 12/2/25 at 1:14pm

Has this improved since the first preview? Any other reports?

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/2/25 at 1:47pm

The text is very dated, it's not a great play, Thomas shouldn't direct his wife in literally anything, and the embarrassing accents were.....a choice. Everyone involved is better than this, so it was a puzzling evening. Great space as always.

[quizking101]

Posted: 12/2/25 at 1:56pm

I thought I posted mine from Sunday. Whoops.

I actually enjoyed it, despite the initial reviews giving me some second thoughts. It’s not mind-blowing, must-see fantastic, but it does function as a showcase for four actors to do what they do best and take a crack at a seldom-done O’Neill play, albeit one that could have benefited from adaptation and revision (it’s public domain) as opposed to a straight revival.

Williams does still look remarkably young for being 45. However, unless you missed the math in the beginning that reveals Anna is only 20, even Williams’ youthful appearance only knocks off about 10-12 years, not 25. If it were revised, though, I can’t imagine that increasing Anna’s age would be dramaturgically feasible since women in the 1920s over a certain age were expected to be married and/or were a spinster, and the fact that she’s a sex worker would make her an “old whore”. 

Sturridge has always played damaged, somewhat brutish rogues well and so I could buy him as a longshoreman in his prime (though he is 39). D’Arcy James was, reliably, excellent - he can be gruff, tender, and conflicted whenever he needs to be. The Swedish accent does muddle some of his lines, but usually you can use context to piece together what was said.

I was a bit bummed by the lack of Mare Winningham, but what I did get of her was pitch perfect. She has really cornered the “folksy/Americana” market in theatre the last few years and I look forward to her on stage at any time and the first act (which she was in mostly), she made a meal out of her interplay with Michele and Brian.

[Kad]

Posted: 12/2/25 at 2:59pm

Was the glass bottle thing resolved?

Frankly, it's kind of astonishing that such a choice would have made it to any public performance without having been totally secured and made safe. It's hard to believe anyone signing off on something so obviously risky. 

[quizking101]

Posted: 12/2/25 at 3:11pm

Not a glass bottle in sight aside from the ones used by the actors

[east side story]

Posted: 12/2/25 at 7:13pm

Woof. Looks like I’ve got two tickets available.

[MadsonMelo]

Posted: 12/4/25 at 12:39pm

When is opening night?

[pathman2]

Posted: 12/5/25 at 9:37am

Late start last night (audience had to hang out in the lobby until about 7:45) so maybe they're still changing things up. Preshow with the actors assembling the barroom set while we were taking our seats. The glass bottles are caged along the back of the space (kinda looks like the Reddit pic but with a metal fence added, did they ever actually remove the bottles?). The first half was just okay for me, but I thought the second half was excellent with the exception of:

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

the silly busy work being inflicted on the actors. Williams, James, and Sturridge were all doing fantastic work in Act 3 (the marriage proposal/Anna's reveal) and midway through the supporting male actors enter and start moving the platforms/flooring around. And then James and Sturridge take their exits by doing trust falls onto those guys. WTF?!

 

Updated On: 12/5/25 at 09:37 AM

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/5/25 at 11:56am

The glass bottles are now "fenced in" at the back wall of the set.  There seemed to be issues with the lighting cues last night, but when the lighting hit in just the right way, it created a really effective mise en scene with the bottles.

Overall, I thought this was very uneven.  Agree that the first two acts are slogs.  Act Three was by far the best of the four.  The direction is unnecessarily distracting, as mentioned above.  Kail seemed to be so focused on the flourishes surrounding the action that he ultimately neglected the meat of the play.

I really liked Tom Sturridge, although everyone around me was complaining they couldn't understand his accent.  Michelle Williams was a disappointment, I'm sad to say. Come to think of it, I've yet to be blown away by any of her stage performances to date.  I guess my favorite performance of hers was CABARET, but even then I had qualms. 

The two best performances came from Brian D'Arcy James and Mare Winningham (who has nothing to do after the first act, sadly).  D'Arcy James was transcendent, honestly.  He delivered moments that were worth the price of admission alone.  If only the rest of the proceedings were at his level. 

Updated On: 12/5/25 at 11:56 AM

[RUkiddingme]

Posted: 12/9/25 at 11:07pm

If anyone is still working on their WORST OF 2025 list make sure you save a spot or 2 for this one!

To call it a misfire would be doing a disservice to the term.

[Voter]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 12:42am

Can't even remember the last time I left a show at intermission. And I was from from the only one. To me, Kail's direction of Hamilton holds the show together. But between this and the worst production of Sweeney Todd I've ever sat through, I'm starting to think he's a hack. 

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 12:56am

I’m so annoyed I have tickets to this lolllll

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 1:10am

I'll be the kind of dissenter in this to say that I sorta enjoyed it.  I had no knowledge of the play beforehand and Michelle Williams's age didn't really bother me (though I'm sure it would hit differently with an actual 20 year old).  And while I found the first two acts to drag a bit (I'll admit I also had some trouble with the accents), I thought the third and fourth acts brought out some really interesting moments (minus the moving of platforms that others have mentioned).  It's not necessarily a show I've thought about all that much since I saw it, but I'm kind of glad I did see it.  I would still be curious to have seen how Mike Faist would've fared in the role, since he seems to be a very different kind of actor than Tom Sturridge, who I thought was very well cast.

[CoffeeBreak]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 1:24am

Updated On: 12/14/25 at 01:24 AM

[sing_dance_love]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 10:18am

I also saw this on the 4th when there was that super long delay to open the house. Overall, I agree with most that this was underwhelming at best, but I enjoyed elements of it. I actually was more or less interested during the first Act(s), rather than the latter half and it seemed to end with kind with a whimper. I though Brian was great, enjoyed Michelle but found the part not really much to write home about, and kind of actively disliked Sturridge in a performance I found pretty one note. I didn't have any issues understanding the accents, but I can't say they added much as far as atmosphere or authenticity. The staging, while not distractingly busy for me, didn't add much and I'm so curious what this original glass bottle situation was and what the idea was behind it. In the end, I was just left with "why?" Why did this work appeal to this team? What did they want to say with it? Why this play, now? Why this role for Michelle? Why did I trek down here on this cold ass night? etc. Oh well! In the end, still glad I saw it (kind of). 

[RUkiddingme]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 10:41am

Voter said: "Can't even remember the last time I left a show at intermission. And I was from from the only one. To me, Kail's direction of Hamiltonholds the show together. But between this and the worst production of Sweeney Todd I've ever sat through, I'm starting to think he's a hack."

When Kail stays out of the way and trusts the material - it's good.

When he wants to be the star - he's really bad!

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 11:24am

I saw a towering performance of this play with Liv Ulman in my youth (mid-20s) in DC, opposite a fine John Lithgow (and Mary McCarty) and I remember then believing the talky, creaky play inaccessible for modern audiences. Along came a B'way revival with Natasha Richardson that people adored, and proved me 100% wrong. But this is a curiosity, and not only because Williams is on the other side of 40. It seems to me that it needs a radical new frame - maybe not as stylized as Van Hove or Lloyd but with a fresh POV - and this looks like a workmanlike college production. 

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 11:26am

Auggie27 said: "I saw a towering performance of this play with Liv Ulman in my youth (mid-20s) in DC, opposite a fine John Lithgow (and Mary McCarty) and I remember then believing the talky, creaky play inaccessible for modern audiences. Along came a B'way revival with Natasha Richardson that people adored, and proved me 100% wrong. But this is a curiosity, and not only because Williams ison the other side of 40. It seems to me that it needs a radical new frame- maybe not as stylized as Van Hove or Lloydbut with a fresh POV - and this looks like a workmanlike college production."

 

I'm so envious!!

[east side story]

Posted: 12/11/25 at 6:49pm

I am looking forward to these reviews. I have two tickets that I (may) no longer need for next week.

[lastmidnights]

Posted: 12/13/25 at 11:52pm

I'm sad to report I thought this was actually worse than everyone has reported so far. I will be far pickier about what Tommy Kail shows I go to in the future, because this was terrible. My thoughts are a little all over the place because I was so, so disappointed by this. 

I'll start with the positive. I want to praise Brian D'Arcy James and Tom Sturridge, who give really great performances despite being in a very bad production. I actually enjoyed the moving of the platforms, but only to have a reprieve from this snoozer of a production (and to hear the beautiful score by Nicholas Britell!).

Now, the negative. Michelle Williams, sadly, is giving the worst performance I've ever seen her in, and it breaks my heart to say. Before this week, I had never been disappointed or even underwhelmed by her work. Every choice she made was bizarre, and all around, this felt amateurish for someone of her talents.

There was really no reason to put this show on, and frankly, I think without a really innovative, visionary director, it's completely outdated. Tommy Kail is not an innovative director, as far as the work I've seen of his, save for Hamilton. Maybe I'm too modern for O'Neal, but something about hearing a man call a woman a slut and then seeing her desperately pine after him is off-putting, especially when the direction gives you ZERO insight into these characters. I couldn't even tell you what Anna's motivations were. Also, it definitely didn't help that Williams and Sturridge have no chemistry (Sturridge tries his best).

The idea that they originally cast Faist in this show just further confirms for me that Kail's only motivation was to do an early O'Neill play with a leading part for his wife (is there another early O'Neill with a female lead?). He obviously did not have a unique perspective on this show, feel moved by it, want to be innovative, etc. There's no world where Faist would play this role in any way similar to Sturridge.

It's truly an achievement to have this level of talent in a production and to end up with something as boring as this, so congratulations, Tommy Kail. The person next to me fell asleep at points in both acts. By my count, at least 20 people left at intermission at my show, and I only counted the section directly across from us. 

[Fordham2015]

Posted: 12/14/25 at 5:08pm

Critic's Pick from Laura Collins-Hughes, who calls the production "luminous and mesmerizing" and says Williams "smartly and credibly makes Anna a code-switcher" (gift link)

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/14/theater/anna-christie-review-michelle-williams-on-the-waterfront.html

[starlightexpress2]

Posted: 12/14/25 at 5:20pm

Any chance they'll close this thing early? I'm seeing that seats are well sold despite the terrible buzz