"Virginia Woolf" review too!

[Lamc16]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 11:45am

I went to the first preview the other night as well. I even noticed Albee (it was his birthday that night) sitting alone in one of the boxes, feet up on a chair. I noticed that he sort of sat back and examined what was going on on the stage, and he would then disappear during the two intermissions--to speak to the cast, I have no doubt. First of all, the audience was amazing. We were all right there with George and Martha and we all often exploded into uproarious laughter. Seeing a show as great as this is only heightened by seeing it with a great audience like the other night. Here are my overall thoughts...

Kathleen and Bill do indeed have an amazing, palpable chemistry on stage. They work off of each other sooo well. Bill Irwin is wonderful as George. He starts out small and doesn't blow his top all at once. Instead, it is a small build that is acted with expert aplomb. I really enjoyed watching him interact with everyone onstage, and he's also great in his scenes with David Harbor.
David and Mirielle were also fine. Although, I think that the Boston critics were too quick to praise Mirielle's performance over Kathleen's because there were times when I couldn't hear her (Mirielle) that well. However, she did do a great job making the part her own and got many big laughs. David was also very good at playing a kind of jerk who easily and willingly gets seduced by Martha in what was a jolting and almost shocking scene. Perhaps it seemed this way to me because this pivotal scene was not used in the film.
On to Kathleen... what can I say? She is absolutely devine. While re-reading the play the other day before I saw the performance, I could very much hear Kathleen in my head--how I thought she would sound. She surprised me right from the very beginning, however, because she made the part something beyond what I expected of her. It is really a joy to watch her. Although she was getting over what seemed to be a cold, her voice was in full force, her energy was up the entire performance, and she really listened to the other characters and improvised a few times which was great. Her monologue in the opening of the third act was truly incredible. It was so full of emotion and sadness and loss. You know that she truly does love George. By the curtain call, everyone (especially Kathleen) seemed drained.
The only problem I had was that they cut the end of the second act, after Martha and Nick have gone upstairs together and Honey stumbles in and tells George about her dream. This scene, to me, anyway, is vital because in it George realizes that Honey did not suffer an hysterical pregnancy, but forced herself to abort. I suppose they felt they had to cut because the critics said that the second act was a bit too long. Oh well. Other than that, the show was fantastic and should not be missed. I really do hope that all four of them get TONY noms.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 11:53am

Sounds wonderful. Seeing it in three weeks and cannot wait. Pretty daring decision not to use body mics, wouldn't you say?

[Matt_G]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 11:55am

MEF, it wasn't daring at all since these actors can whisper and be heard in the back of the house.

I saw Albee there also and got to meet him after the show. That was one of the thrills of my life. !!!

[Lamc16]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 11:59am

Absolutely. I was in the balcony and could hear Kathleen and Bill even when they were whispering. I am so sick of seeing actors w/ mic's. I knew these guys wouldn't let me down. Kathleen would never hear of wearing a microphone.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 12:00pm

I'm getting more and more excited with every post.

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 12:13pm

Saw the second show Sunday afternoon, and though I wanted to Love it, I merely ended up pleased with it. True, the begining of the show demonstrates real chemistry between turner and Irwin, though it seemed to lack drive. I felt the play really picked up once Honey and martha went to tour the house, allowing George and Nick to have their first confrontation. The two person scenes, I felt, were fabulous. Irwin took the role of George and made it his own, added very specific movements and an affected voice that worked well most of the times (sounded put-on at other times). Turner was fine. Played the role exactly as I expected, though I tend to agree that she died a bit in "The Exorcism." Yet her monologue ("tears in our glasses") was exquisite. My main holdup with the show came with the overall direction. While filled with genius moments, such as when martha delivers the "georges book" monologue accompanied with the swanky jazz music, I also felt some of the shows most powerful moments were ruined by staging. When Geroge finally reveals the news of "the little bugger" the staging has him sitting on the corner of the couch while martha gets up and moves downstage. This is George's moment. At this point, he has taken over the power. He can't be feebly sitting like a wounded dog! And Irwin seemed to throw away what is easily my personal favorite line of the show: "I ate it." He casually tossed it off, which I realize is a complete choice. But this is the climax of the evening. I would rather hear an audience gasp than laugh. I realize this production was praised for finding the comedy in the script more than other previous productions. But when it was time for the big drama, I just felt that irwin and turner didn't (now I'll get into actor language) Go There. They missed a golden opportunity to tie this show together, making an audience weep through the laughter. Instead, for me, the curtain came down with a simple chuckle. Good production, though I just wanted MORE.

[Lamc16]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 12:19pm

I completely agree with you on the "I ate it" line. Sorry to say, but no one can deliver that line better than Burton. I also missed Martha's line "You also used to drink bergin." I'm not sure if she forgot to say it or if they threw it out altogether.

[TVBoy]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 1:14pm

Wow, all these BWW people at the same show. I was there too. I wish I had known so many of "us" would be there. :)

[Lamc16]

Posted: 3/14/05 at 2:32pm

maybe next time TVboy. i will definitely be seeing this show again. :)

[williamsburg]

Posted: 3/15/05 at 10:48am

Oh, I didn't realize they'd cut that scene with Honey and George in this production! What a shame. I think that scene is so vital ... it elevates Honey's character to a more profound place(and you see the pain behind her behavior that evening). It's also the only real time that George and Honey interact directly. I have tickets for the show in a few weeks, but heard that Mirielle was excellent, though I heard she's very Sandy Dennis in her choices (not a bad thing, but it's hard to match Dennis' performance). Have heard equally great things about Irwin.

[Lamc16]

Posted: 3/15/05 at 12:47pm

Yeah... i was upset by that. especially since Albee was making a big to-do about how they were going to do the "full" uncut version of the play. i suppose it wasn't so much Albee's decision as it was anthony page's. enos could not be further from sandy dennis in her performance, however. very dissimilar.

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 12:45am

I own the 2004 revised script and albee cut the george/honey scene himself. The play was performed exactly as the 2004 version is printed. No changes (other than the fact that irwin does not let out any yell/howl when he throws the book at the chimes--something i was disappointed in)

[Matt_G]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 12:46am

There is a note in the playbill also saying that is the version of the play that is being performed.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 1:47am

VIRGINIA WOOLF was entertaining and very well-acted, but disappointing. I haven't had a chance to see this play on stage before. I'm a huge fan of the film and the script which I've read a few times over the years, but this production ultimately simply didn't have the same impact for me.

The actors playing Nick and Honey were wonderful, especially Honey (Mirieille Enos who was very different from Sandy Dennis in the movie -- less of a neurotic nightmare -- but found her own way into the character and was terrific).

There's an essential tension, though that's missing between George and Martha, though, I thought. I ultimately just didn't buy Kathleen Turner and Bill Irwin as a couple, though individually their performances were fascinating.

Turner is exactly what I expected -- big, blousy, foul-mouthed and larger-than-life. She's wonderful, mostly, but she isn't as devastated in the final scenes as she needs to be -- which hurts the play. George and Martha have been playing "games" all night, but in the final scenes George crosses a line where the games are no longer "games" -- they're very real and Martha needs to feel the slap of reality hit her in the face. I didn't get that from Turner - she reacted as if it was just another game. Her lack of emotional investment undermined everything that had happened the previous three hours and hurt the overall impact of the play. I should have been wiped out and destroyed by the end ..... I wasn't.

Irwin is an interesting choice as George -- he does "emasculated" well and finds humor in interesting places -- but there's something too antic and playful in his demeanor. For this play to really work, George and Martha MUST be equal adversaries -- though Martha seemingly has the more dominant personality type, George, even with his more subtle demeanor, has to reveal himself as an equally formidable presence. Irwin is a bit squirrelly, too antsy in his physicality (as befits a mime) and a bit too nonconfrontational generally -- I just didn't buy him as an equal match for Martha in these games, didn't buy him as a willing participant for decades in their psychological manipulations of themselves and others and, frankly as someone who would be in a marriage with Kathleen Turner's Martha. I think she'd have swallowed him whole, decades before.

Despite that, the show still works for the most part -- a B or B+ if I were grading. Anthony Page the director blocked it well, more or less, but seemed incapable of sustaining the tension at the level it needed to be throughout. Lots of dead spots with nothing happening visually to emphasize text or subtext. Some marvelous acting moments here and there, but overall it didn't add up to the powerful, cathartic evening I was anticipating. Through three hours, my pulse never quickened and, oddly, I found myself not really caring about any of these people on the stage. In fact, as I departed, I found that the experience seemed somewhat forgettable, all in all.

Incidentally, I ran into an old friend, Mark Bennett, at the show. He's the production's sound designer. Make no mistake that there is miking of the show (no body-mikes, though). Mark's way too talented for it to be obvious to you, but there most certainly IS professionally-designed sound enhancement throughout.

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 1:53am

Great review. Very much like my feelings, stated above. It's too bad. Itll be interesting to see how Brantley treats this one.

[williamsburg]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 1:36pm

Very insightful, smart review from Margo. I'm going earlier than anticipated (this week) thanks to free tix. Haven't read the updated Albee version of the play so didn't realize that he'd cut the George/Honey scene and don't know other changes made either so very curious. I've heard about the weak Act III though and surprised that Page isn't pushing Turner more to take a risk with Martha's collapse and very real agony.




Updated On: 3/16/05 at 01:36 PM

[Matt_G]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 1:38pm

Interesting take on the show. I love how people can see such different things in the same show.

[magruder]

Posted: 3/16/05 at 2:03pm

Completely vapid question here from me, but how did the theatre look? Seemed they were doing some work on the interior for several weeks before the show loaded in...

[Lamc16]

Posted: 3/17/05 at 2:09pm

I don't know if they were doing work on the interior--I assume they were since the theatre had not housed a show in some time--but it looked fine inside. Probably some of the most uncomfortable seats on broadway, but other than that.... The one real problem I have w/ the theatre itself is the exterior. It's so plain and blah. I was hoping that they would the title and the actors names up in lights.