WOLF HALL Reviews

[LimelightMike]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 12:32am

Post 'em here, kids!

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 1:41am

One of the most thrilling days of theatre I have had since the original NYC production of Angels  In America, kudos to all involved. 

[MaddieBB12]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 11:00am

Just wondering but: how do reviews/opening nights word for shows with two parts or like Twelfth Night/Richard III? 

[eperkins]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 12:03pm

They're doing both parts today. A matinee and then an early evening.

Do reviewers ever go to opening night anymore?

[macnyc]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 12:51pm

I'm at the theater now, doing a marathon today. I didn't realize it's opening night! I'm very excited. My TDF seats are in a box. I was disappointed at first, but the view seems pretty close. 

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 1:04pm

they still do rush even for opening night?

[Andrew777]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 1:41pm

I'll be seeing this next month. Should be great!

[eperkins]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 2:02pm

It is great (IMHO). I saw Part One last night, and will see Part Two tomorrow night. I'm certain the reviews will be excellent.

[macnyc]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 4:31pm

Wow, Part 1 was amazing. I can't wait for Part 2! By the way, the woman sitting next to me told me she rushed this morning. 

 

The he box office personnel told me that yes, they are still selling rush, if available, for $39 per ticket, Part 1 or Part 3, and you can buy two tickets. 

Updated On: 4/9/15 at 04:31 PM

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 10:31pm

"I'm certain the reviews will be excellent."

Not all of them are...

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 10:45pm

wow the reviews are pretty dull actually

[rob136]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 11:10pm

I saw Part I the evening before opening, and if it was a Saturday and Hedwig had a showing at 10pm, I'd have walked out at intermission and ran to get a ticket to something I would have enjoyed more. I found it to be a dull show that's unnecessarily long yet still somehow manages to leave out large portions of the historical narrative. I love this era of history, but this was just downright boring in my opinion.

I considered Anne Boleyn's acting to be average, although her lack of stage time in Part I made it impossible to develop her character fully. I think the majority of the fault lies in the book. It's too long and has too many characters to develop any of them fully. Even after three long hours of theatre, I'm still not quite clear on what Wolf Hall's Cromwell has for a motivation. He switches between ambition and seeming to just wish to survive repeatedly. I suspect that's more an issue with the book than an issue with the acting.

On the other hand, the actor playing King Henry VIII did an excellent job. The minimalist staging and direction were the highlight of the evening - I doubt they could have done a better job in that department.

I'm undecided on whether I'll go back for Part II, but I suspect not. There are too many good shows opening at this time of the year for me to waste half a trip to the city on seeing a play for the sake of completion.

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 11:23pm

It's an all out rave from the times 

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 11:41pm

"I think the majority of the fault lies in the book."

I believe that most, including myself, found Mantel's book to be extraordinary.  It is admittedly a lot to harness in a play, even in two parts, but I think the less successful stretches can be attributed to the adapter, Poulton rather than Mantel.  

Updated On: 4/10/15 at 11:41 PM

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 11:43pm

"It's an all out rave from the times "

 Not just that, but Brantley is pushing people to flock to this by tarting it as a low brow (but awesome) period piece.  

NY times

[broadwayfan24]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 11:49pm

NY Post is mixed..."Beautiful, but Boring"

[Jonwo]

Posted: 4/9/15 at 11:52pm

There are enough strong reviews that they can use but the NYT review is encouraging and likely will help ticket sales

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 12:14am

Have any of the reviews compared the play to the TV show? I mean, have any of the reviewers seen both?

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 12:22am

Many have mentioned the TV show, emphasizing that they have nothing in common other than the source material.

[rob136]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 12:48am

Re: Wilmington

I should clarify that by "the book", I mean the script itself. I have not read the source material, but I've heard nothing but good things about it.

[Wee Thomas2]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 9:22am

Is this the same story (abridged, I imagine) that Masterpiece Theater is currently showing on PBS (with Rylance!)?

[little_sally]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 9:55am

"Is this the same story (abridged, I imagine) that Masterpiece Theater is currently showing on PBS (with Rylance!)?"

 Yep, pretty much. But the play is very different from the series.

[macnyc]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 10:33am

I did the marathon yesterday and really enjoyed it. But I thought Part 1 was much stronger, more interesting, better paced. Part 2 is where most of the grim stuff happens. But more than that, I found the "trial" scenes to be tedious and my mind started wandering a few times. I found myself really missing last year's Twelfth Night.

The people sitting in the box with me had done rush for Part 2 and hadn't seen Part 1 yet. That I would not recommend. Still, I do recommend the show.

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 10:51am

Does anyone think it could still get some Tony Nominations for...

Best Play?
Leading Actor in a Play?
Featured Actor in a Play?
Direction of a Play?
Lighting Design of a Play?
Costume Design of a Play?

[jnb9872]

Posted: 4/10/15 at 11:05am

Could still get some? Yes 6x.