MERCURY FUR at The New Group- Page 4

[NewYorkTheater]

Posted: 8/21/15 at 8:10pm

For balance (vis a vis the Times review), another review: (plus photos)

The horrific future conjured in “Mercury Fur” – a world piled high with atrocities ranging from the killing of zoo animals to random decapitations to child torture – is clearly meant to shock. But what is unexpected in the New Group’s revival of Philip Ridley’s 2005 dystopian fantasy is how tedious it is.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 8/21/15 at 8:23pm

With all due respect (and I do respect your opinion), when you put the Times review on one side of the scale and yours on the other, you are still way up in the ionosphere. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 8/21/15 at 11:12pm

I did $25, and I had a full view seat. I honestly didn't see any of the issues with seating that a lot of people were complaining about. They all seemed to offer a "unique" view of the action. 

 

And The Post got it right. 

Updated On: 8/21/15 at 11:12 PM

[Sauja]

Posted: 8/22/15 at 9:36am

Ripped, can I ask where specifically you sat? Thanks!

[RippedMan]

Posted: 8/22/15 at 1:44pm

House right. D4 or something. Was a fine view. Didn't go up top so I can't speak for those seats. 

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 3:08pm

I have to applaud Scott Elliott for going outside the box with casting and not turning to the knee-jerk conservatory graduate route when casting this thing, but these actors were of varying levels of in over their heads.  Directed for speed and energy, I swear most of them weren't even thinking about the lines they were spouting.  No communication, no relationships, no base for the storytelling.

As for the play, it feels like the work of a talented but not terribly original twenty-one year old who grew up on Sarah Kane, ORPHANS, and the HOSTEL movies.  It might have worked as a ninety minute B-movie piece of theater in the vein of KILLER JOE, but it just goes on and on and on with the "I remember" monologues.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 3:36pm

Obviously, Borstalboy, some of us it see it the way you did and, as has already been rehearsed here, what you are disliking about the performances is what makes them so relatable to others. People have also discussed why your assessment of the script doesn't align with others. But no question this is a divisive play. And ain't that grand?

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 4:46pm

Hogan: were you a fan of Mr.Burns?  If so, how does this messure up? 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 5:50pm

Play Esq.,

I understand where your question is coming from. I'm not big on comparing plays and these two are very much apples and oranges in spite of the setting. I liked both but not unqualifiedly.

Both are dark, Mercury is darker. Mercury is more of a present tense play whereas Burns is more about conveying the sensibility of 3 future time periods by reference to one we are familiar with. Mercury therefore has a tension that's not present in the other play and it also ups the ante by taking away the distancing that the form of Mr. Burns allows us. 

I don know if that helps any. Right now I think if I had to measure them against each other, I'd say Mercury has grown on me more after the fact. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 7:54pm

I would have loved to have seen the show you saw.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 11:35pm

What is "relatable" about actors not talking and listening to each other?  Aren't relationships the foundation of drama?  Have we finally hit the cultural point where being facile is actually a selling point?

[RippedMan]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 11:42pm

Amen. What's relatable to someone not talking and listening ?

[haterobics]

Posted: 8/23/15 at 11:50pm

RippedMan said: "What's relatable to someone not talking and listening?"

 

Seems like the foundation of BWW, no?!

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 8/24/15 at 12:57am

whereas Burns is more about conveying the sensibility of 3 future time periods by reference to one we are familiar with. 

 

What a fantastic description of Burns....well done, sir!   Also, very much looking forward to seeing MF on Sunday based upon your thoughts of the play. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 8/24/15 at 1:58am

Borstalboy said: "What is "relatable" about actors not talking and listening to each other?  Aren't relationships the foundation of drama?  Have we finally hit the cultural point where being facile is actually a selling point?

It is a play about a dystopian future, hopefully not a point we have reached. You don't like plays that depict something imagined about the future that doesn't align with your sense of drama. Fine. This is not a play for you. This is a play about something that I think we can all agree we never have to face. But to say these characters are not speaking to each other, or that they do not have relationships, is essentially to ignore what you saw. 

Play Esq.,I'll duck in case you end up in the other camp re this polarizing show.

"

 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 8/30/15 at 12:00am

I wanted to decide for myself so I chose to see Mercury Fur tonight. Let me stop you before you tell me why I didn't like the play. It neither shocked me nor offended me. I love Hair. I liked Misfits (TV) until it fell apart at the end. I don't seek out horror movies or films about war or dystopia or male power or angst fantasies but I was determined to be open-minded and to meet this play on its level. Actually, I think my lack of exposure to some of those movies should have given this play more of an impact because it wouldn't have seemed as cliched and tired to me.

 

I don't think the blame for what I see as the failures of the play falls entirely on the actors or the material. It's a little of both. There were times when I could see how stronger performances would have better sold the material. That was especially true for the beginning of the play when I agree that the pace of the dialogue made it meaningless. There simply wasn't time for the actors to imbue their words with any thought or emotion at that pace. The cursing didn't bother me so much except for the string of curses/racial epithets. You know the one I mean. That felt unearned and drew me out of things because it made it all feel more artificial. But the general cursing through the show was fine. I had a much bigger problem with how much of a "tell" vs "show" play this was. I understand that people are losing their memories and so there has to be some of that... but there was so much of it. The writing of Darren felt inconsistent, as did the performance. It didn't seem like there was a good grasp of exactly how "simple" he was.

 

I tried my best to stay with the show but at some point I just gave up. I was trying to follow the threads of a strong brotherly bond and male bonding through and in spite of violence and homoeroticism but none of it really played out. I so badly wanted there to be something to Lola and The Duchess but even those characters let me down. This play had nothing to say. I think there were still women in the world. They just didn't have meaningful roles in this play.

 

The ending really killed it for me. I was so bored and detached at that point. The performances were too weak to pull me back. The way things played out with the party guest and the party piece and Darren made the entire play seem pointless. I was laughing. I was laughing at the most dramatic parts.

 

As for the world outside of the apartment it also didn't seem to make much sense. So the Metropolitan Museum was destroyed and looted but there are still Wall Street bankers? I didn't know if there were stakes for a murder because I didn't know how much of the law enforcement/government infrastructure was still operating. How was Spinx still able to get medicine for The Duchess and to even know what to give her when this is a world where hospitals become slaughterhouses? How many people are left? I was prepared to accept their reality as kids/young adults who had been forced to establish their own rules and sense of normal after the world collapsed but if the world hasn't really collapsed that much then the world inside the apartment starts to crumble.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 8/30/15 at 12:56pm

Amen.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 8/30/15 at 8:49pm

"The two problems were terrible. There was no sense of connection or family."

 

I thought they had a nice moment during the "I love you this much" scene but other than that, I didn't feel it. The memories that should establish their connection in the beginning fell flat because there was so much to process for them as actors and for us as audience members. It was overwritten. I don't know if the lack of attachment to their mother was a failure of writing or acting.

 

"The older brother is suppose to be the smart one, but he says "****" every two words, and, like was said, he doesn't own those curses."

I was prepared to go along with it. OK, he wanted to be an archaeologist and has some very rudimentary knowledge of Ancient Egypt and Greek mythology. OK, he reads and doesn't take butterflies and can throw out an SAT word or two once in a while. In this world, I guess that passes for intelligence. But then Spinx comes in and the party guest and it all falls apart. He tries to reestablish control at the end but I can no longer buy him as even the smartest person in the room.

 

"Lola... I mean, he was fine. There was just no sense of WHY DOES THIS CHARACTER BELONG IN THIS PLAY."

 

I thought he was one of the better actors but he didn't fit in this world because his performance overwhelmed the older brother's. He was so forceful that parts of the play didn't make sense as written. It's hard to argue that you should give a bad performance to match someone else's low energy but... I think he could gave given a different performance. Less shouting perhaps.

 

"Why is there so much attention paid to cleaning up the room and making it look nice - like stacking wood planks against a street sign HUH?! - and yet there's maybe one line about "oh it looks fine." Huh?"

 

I think the set is alright if you imagine that the world has fallen apart. Roving gangs are violating young girls in supermarkets. People are making do with what they can, squatting in apartments without electricity or hot water. But when you realize that at least some institutions are still in operation, the decor makes less sense. Are the bowls of peanuts some pretense at normalcy or does the group just not know any better? And yet, there's still champagne and a ballgown (one of the things I did like... that was a nice dress) for The Duchess. You have throws to cover the seats. Why are you arranging children's books and Elmo toys on the shelves? Either there are metaphors or there aren't. You can't have it both ways.

[haterobics]

Posted: 8/31/15 at 5:26am

RippedMan said: "Amen."

 

Do you really need to praise the people who support your opinion? It's clearly a divisive play, i think everyone gets that by now. But no side of the debate is wrong, heh.

[15minutecall]

Posted: 9/3/15 at 1:38am

I've got an extra tkt for the 9/3 show tonight. Best offer. PM me.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 9/3/15 at 1:16pm

"You don't like plays that depict something imagined about the future that doesn't align with your sense of drama." 

See, this is what annoys me. You're taking all of our opinions and mangling them. Who said they don't like a "futurist" play? I actually think the set up for the play is really interesting, and really enjoy the idea of the whole thing. I just didn't like the execution and didn't think any of the characters were remotely interesting. 

[uncageg]

Posted: 9/5/15 at 3:18pm

This show wasn't really on my radar. A friend asked if I wanted to see it and I have been wanting to see some off-Broadway shows so I am going tomorrow afternoon. After reading this thread, I am really looking forward to seeing this.

[uncageg]

Posted: 9/6/15 at 5:40pm

Saw it this afternoon. Still kind of processing it and shaking it off, so to speak. But I can say that I did like it. I can understand why a lot of people have the comments they do about the show. For me, in the end, it was well worth seeing. The last 1/2 hour had me holding my breath and the final moments were heartbreaking. 

I am wondering also if the acting "style" was a choice.  That ran through my mind for the 1st half hour. I did kind of drift during the opening scene with the two brothers but pulled myself back in. I am still wondering if I missed something about the butterflies. I realized what they were but they didn't seem to be a really impotant part of the storyline. 

I could go on but I say that if you have a desire to see it, do so. It's a pretty messed up evening/afternoon at the theatre! And I like that.

[little_sally]

Posted: 9/9/15 at 11:51am

I saw this last night and pretty much loved it from start to finish. It's certainly not for everyone (one woman got up and left as soon as the Party Piece was brought out but I didn't see anyone else get up) but as someone who loves dystopian/post-apocalyptic stories and is a huge fan of Martin McDonagh's work, it was right up my alley. I don't think it's anything shocking, or anything I haven't seen on stage before (I also found a few plot points predictable) but I do think it's twisted and disturbing. I do agree there is a lot of telling and not showing but I loved the writing and direction enough that it didn't bother me. Overall I thought the acting was fine. It was neither spectacular nor a detriment.

I sat in the mezzanine (row CC) and was able to lean over the wall if I had to but I don't think I missed very much at all. In fact I rather liked my seat.

Updated On: 9/9/15 at 11:51 AM

[haterobics]

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

Caught it tonight, got a rush seat in the second row, and rather enjoyed it. We probably had about 8 people leave, and one couple crossed in front of everyone about 10 minutes before the end?! But my friend and I definitely had a good time and found it interesting from beginning to end.

 

I would like to hear how the casting agent pitched the Party Piece role to that kid's parents, though, hehe.