Mr. & Mrs. SDS see Mr. & Mrs. Fitch

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 12:57pm

My husband (Mr. SDS) and I went to the matinee yesterday of Mr. and Mrs. Fitch, which is currently in previews at the Second Stage Theater.

The comedy, written by Douglas Carter Beane, stars John Lithgow and Jennifer Ehle. It runs about two hours including a 15-minute intermission.

If you are fan of the two actors, it's fun, so definitely go. However, the play itself is a very light trifle. Unless some significant changes are made, I wouldn't expect to see it on Broadway.

The set: An upscale N.Y.C. loft designed by Allen Moyer. Very striking! Especially liked the wall of windows. Amazing!

The plot: No spoiler, much more being said in ads for the show. The plot revolves around a married pair of gossip columnists who run into a problem.

The play: The play had some very good laughs, and a little singing and dancing by John Lithgow, but it lacked a substantial plot and meaningful denouement. We were fortunate to get a talkback session after the show with the playwright. He said it took him a year to write the second act, and he drew some inspiration from a trip he took to visit his son in South America. Unfortunately, facts gleaned from that trip were memorialized in a major speech by Mr. Fitch, that were totally out of place. It was just shoved in there and felt it.

I liked As Bees In Honey Drown, another show by Mr. Beane, better.

The characters: I hate to write this, but it must be said. Mr. SDS and I had the same thoughts, though in reverse. We both thought John and Jennifer were a bad fit as a married couple. Not for lack of trying, because they are consummate professionals and acted their hearts out. They just lacked chemistry.

My husband thought Jennifer was too young for the part and an older actress would better complement John Lithgow. He thought Jennifer sounded at times like Jane Fonda and someone like her would have been better.

On the other hand, I thought John was too old for Jennifer and that she needed someone like David Hyde Pierce to complement her. Either way, we both agreed on the general problem.

In the talkback, Mr. Beane said he signed Jennifer for Mrs. Fitch very early, and originally cast someone else as Mr. Fitch, but the actor reminded him of a "fireman that Jennifer picked up for a one-night stand." After a series of subsequent auditions didn't pan out, John Lithgow became available and they snatched him up.

Stage Door: As a John Lithgow fan, I was thrilled to see him live. He could read the phonebook and I would be happy. I ran to the stage door as soon as the show ended and was fortunate to catch him as he was bolting away. He signed my playbill as well as my CD of Singing in the Bathtub. I got some pictures of him, but I had the camera on the wrong setting and they came out blurry. Still I was very happy!

The audience: I am not exaggerating when I say my husband and I were practically the youngest people in the audience - and we are in our early 50s.

The subscribers to the this theater are older and very loyal. Saw quite a few mink coats. It was a very warm and savvy crowd. The woman sitting next to me said she loved going to previews. She liked seeing Next to Normal when it played Second Stage and was impressed with how the ending was change before it went to Broadway. Another lady borrowed my cell phone to call her friend who had not shown up at the theater. Turns out he forgot the date. I totally enjoyed being with these patrons of the arts. Will that be me someday...? I do not know.
Updated On: 1/31/10 at 12:57 PM

[wdwfreak]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 1:06pm

Sounds like I might need to see this. Do they happen to have playbills?

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 1:09pm

They do have playbills.

[wdwfreak]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 1:21pm

Ok thanks, I am sending a request for a signed playbill and didn't want to look stupid and ask for a signed playbill, when they have none.

[After Eight]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 6:21pm

Fatuous frippery, arch beyond belief, in which neither the characters, plot, nor dialogue ring true for even a minute. Come on, a grown woman who never once before in her life faced the challenge of cracking open an egg? A real dilly, this one, that tries to cram as many pointless references to high and low culture that could fit in 2 hours, everything from Edith Wharton to "The Brady Bunch." Spaghetti strands of verbiage give birth to supposed bons mots that land like lead bricks. My hats off to the actors for having been able to both memorize and mouth all this gibberish at a non-stop clip. And my sympathies to the audience for having had to listen to it.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 6:48pm

Why would they not have Playbills?

I'm disappointed in Douglas Carter Beane's work more often than I would like to be. I still want to give this a shot, though.

[wdwfreak]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 6:58pm

I don't really go to Off-Broadway shows and don't really knew if they all had playbills.

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 8:48pm

After Eight, your take on it may be how the critics view it as well. The play, as they say, is the thing, and this thing has major issues. Will it be re-written at all at this point other than throwing in an Eydie Gorme joke here or there? That is the question.

[After Eight]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 9:08pm

Stage Door Sally:

I'm going to have to disagree with you on your last point. In light of the woebegone state of present-day theatre criticism, and all the horrible plays that have been praised to the skies this season, this play will probably get unanimous raves!

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 1/31/10 at 9:15pm

We'll see.

[April Saul]

Posted: 2/1/10 at 12:29am

Hey Sally and others--I caught the evening show and I have to say I'd give it about a B-minus. Love Lithgow and he and Ehle had a ball with the snappy repartee, there were lines I laughed out loud at, but basically, it lacked heart and soul. Seeing The Pride at MCC earlier in the day--which was fantastic--probably didn't help. I think Fitch will probably get middling reviews, but with a pat on the back for Lithgow, who's always great no matter what the material. And I loved Little Dog Laughed and enjoyed Xanaudu, so I have definitely been a Douglas Carter Beane fan under other circumstances!

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 2/1/10 at 6:20am

AprilSaul,

I'll be very surprised if anyone thinks the play itself is good. That's not to say you can't have a good time, because like you, we particularly enjoyed John Lithgow. I am curious to see if there will be any serious re-vamping, or will it be allowed to just wither on the vine.

[Patash]

Posted: 2/1/10 at 9:29am

Saw it last night and really enjoyed it. I'd be the first to agree the play is so much drivel. Two pretentious but shallow people throwing out clever quips and trying to outdo each other with their literary and theatrical zingers. Hmmm. It was just like modern Oscar Wilde or Noel Coward. And I thought it worked just about as well as they do -- perhaps more so. Compare to Present Laughter -- the laughs from the crowd last night far surpassed those at Present Laughter! The "silliness from Alaska" Sarah Palin barb nearly brought donw the house!

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/1/10 at 10:20am

"Hmmm. It was just like modern Oscar Wilde or Noel Coward. And I thought it worked just about as well as they do -- perhaps more so."

Can't say I share that point of view.

[DrewBill]

Posted: 2/1/10 at 11:22am

I saw the play last night -- I enjoyed Lithgow and Ehle, and there were a number of genuinely funny moments, but in the end, there just isn't enough "substance" to the show to be particularly interesting.

The first half of the play is merely an exercise in "witty" dialog -- some of it hits and some of it misses, but it all seems so labored and artificial. The second half is stronger -- you finally get more of a sense of the characters beyond their endless quips -- but it's kind of too little, too late. And I wouldn't say the story or characters ever reach any sort of satisfying ending that makes the time spent worth it -- the play just kind of stops.

Overall, I wouldn't say "Fitch" is bad -- you do get to see two very good actors in top form, and it does have a few laughs. But I wouldn't count on this play really going anywhere beyond this Second Stage run.

[Patash]

Posted: 2/1/10 at 5:11pm

After Eight, so since you're quoting me, why not continue? Did you think Present Laughter worked BETTER? It sure didn't get half the laughs that Mr. and Mrs. Fitch got -- and let's face it, Present Laughter has no more deep meaning than the Fitch play. Both are essentially alot of witty repartee without any deep psychological or intellectual value. And I mean that in a very loving way, particularly to my hero, Noel Coward. Although some people accept witty repartee from British characters in the past as if that's what they were supposed to be, and at the same time find that when modern folk do the same thing they are simply shallow.

Perhaps Mr. and Mrs. Fitch didn't work so well for you, but if the purpose of both those plays was merely to invoke laughs and to entertain, I'd have a hard time judging from the audiences I joined at both plays saying that Mr. and Mrs. Fitch didn't work better than Present Laughter -- at least if the volume and the number of laughs are the mark of how funny the show is. Updated On: 2/1/10 at 05:11 PM

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/1/10 at 10:15pm

"After Eight, so since you're quoting me, why not continue? Did you think Present Laughter worked BETTER?"

Nither one worked. The current production of "Present Laughter" is a dud. But other productions that did the play justice worked 1,000 times better than this clunker, "Mr. & Mrs. Fitch." Maybe because the play itself is 1,000 times better.


And you actually put Douglas Carter Beane's dialogue in the same league as Coward's or Wilde's? Come on.




"It sure didn't get half the laughs that Mr. and Mrs. Fitch got"

Neither production got many laughs at the performances I attended.


"Present Laughter has no more deep meaning than the Fitch play."

Gilligan's Island has deeper meaning than the Fitch play.


"Both are essentially alot of witty repartee without any deep psychological or intellectual value."

I did not find the so-called "repartee" in "Fitch" witty. I found it excruciatingly forced, and frankly, excruciating.


"Although some people accept witty repartee from British characters in the past as if that's what they were supposed to be, and at the same time find that when modern folk do the same thing they are simply shallow."


The fact is that Coward and Wilde are genuinely witty--- not so Beane, at least here. Moreover, the first two's wit derives naturally from the characters and situations. It doesn't come from dialogue that is twisted artificially and expressly to bring forth a "witticism" that makes you groan.

"Perhaps Mr. and Mrs. Fitch didn't work so well for you, but if the purpose of both those plays was merely to invoke laughs and to entertain, I'd have a hard time judging from the audiences I joined at both plays saying that Mr. and Mrs. Fitch didn't work better than Present Laughter -- at least if the volume and the number of laughs are the mark of how funny the show is."

Come back when "Present Laughter" is given a production with some brio and vitality and then you'll see the difference.

[Patash]

Posted: 2/2/10 at 12:04pm

You're missing the point. I have seen Present Laughter in GREAT productions and yes it can play very well. I was merely comparing audiences viewing the two current productions.

Different people find different things witty. I honestly found much of the Fitch dialogue to be AS witty as Coward's, and that's a lot coming from me who adores Coward. I can't say the play itself (Fitch) went anywhere, but I found much of the dialogue to be extremely funny and very "witty" -- as did the bulk of the audience the night I was there.

And clearly the audience at Fitch the night I went must have been much more into it than the one the night you went. People weren't faking being highly entertained and amused. They got MOST of it and often roared with laughter. So while the wittiness may have escaped some, some others clearly found it VERY witty. Granted, not everyone's sense of humor is the same, but I don't assume that if someone's is different from mine that I must be right and they others are clearly all wrong. It's just the way it is --as with anything.

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/2/10 at 1:53pm

"You're missing the point. I have seen Present Laughter in GREAT productions and yes it can play very well. I was merely comparing audiences viewing the two current productions."

Actually, it is you who are missing the point. You asked me to compare the audience reaction to these two plays. The problem is you're asking to compare a decent production of a bad play to a bad production of a good play. The only valid basis for comparison are good productions of both plays. And in that case, there is no comparison.

Moreover, your using audience reaction to ascribe a play's worth is itself defective. At the monstrously bad and unfunny movie, "The Hangover," there was more laughter from the audience than at productions I've seen of "As You Like It" and "Twelfth Night." According to your line of reasoning, that would make "The Hangover" as good if not better than Shakespeare's plays. (And please don't tell me you think it is.)

Likewise, the audiences I was in gave standing ovations to "Carrie" and "Oh, Brother!" I guess that means these two are as good as "Fiddler on the Roof" or "South Pacific." To which I say, "Oh, brother!"

As for your audience at "Fitch" finding it "witty?", how do you know that? Just because they laughed doesn't mean they found it "witty." Does that mean that the audiences laughing at "The Hangover" also found that one "witty?"

In any event, you find Douglas Carter Beane to be as witty as Noel Coward. Well, so be it. Happy theatregoing.

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 2/13/10 at 12:50am

Saw this tonight, and I was kind of flabbergasted by how dreadful it was. All stale, overwritten one-liners, which is, of course, Beane's specialty. No matter who's saying it, every line feels like it's coming out of the mouth of a bitchy 60-year-old theatre queen making Brady Bunch jokes. So many laugh lines play to dead silence, I kind of felt bad for the (obviously insanely talented) actors, if silence weren't exactly what the lines deserved.

Those who find Beane funny will likely find him funny again this time out, but mark my words, word-of-mouth will be poisonous.

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 2/13/10 at 8:58am

Thanks for the update, Miracle.

There hasn't been a tweet out of John Lithgow since Feb.4, wherein he wrote:

FITCH gets better with every tweak, love those previews. Tomorrow a new ending.

...sigh

[ZiggyCringe]

Posted: 2/19/10 at 2:25am

Saw the show tonight.

Loved it. I found it smart, erudite, and hysterically funny. Add well acted and well directed to the mix, and it was a great evening.

A lot of people in the audience tonight disagreed with me. There were walk-outs, and grumbling.

Personally, I found it intellectually stimulating, and honestly, really, really funny.

I have no idea how the critics are going to perceive it. But I had a terrific time, and laughed my ass off at Carter-Beane's rat-a-tat-tat references. He's smart. And as a theatregoer that wasn't alive for Coward or Wilde, I love that we have someone writing plays today that is just that witty. Wit is a rare thing, and Carter-Beane has it, in spades.

And no matter what you think of the play, you have to admit that Lithgow and Ehle were at the top of their game.


Updated On: 2/19/10 at 02:25 AM

[Stage Door Sally]

Posted: 2/19/10 at 8:39am

Glad you enjoyed the show Ziggy. Like you, I enjoyed the repartee and performances, I just couldn't get past a play with a silly little plot device and almost no point.

The show opens this Monday, Feb. 22.

That people are walking out and grumbling does not bode well at all.

I am sorry for John Lithgow and Jennifer Ehle, they deserve better material. Fortunately the show has a limited run and can close quietly.

All that said, as a Lithgow fan, I am very glad I went.
Updated On: 2/19/10 at 08:39 AM

[Elke]

Posted: 2/19/10 at 9:30am

I saw the evening performance on Wednesday. Both are excellent performers and I felt they deserve a much better play to work with.

I found the story ridiculous and the dialogue tiresome. Not my cup of tea at all. Nice set and music choices though.

[Patash]

Posted: 2/19/10 at 12:05pm

After eight -- wow, talk about misunderstanding my points!
I never said that Carter Beane is "as witty" as Coward! Go back and read. I said, "I honestly found much of the Fitch dialogue to be AS witty as Coward's". Hopefully you can see the difference between those two statements. perhaps not.

And I clearly said "IF the purpose of both those plays (Fitch and Present Laughter) was merely to invoke laughs and to entertain, I'd have a hard time judging from the audiences I joined at both plays saying that Mr. and Mrs. Fitch didn't work better than Present Laughter."
Trying to twist that statement into suggesting I was saying Mr. and Mrs. Fitch is a better play than As You Like is -- well, simply an unbelievable stretch! In fact, it would be a stretch (or a result of a total lack of reading what I was talking about) to think that I was saying one SCRIPT is better than the other. Clearly I was talking about audience reaction to two PRODUCTIONS.