"It's Only a Play" Preview Thread- Page 4

[mjohnson2]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 1:24am

This is a thread for people to write about their thoughts of the show if they saw it in previews. I saw it in previews and wrote about what I thought of it on this board. How is that a hate fest? Lots of people don't like it, and they have said as much in this thread, if this is a hate fest, it's because a lot of people didn't like the show.

[Jotebry]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 3:20am

"How is it a hate fest ?" You asked, mjohnson2, so I'll reply.
My comment was in response to Lights Out 90 who, because of my positive comments told me to "go shill elsewhere. Signed, everybody here". Of course I know he doesn't speak for everyone on this board because of the positive comments people have left, but when I read the venomous comments like his and yours mjohnson2..."every single joke falls flat on its face." "Besides Nathan Lane,rest of the cast is entirely flat and miscast"...and "Terrence McNally has never been a believable playwright and has gotten worse with time." Oh really, I guess those 4 Tonys he's won were just flukes. Sorry, but those comments are so exaggerated they are laughable, but the haters for whatever reason don't want to acknowledge anything positive about the show except Nathan Lane. That's just sad and pathetic. Well, I've had my say, and hopefully others who enjoy the show will post their comments here as well, because it's deserving of praise.

[mjohnson2]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 3:53am

Okay, I'm just going to say you probably work for the Broadway company, because I don't know of a whole bunch of new posters that stick to one single show and attack anybody who doesn't like it as being "sad and pathetic". Tell the people that hire you to create an account of few months before a show opens and to post on other threads before beginning the ridiculous cheerleading for the show so that it isn't so obvious. Also, I just wanted to clarify to you that I didn't think Nathan Lane was particularly good in this play, but merely seeing him on stage was what was enjoyable about it.

[Jotebry]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 4:44am

Real nice mjohnson2...Only saw 2 shows during my Broadway trip from out west, and this one is the one I really wanted to see. It was only my third time to N.Y. in 15 years. I'd anticipated the first preview of IOAP for months, looking for news on the web about anything leading up to the play, as I had tickets for the 3rd preview...I find this site, join the message board, and then because I like the show, really like it, get slammed by you and a few others who hate it because I stand up for it and challenge your entirely negative reviews, dissing every cast member but Nathan Lane. What's so hard to believe about me liking the play as much as you hate it ? Well, don't concern yourself, folks will go to the show will see who was off base in their postings.

[Up In One]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 7:11am

Oh Joetbry, welcome to the family, like any other family we are filled with all kinds of characters, some you'll love and appreciate and admire and others you'll hate and fume about and ignore. One thing MJohnson has done in his venom filled post is set nicely a context - no matter how crudely. He also shows how quickly he can choose the nuclear option and call someone a shill. Either enjoy the Georege & Martha repartee and keep goading him or dismiss him with a "Be gone with you , you have no powers here" because we are all equal here and we all have our fans and detractors. In this case I haven't even seen the play and Im with you.


"Welcome to the theatre, to the magic, to the fun
Where painted trees and flowers grow, and laughter rings fortissimo
And treachery's neatly done.
Now you've entered the asylum, this profession unique
actors are children playing hide-and-ego-seek.

So welcome, Miss Eve Harrington, to this business we call show.
You're on your way to wealth and fame
Unsheathe your claws, enjoy the game
You'll be a witch but they'll know your name from New York to Kokomo
So welcome to the theatre, my dear, you'll love it so!

Welcome to the dirty concrete hallways
Welcome to the friendly roaches, too
Welcome to the pinches form the stangehands, it's the only quite thing they do!
Welcome to PHiladelphia critics
Welcome to Librium and Nembutal
Welcome to a life of laryngitis
Welcome to dark toilets in the hall

Welcome to the plot you thougth would run for years.
Welcome to a world of fears and cheers and tears.
So, welcome to the theatre with some luck you'll be a pro.
you'll work and lsave and scratch and bite
You'll learn to kill with sheer delight
You'll only come alive at night, when you're in a show.

So welcome, to the theatre-you fool, you'll love it so!"

[After Eight]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 7:16am

"I find this site, join the message board, and then because I like the show, really like it, get slammed by you and a few others who hate it because I stand up for it and challenge your entirely negative reviews,"

You were slammed because of your immature, infantile, insulting reactions to those who expressed a different view of this show than yours.

If this show made you happy, and made your trip to NY worthwhile, then that's wonderful. But you really need to grow up and act like a mature adult, because you've embarrassed yourself here.

Updated On: 9/6/14 at 07:16 AM

[Up In One]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 7:33am

And now grumpy grandpa has chastised you. Many have embarrassed themselves here and you have not even come close. You've actually made this thread fun to read. It's almost our own little version of You Can't Take It With You

[rjm516]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 2:44pm

It's not a hate fest. I think it's actually helpful for people to list their complaints here because it's still in previews, and I'm hoping that the producers reflect Megan Mullally's producer character in that they all read these boards :)

[BitchyMargoChanning]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 5:25pm

What do you suggest they do to Mullally's character? a lot of the comments here suggest she was miscast, which I don't agree with. (For the record Jotebry, I was eagerly anticipating it as well- and I liked it. I actually saw it twice & will go back again.) It's not the best thing I've seen Mullally or Lane in, but I thought it was entertaining. (I think the Puppet thing could go, and Brodericks speeches shortened - I do agree there.)

[Jotebry]

Posted: 9/6/14 at 10:35pm

My trip to N.Y. is over, so I'm done here, but re. your last post After Eight...I gladly invite anyone who reads this board to check this thread from the beginning and see who they think, in your words... "needs to grow up and act like a mature adult because he posts immature, infantile and insulting reactions." Thanks to those who made a newcomer to the board feel welcome. Happy theatre going to all !

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 9/7/14 at 9:25am

Well...I didn't like it. The first act was a struggle to sit through; the second was marginally better. It's just not well-cast and the laughs aren't as boisterous as they should be. The ensemble doesn't gel in the way that YOU CANT TAKE IT WITH YOU's fantastic ensemble does. They're all doing their own thing(s) and none of them really mesh in a cohesive way. Each performer is miscast, to some degree, save for Lane and Stock. Lane is giving 1,000% which can sometimes be grating, but is never boring. Stock is giving a very fine debut performance. Broderick is sleepwalking, per usual. Mullally and Channing should switch roles. Abraham and Grint seemed to be way out of their elements, and were way overdoing it the night I went.

It's full of very, very insidery theater jokes that the non-theater crowd will not get. And most of the "jokes" aren't even funny. It's like they threw together a bunch of current theater and pop-culture references and didn't even try to create a funny, well-rounded joke around them. How is saying "Shia LaBeouf just got arrested" funny...? Because he did in real life...? Ha?

I was very disappointed by this one. If you want to see a great ensemble in a delightful comedy, go see YOU CANT TAKE IT WITH YOU. And save yourself some money.

[rjm516]

Posted: 9/7/14 at 3:18pm

^ That was the thing that really bothered me the most about the script updates. I GOT all the jokes, but for the most part they weren't funny! Such wasted effort!

[Okiekat]

Posted: 9/13/14 at 6:41pm

Saw the show this afternoon and enjoyed it. I was a little hesitant after reading many comments. I assume some of the kinks have been worked out. The audience seemed to enjoy it. I agree the jokes are very much inside theater, but I thought they were funny. Nathan is terrific and has great timing. Stockard was out for the matinee, that was a bummer. Thrilled to see Micah Stock give a very good performance in his broadway debut. Also, had some trouble hearing Megan and Matthew.

[mc1227]

Posted: 9/13/14 at 7:36pm

I saw the play in it's first week of previews and also had trouble hearing Megan and Matthew when they weren't downstage. I thought it might have just been a 1 show glitch but seems like they still need to work on the sound. I hope they shortened it by now as well.

I did enjoy the show but recognized it could be better with some trimming.

[mgldan]

Posted: 9/13/14 at 8:08pm

I saw the play for the first (and definitely last) time today, and I too was disappointed in Stockard's absence. I had bought 3rd row center orchestra seats based on the strength of the cast, her included.

The play doesn't spend any time establishing the interpersonal relationships between its characters. Even if it's a comedy, it's important that we get a sense of the history between them, to help give flavor and meaning to the ~2 hour fragment of their lives that we get to spend observing them. (Vanya and Sonia last year did this extremely well.) The rapport that they have established needs to happen on stage for the play to be good. Not once did I get the impression that these characters have more than perfunctory working relationships.

This impression was reinforced by the lack of chemistry in the cast. Nathan Lane has enormous charisma with the audience the whole time, and he gives 100% without giving himself a heart attack like James Monroe Iglehart across the way. But Matthew Broderick acts like a potato against him, even though they are supposed to be old friends. Maybe the dynamic is better when Stockard's in; I wouldn't know.

And yes, the jokes are not only inside Broadway, but I also suspect/hope they were targeted at an older fanbase. I was born in 1984 and recognized maybe 30% of the names being thrown around. I did at least get the jokes about current plays on Broadway--they reference Matilda, Lion King, Elephant Man, Phantom, Aladdin, and Book of Mormon--but these jokes aren't funny, and they don't advance the almost non-existent plot.

I laughed and smiled a little, but as I was leaving the theater, no one around me was talking about how much they loved the show.

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 9/13/14 at 11:10pm

I'm out of the loop on the Matthew Broderick cult of hate. Do people hate him because he cheated on Carrie Bradshaw? I enjoyed his performance in the play. I like his close to the vest delivery. It can be quite subtle and funny without being laugh out loud funny which is actually the kind of funny I like the best.

The play? It's not very good but there are good things about it. There are a lot of jokes that are pitched knowingly at the Broadway audience that score a lot of laughs. And some jokes that tellingly go straight over their heads like a reference to a performance of "Arden of Faversham at the Halliburton auditorium in Park Slope." If people think the shopworn backstage patter and celebrity name dropping that the play dishes out are "insider jokes" then they've been successfully flattered by the author. There's a lot of stars doing a range of performances from good to not so good. No one was bad except for the understudy who took over for Stockard Channing. The understudy is a good actress but she irreparably threw the rhythm of the evening off track. F. Murray Abraham, an actor who I find hard to watch, gives a good character performance of an oily theater critic. There are a lot of well designed running gags and some very expensive visual gags that are pretty delightful. And Jack O'Brian's direction can be clever.

The bad things. It's not a good play. There's little suspense or theme or comic structure. And it forces a topicality on the audience that feels dated. It doesn't present enough of a sharp take on the contemporary Broadway game to merit its existence as satire. That's really its only sin. But I'd add that quite a bit of the play rings true in its depiction of the desperation, backstabbing and odd heroism of theater artists.



















Updated On: 9/14/14 at 11:10 PM

[mc1227]

Posted: 9/14/14 at 6:13am

Sinister, I concur with Broderick's style, it's dry and subtle and very appropriate for this role. Playing against larger than life characters like Lane's and Abraham's is not an easy task in this play, but I feel he pulls it off. My only complaint at the time I saw it was he was bogged down with way too much dialogue and it should have been trimmed. That was early previews so I hope it has been shortened.

Not being a theater insider but a long time theater lover, I felt that I "got" many of the inside jokes but not all. That didn't affect my enjoyment of the performances. Let's face it, most people will attend this based on the cast, not the fact that it's a McNally play, so I enjoyed what I came to see. This play will never live up to the hype, but it's worth seeing anyway.

[mamaleh]

Posted: 9/14/14 at 8:03am

Is Stockard Channing out all weekend? Or was her absence a one-time thing?

Updated On: 9/14/14 at 08:03 AM

[Patash]

Posted: 9/14/14 at 9:05am

"That being said, how can you tell someone their OPINION is wrong? You can disagree with it, but an opinion can't be wrong."

Hmmm. An acquaintance of mine insists it is his opinion that Adolf Hitler was the greatest man who ever lived and he did more for world peace than anyone else. So I guess there is no way his opinion is wrong? OK, thanks.

[Producer2]

Posted: 9/14/14 at 10:41am

It's a very funny show! Stockard's absence was very disappointing!!!!!!!!

[little_sally]

Posted: 9/14/14 at 9:01pm

I didn't want to start a new thread for this so I'll ask here. Has anyone done standing room for this show yet? What time do they give them out?

[mamaleh]

Posted: 9/15/14 at 12:45am

I did standing room for the Sunday matinee earlier today; got there around 12:15 and waited 15 minutes on line. I was able to purchase a center-right SR spot.

I thought Keating was marvelous--funny, touching and she looked great. I think I got most of the references, but I noticed that not too many people laughed when one character said plays should be about "love, valor and compassion." Everyone roared at Nathan Lane's self-reference, but it made me squirm a bit. It wasn't worth the roar; was more like a cheap gimmick. Lane and Micah Stock (probably the best of the ensemble) were clear as a bell and projected beautifully. I'm afraid Megan Mullally and often Matthew Broderick were at the other end of the audibility spectrum. Rupert Grint was maybe a little over the top, and I kind of understood what he was up to with the puppet, although I couldn't understand much of the back-and-forth rapid dialogue in his British accent in that scene. Overall, it's fairly funny but certain speeches should be trimmed mightily, especially Broderick's.

[gleek4114]

Posted: 9/15/14 at 11:43am

Any updates on performers coming out the stage door to sign/take pictures?

[mamaleh]

Posted: 9/15/14 at 11:49am

It looks doubtful that anyone who has just seen the play will get anywhere near the stage door. The crowds obviously form there well before the show ends. Not cool; there should be at least a separate area for ticketholders.

[gleek4114]

Posted: 9/15/14 at 12:01pm

I walked by it yesterday around the time it was letting out, and yes there was a crowd but it did not look like it was out of control.