FATHER COMES HOME FROM THE WARS (PARTS 1, 2 & 3) reviews

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 8:06am

Is anybody there? Does anybody care?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/29/theater/father-comes-home-from-the-wars-by-suzan-lori-parks-at-the-public-theater.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/theater-arts/father-home-wars-theater-review-article-1.1990267

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/father-comes-home-wars-parts-744563

http://www.vulture.com/2014/10/theater-review-father-comes-home-from-the-wars.html

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/theater/father-comes-home-from-the-wars-review-from-the-civil-war-to-today-1.9552556

http://www.northjersey.com/arts-and-entertainment/theater/a-slave-s-odyssey-in-three-acts-1.1120651

Updated On: 10/29/14 at 08:06 AM

[dreaming]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 8:22am

I'm glad the Times liked it so much. I saw it in lab and will return for this run soon so I'm very excited to see it. I really loved the lab performance and am seeing it next Wed.

Yay! I love Ms. Parks...fellow alumna!

[AC126748]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 8:29am

Did anyone read Matthew Murray's review for Talkin' Broadway? I was struck by the particular bone-headedness of his opening comment:

"Suzan-Lori Parks's primary hook as a playwright has long been her willingness — daring? — to bring poetry to what often seems that least inherently poetic of American subjects: the plight of African-Americans."

The historical plight of African-Americans is the "least inherently poetic of American subjects"? I guess he's never read Toni Morrison, or August Wilson, or James Baldwin, or Rita Dove, or Natasha Tretheway, or Maya Angelou, or Robert Hayden, or any number of other writers who could be described as poetically chronicling African American life.
http://www.talkinbroadway.com/ob/10_28_14.html

[HogansHero]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 8:48am

AC--

There is a mentality expressed often that critics should be more experienced in theatre than they are (and the same is said of creatives). In fact, this comment that you aptly describe as bone-headed reveals why that sort of cultural myopia ill serves criticism (and also the creation of theatre).

[Auggie27]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 8:50am

Agree 100% with AC. My jaw-dropping response as well. It reads like a 1964 take on, say, Leroi Jones. But of course, it would have been offensive in 1964, too.

[AC126748]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 8:56am

He's no stranger to making offensive comments in his reviews, but this one just seemed particularly stupid.

[dreaming]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 9:32am

Hence I don't usually read his reviews. He makes way too many stupid comments and is often plain offensive, as is the case here.

[AC126748]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 9:39am

I'm kind of surprised Talkin' Broadway hasn't thrown him over by now. Sure, they're not the New York Times, but I'm sure they could do better than him.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 9:50am

I'm a little surprised at how ecstatic some of these reviews are. I liked the show when I saw it earlier this year, but found it a bit uneven (I enjoyed Part 2 the most). Did anyone who's seen this run also see it in lab? Has it truly flourished that much?

Updated On: 10/29/14 at 09:50 AM

[dreaming]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 10:05am

givesmevoice-I'm going next Wed. and I'll report back.

I did see it in lab and enjoyed it very much. It did need changes but I'm hoping they made them. We'll see.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 11:49am

I saw the lab production twice - can't beat $10 - but I feel like when i saw it it was only Part 1? I don't totally remember, but I loved what she did with it. I'd be curious to see this production. It doesn't look like they sprung for much money to stage it.

[broadwaybelter]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 3:20pm

I saw the play this past weekend. I agree that it's uneven. It pick up towards the end of the first act, and succeeds far better in the second act.

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 4:03pm

Aren't there three acts? Or are two of the parts considered one of the acts?

[Wee Thomas2]

Posted: 2/2/15 at 7:09pm

I don't feel the need to start a new thread, but we saw this at the ART yesterday and had mixed feelings about it.

First of all, it is 3 acts, but the first two (discussion if Hero should go with his master to war and Hero, Master, and prisoner) acts are done back to back, then intermission, then the 3rd act is Hero's return.

We found the 2nd act to be far more compelling than the other two, and we were both put off by what Isherwood referred to as the "Greek Chorus" that is Hero's dog, considering it more a "what the hell is a talking dog doing in a darn good play about slaves and the Civil War???" Dropped our rating of this from an A-/B+ to a solid C.

4th act was by far the best (Pats over Seahawks!)

[josiahjosiah]

Posted: 2/2/15 at 10:55pm

We saw this on Saturday at ART and had quite a different reaction: this is brilliant playwrighting and we wish more of this was heading to Broadway! Part I was absolutely poetic and thought provoking and Part III really began to tease out the drama of the after-effects of the Emancipation Proclamation. We were left salivating for Parts IV, V and VI. And the dog was just brilliant THEATRE! I could easily see this again. And again the next day.

I admired TOP DOG/UNDERDOG, but I LOVED this play. This, to my ears, is Pulitzer material: poetic, epic, magisterial and resonant of an American experience. And kudos to all of the brilliant performances, down to the guitar-strumming "minstrel"... It all works, and brilliantly.