THE TWO AND ONLY reviews

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 7:59pm

Murray for talkin' broadway is positive/rave.
talkin' broadway

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 9:52pm

Anyone have anymore?

[StephenSondheimWHOO]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 10:02pm

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117929347?categoryid=33&cs=1

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/reviews/review_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001919446
there are a few, I can't fine the NYT one but i remember it being pretty good. I just dont get this i mean the performance at broadway on broadway was just so awful I can't imagine the show being any good

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 10:05pm

Well, a hundred million miracles are happening every day.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 10:18pm

Those aren't the Broadway reviews.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 10:24pm

I was just going to say that.

Well, mine is.

[Calvin]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 11:01pm

TheaterMania is a rave:

The show's title may be Jay Johnson: The Two and Only!...
In that sense, the show's title is far too modest. There is nothing modest, however, about Johnson's talent. More to the point, this production shows off his talent within the context of a graceful autobiographical arc that is packed with laugh-out loud comedy, tearful poignancy, and amazing skill.

Johnson starts his show with a fascinating history of ventriloquism that smoothly segues into his own personal story. A charming performer, he has an easy and engaging manner that makes him seem less like a carnival attraction and more like your wildly talented kid brother.

Conceived by Johnson, Murphy Cross and Paul Keppel, and unobtrusively directed by the latter two, the production has a story to tell that makes it feel decidedly more like a genuine show than a nightclub act. We should note that when the show was Off-Broadway everyone sat close enough to the stage to be able to witness the fact that Johnson really doesn't move his lips. Moving the show to Broadway, even to the Helen Hayes, may reduce the sense of wonder felt by those sitting at the back of the house. Perhaps that's why he performs one bit with tape over his mouth! Johnson, after all, is no dummy.

eta: forgot the link Updated On: 9/28/06 at 11:01 PM

[Calvin]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 11:08pm

I just dont get this i mean the performance at broadway on broadway was just so awful I can't imagine the show being any good

I mentioned this in another thread, but I could see how a bit of a performance in a wide-open setting like Broadway on Broadway might not translate well. The bits themselves would be a bit corny on their own, but they all work in the context of the whole show. I certainly found the show worthwhile.
Updated On: 9/28/06 at 11:08 PM

[neddyfrank2]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 11:08pm

They really like that monkey?

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/28/06 at 11:13pm

I loved the snake.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 12:36am

The Times is mixed-negative:

http://theater2.nytimes.com/2006/09/29/theater/reviews/29john.html

You couldn’t ask for a sweeter straight man than Jay Johnson, the one and only star of the new Broadway show “Jay Johnson: The Two and Only!” By straight man I mean not a heterosexual, although Mr. Johnson happens to be married, but the long-suffering, punch-line-less half of a comedy act, the guy who sets up the gags and smiles affably as his partner knocks ’em out of the park.
____________________________________________

Strictly speaking Mr. Johnson is the sole star of this genial if flimsy 90-minute entertainment. His name is the only one on the marquee, and presumably he doesn’t have to share a dressing room with any of his nonhuman, and sometimes a little inhuman, co-stars.
________________________________________________

He’s a real live ventriloquist, folks. Remember them?

Possibly not, if you’re under the age of 40. Or maybe 50. This species of entertainer has mostly vanished from the show business landscape, where the wondrous capabilities of plain-old human beings are increasingly being enhanced, if not replaced, by the prodigious gadgetry of the digital age. The halcyon days of the voice-throwers were long past even by the late 1970’s, when Mr. Johnson gained minor fame as a star of the television comedy “Soap.”
_____________________________________________________

(Before I get hate mail from the felt-covered, highly opinionated cast of “Avenue Q,” I should add that I have nothing but respect for plain old puppetry. Really. Some of my best friends are socks.)
_____________________________________________________

“The Two and Only!” would be a richer show if Mr. Johnson did admit some doubts or anxieties, or for that matter explore the tribulations of living a life on the far fringes of show business.
_______________________________________________

The only squirm-inducing moment in the show is a tenderly sentimental one, when Mr. Johnson is forced to break it to his beloved Squeaky that, well, he’s just too sweet for television, and the producers of “Soap” are determined to go in another direction. As Mr. Johnson re-enacts this tortured encounter, you may uneasily wonder whether this painful heart-to-heart between man and puppet, obviously not part of a public performance, is in fact a re-creation of an actual scene from Mr. Johnson’s life. And come to slightly disturbing conclusions.
______________________________________________________

Updated On: 9/29/06 at 12:36 AM

[Corine2]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 7:45am

Ouch.
The snake looks like a sock puppet.

[folkyboy]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 8:51am

i spoke with someone at length on these boards about this show and how i said The Times was going to hate it too as they usually agree with me about shows.

god i love vindication!

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 9:26am

Clive's review is oddly similar to the NYTimes, though a bit more on the positive side:

NY Post

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 9:47am

Saw THE TWO AND ONLY a few days ago.

Johnson's an astonishingly talented ventriloquist, but the evening is a very scattershot affair, taking in (among other things) the history and reputation of ventriloquism (they were originally considered to be instruments of Satan and later, mentally ill), the science of how sound travels, and Johnson's life from rural Texas to his relationship with his mentor who fashioned his alter-ego 'Squeaky' for him, to his career on the TV sitcom "Soap" with snarky "Bob" (who makes a funny appearance, reminiscent of the banter between Edgar Bergen & Charlie McCarthy). Bits of this and that, some very moving and sentimental... but it never really jells.

Without his taking characters, ambling around a simple and handsome set consistiong of trunks, baskets and boxes of various sizes, Johnson is genial but manic (he seemed over-miked). And his stories were only intermittently interesting. The history of the art was fascinating to me, but the travails of working on "Soap" made me drowsy. And at nearly two hours, the show is TOO LONG. Trimming some of thse bits would help keep the audience at attention. I saw several snoozers around me at these points, though they were up and rapt whenever Johnson used a puppet.

THE TWO AND ONLY isn't quite sure what breed of duck it is - it's not exactly a kids show - several of the characters make four-letter wisecracks, and there is a routine with a severed head that might creep out a few (though I loved it). The material is uneven - I thought the vulture and especially the monkey routines were interminable and deadly (though they elicited lots of laughter from the audience) but Johnson's simplest routines, with less traditional 'partners'- a sock-puppet snake, an everyday yellow telephone, a talking drawing and especially, a tennis ball named Spaulding - were breathakingly magical and completely captivating. The show could have used more of these off-kilter choices.

Updated On: 9/29/06 at 09:47 AM

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 10:03am

Daily News gives quite a good notice. It's brief but is almost entirely positive. Good quotes for under the marquee. Anyone been to the show this week and have an idea how their attendance has been for week 2? The numbers for the 1st 7 shows were pretty sad, it'd be nice if they were in the 30s or 40s for their opening week. It doesn't sound fun doing a 1-man show for a house less than a quarter full.
New York Daily News

[folkyboy]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 10:37am

when i saw it in the pre-broadway run in Boston there were 10 people in there. and 8 of them were comps as i came wicked early and watched a person come in and ask about their 8 comp tickets.

[Calvin]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 10:41am

I figured that the reviews would be all over the place. I'm still not sold that this show is a good fit for a Broadway house. Theatermania's predicition that it will do boffo business was pretty bold.

eta: And I have to agree with Isherwood about the creepy aspect...that whole putting the cloth over the eyes so the soul doesn't escape thing was a little wacky...

i spoke with someone at length on these boards about this show and how i said The Times was going to hate it too as they usually agree with me about shows.

But I think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say he hated it...there was some praise mixed in with the criticism. Updated On: 9/29/06 at 10:41 AM

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 9/29/06 at 11:28am

The Times review didn't strike me as particularly negative, I wouldn't say he hated it. Newsday didn't seem too fond of the show either, but also had the same nice things to say about Johnson's performance. Sounds like it's pretty mixed-negative all around.


Newsday Review