Sweet Bird of Youth in Chicago- Page 2

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/20/12 at 5:43pm

I'd love to hear the take from someone who doesn't know the play or even the film.

Even if Cromer seems oblivious about Night of the Iguana, it's interesting that in The NY Times, Lane says that she has been trying to get people to do a revival of Iguana on Broadway with her for a number of years now...

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 3:40pm

I'll be curious to hear the reviews after opening night, tonight.

The Goodman's website has a typically fluffy audience reaction video, but it does have a few (silent) clips from the production. Not many new thoughts from me, but I do like the colour scheme (and thought that Lane's grey outfit looked awfully conservative for Princess, but then I realized I think it's from the final Act when she's starting to sober up and face reality). http://www.goodmantheatre.org/watch-listen/?pageid=1951

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 4:18pm

*edit* The Chicago Sun-Times in their article about the opening has a slightly longer video montage with much of the same footage, but none of the random audience praise for those interested. http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/weiss/15254167-452/goodman-theatres-sweet-bird-of-youth-takes-flight.html

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 5:02pm

You've come a long way, baby!

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 5:21pm

I'd actually never seen that Time cover before--just heard it referenced before. Thanks for the link.

[jon5202]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 9:36pm

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/theater/theaterloop/ct-ent-0925-sweet-bird-review-20120924,0,4242149.column

[jon5202]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 9:38pm

http://newcitystage.com/2012/09/24/review-sweet-bird-of-youthgoodman-theatre/

[egghumor]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 10:00pm

Thanks jon and Eric for posting the features and reviews. I found Chris Jones' review in the Tribune especially fascinating.

[somethingwicked]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 10:36pm

Brantley is a rave, especially for Diane Lane. I could see Roundabout picking this up for a limited run in a heartbeat.

http://theater.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/theater/reviews/sweet-bird-of-youth-revived-by-goodman-theater.html?adxnnl=1&ref=theater&adxnnlx=1348540565-eEAREKfHPGGU/X4r2icc6Q&_r=0moc.semityn.retaeht

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 10:51pm

Yes, thanks for those reviews, they're great to read.

One nitpick--it's funny how Dennis Polkow in the Stage calls the play Williams' last real success, but Chris Jones implies it wasn't a success on Broadway. I'd argue he had one more significant commercial stage success with Night of the Iguana which got some of his better reviews of his later works, and shouldn't be discounted (and was a successful movie), but as I mentioned elsewhere Cromer himself seems to forget about it in his interviews so maybe they are just going from his interview. I'd also argue that Bird was a true success, even if part of that success was surely due to the fact that Paul Newman was onstage and by then was a big star (though it did go through a cast change with Rip Torn promoted to the role of Chance)--and it is true that the critics were starting to turn on Williams and the perception that he was getting increasingly lurid (what with Orpheus Descending, Suddenly Last Summer, and then Bird all playing pretty close to each other)...

Anyway I liked Jones review a lot, and more and more appreciate what the design sounds like--from the clips I wondered if the bar scene had the scenery moving--it sounds effective. I also like the approach it seems Lane has taken--as great as Page is, people often seem to want to play the role as something of a drag queen which doesn't mesh with the final act.

And as much as I love the play, I'll happily admit it is fairly unwieldy--I like how it goes from an intimate play to a big one to intimate again. Someone who saw a preview here mentioned how Act II felt really short and odd--and it sounds like this was a director's choice, and one that as Jones says doesn't seem to work.

*edit* Nice to see that review from Brantley (but man, I wish he'd look into somehow changing his writing style...). He has trouble with the middle part--and I admit that it is a big shift in tone and style--I like the mix of the two, but it's definitely messy in a way that Williams' most loved plays, I guess, aren't.

I agree with SOmethingwicked, that from the reviews alone it does seem like something the Roundabout or someone else would want to pick up for a limited engagement, and it would be nice to see a less often done Williams play on Broadway. From some of those articles it sounds like both Lane and Whittrock have tentative plans for moving on once the Chicago run is over, but it didn't sound like it would be imposible to get them on board.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/25/12 at 4:38am

A decidedly mixed review from the Sun-Times http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/15295550-421/goodman-theatres-sweet-bird-of-youth-never-fully-takes-flight.html

[jon5202]

Posted: 9/25/12 at 9:25am

A few more reviews - more mixed than positive

http://www.theatreinchicago.com/review.php?playID=5756

Updated On: 9/25/12 at 09:25 AM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/25/12 at 4:51pm

I get the impression *some* of the mixed reviews take issue with the play7 itself, which isn't completely unexpected. I do think it's a weird criticism that the production looks too beautiful--I actually think that helps point out the hypocricy and one of the main themes Williams wants in the play. I do hope if the production has an afterlife, that Cromer takes the suggestions to use the longer Act II and not move one ofthe scenes to Act III which doesn't seem to work.

Slightly connected: I didn't realize that Angelica Page (who's Rip Torn and Geraldine Page's daughter) was doing a one woman show about her mom, off Broadway. http://www.turningpagetheplay.com/home2.htm

[SimplyShowbiz]

Posted: 9/25/12 at 7:46pm

Never read the book, never saw the film. This is my take on opening night of SWEET BIRD OF YOUTH at the GOODMAN THEATERE in Chicago.

http://simply-showbiz.com/blog/archives/37422

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/25/12 at 8:38pm

Well there isn't really a "book"

I'd love tohear a novice's take, but I've tried opening your link on two pages and I get the header, and then a lot of white except for a Rosemary Clooney youtube video...

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/25/12 at 8:43pm

OK, got it to work. I'm pleased that someone who didn't know the play, was so taken by it! Great to read... (My one mild objection is I think the Princess ultimately is different than Norma Desmond in several ways, even if it's easy to see the similarities. The big difference being that she does kinda literally and figuritevly sober up at the play's end. Yes Williams still has some irony about what her comeback is--and she may not be fully aware--in the film another major change is they have her comeback be absolutely triumphant, but it is an important difference). In case anyone wondered, I wish I could see this.

[customsay]

Posted: 9/26/12 at 10:48am

I think moving this production - to the Roundabout or any Broadway house - would pose a significant commercial risk, despite the mostly positive reviews I've read so far. All the critics who've weighed in have cited the unevenness of Williams’s play and registered at least a quibble or two with Cromer's production. Also, Lane and Wittrock aren’t big enough marquee names to ignite the box office and none of the reviewers so far have hailed their performances as truly definitive or an “occasion”. Brantley certainly knows how to ramp up a rave, and he takes obvious pleasure in extolling the virtues of (mostly female) performers in the kind of breathless, gushing prose that extensions, transfers and sold-out performances are made of. His review of Lane’s performance is positive but lacks the giddiness and fervor of, for example, his discovery of Nina Arianda in VENUS IN FUR, his delight in seeing Donna Murphy cut loose in WONDERFUL TOWN, or his appreciation of Christine Ebersole’s career-capping turn in GREY GARDENS. Likewise, Brantley praises Wittrock but not in Jackman-ian terms that would establish him as the theatre's new must-see leading man. Nicole Kidman and James Franco, who were originally announced to headline this production on Broadway, might have lent more box office oomph, but who knows how they would have fared under Cromer’s direction, which I found unfocused and heavy-handed at the Goodman. Perhaps the show will eventually make it to New York but I don’t see this production, with this cast, enjoying a long or profitable run or sparking a profound reassessment of the play itself.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/26/12 at 12:51pm

I think that sounds more than fair (obviously, not having seen it myself). It sounds like, from another review linked above, Cromer's weird setting of the final part of Act II as part of Act III undermines the piece (is this a set issue? Audiences, IMHO, would be much more compelled back to their seats after the break as written).

Again, as an outsider, I'm not sure though that it couldn't be sold on a 9 week run. Lane *is* a big enough name, and selling something as "Tennessee Williams' Sweet Bird of Youth" can as well (it is one of his better known titles outside of the "big three", and Roundabout did just do a pretty awful production of a much more problematic play with Williams' Milk Train with Olympia Dukakis--though that could be a reason for Roundabout not to pick this up).

[Kad]

Posted: 9/26/12 at 1:09pm

Cromer would also rather stick to smaller houses.

[SimplyShowbiz]

Posted: 9/26/12 at 3:04pm

Eric! I'm so embarrassed for you! Have you never read the "Harlequin-Romance" version?!? ;->

http://simply-showbiz.com/blog/archives/37422

I'm covering my eyes, and am reading no more, because I've never seen the film -- but will respond after I watch it.

But before I go, may I say the dullards who gave this show a bad review are nuts. The Chicago Trib review said the set was "distracting." After I read that, I couldn't take anything else they said seriously.

P.S. We need to be friends on Facebook.

Bye! --Michael

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/26/12 at 4:32pm

Feel free to PM me then :P

[jon5202]

Posted: 9/29/12 at 9:27am

Review from All That Chat website which hits the mark for me:

http://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch412.html

[jayinchelsea]

Posted: 9/29/12 at 10:00am

Hoping current production gets extended one week more, as I'll be in Chicago for the last weekend of SUNDAY IN THE PARK, or that Roundabout or MTC or another production company picks it up and moves it to Broadway.

Did not see the original, but did see two very interesting revivals over the years: the magnificent Irene Worth, paired with the eccentricities of Chris Walken in a New York production in 1975, and later a Washington, DC revival in 1998 with two great performances from Elizabeth Ashley and Michael Hayden.

Yes, it is one of Williams' last successes, and while flawed, it contains some of his best later writing and two terrifically well-written leads. Time for New York to see it again!

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 9/29/12 at 3:07pm

It may be because I love Bird so much, but I'm getting a little bit sick of reading constantly how it's one of Williams' later "flawed" plays. He was stretching and experimenting by the late 50s (arguably even earlier, with Camino Real), but the things critics see as flaws in Bird--such as the very different middle act, an impression that probably is made worse in the weird way Cromer has moved scenes around--were verymuch done on purpose, I'd argue.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 10/1/12 at 1:07am

I saw tonight's performance and was very impressed. I had not seen the play or the movie before. I enjoyed this much more than the last show I saw at the Goodman, The Iceman Cometh. I thought the acting was equally as good, and the play itself was just better. Iceman beats its point to death over its five hours, whereas Sweet Bird leaves it's big dramatic impact for the end in Chance's final monologue (starting with that haunting clock), which gave me something to think about on the way home. However, while the first act was intriguing, it wasn't until the end of that act when the momentum really started and there was very much dramatic tension. I sort of wonder if they had the very attractive Finn Wittrock shirtless for the first scene just to keep us alert while we waited for the play to pick up. I am very glad to say that Finn Wittrock was just as intriguing after he put his shirt on. He was really the center of the play and held up very well against the fine acting around him. I was surprised that Diane Lane's part was as small as it was--all the advertising made it seem as if her character was the protagonist--but she did very well. Her performance really reminded me of Norma Desmond. In the first act, the play sort of reminded me of Sunset Boulevard, but better.

The design had many interesting ideas--some good, some bad. The projections felt a bit annoying for most of the show. When we entered the theatre, there was a good projection of moving palm trees on the translucent white curtain, which did a good job of setting the mood, but during the first act, Alexandra de Lago's face was projected from a live offstage camera onto a similar white curtain hanging in the room when she had a monologue spoken out the upstage window. I thought that was annoying. When Chance and Alexandra had sex, the white curtain came across the front of the stage and there was this weird projection of Chance in his underwear, diving, I think, (although that thought only occurred to me after Miss Lucy said she watched him dive, so I was a little confused at the time) which was a very strange choice. The turntable in the third act also felt unnecessary most of the time (there were a few scenes that happened as the turntable just spun for no apparent reason, which was distracting), but I thought it (and the projection) was used well in Boss Finley's speech.

I'll write more tomorrow because it's very late right now, but overall, I thought good acting and a good play were thankfully able to triumph over some odd and distracting uses of technology. I would recommend this production, but some unfortunate choices prevented it from being a "must-see" show.