THE GLASS MENAGERIE Previews (2017 Revival)- Page 5

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 2/9/17 at 11:32pm

I'm just getting home from tonight's preview and I fall firmly into the camp of not being very impressed by this revival. I didn't despise it with the rage of a thousand suns or anything- small moments here and there worked for me- but overall I thought it was a mess.

I do lump this Menagerie in with A View From The Bridge, Crucible and Streetcar at St. Ann's from last season. Each of these productions stripped their plays of any time and place in what I can only assume was an attempt at finding a deeper universality than the particular setting the author chose. (Far be it for one of these directors to actually trust a playwright's vision, and of course we're not talking about hacks here who could use the helping hand!) Part of what makes these plays so special IS the specificity of setting though, and in deconstructing and dismantling every thing in the text we are robbed of the richness and detail the authors intended us to experience.

Sam Gold, whose direction of Fun Home, John and The Flick I count up there as some of the best in the past 5 years, seems completely lost in his own mess of a concept here. In fact, Gold almost seems to have contempt for the text, blatantly defying everything Williams writes.

Tom tells us the memory play is dimly lit- the house lights remain on for 30 minutes

Some of Amanda's earliest lines are telling Tom not to push his food around on his plate- Tom is not pushing food around on his plate. Tom doesn't even have a plate in front of him. Tom isn't even at a table!

We are told it is the 1930's- other than the Victrola nothing indicates we are in the 1930's, and that includes set, costumes, acting style, atmosphere- nothing

We are constantly reminded of Amanda's Southern Belle roots- Amanda has been stripped of any trace of an accent or Southern comportment. It comes as a complete shock at the end when Tom says he left St. Louis and the state of Missouri. So that's where we've been all this time! Why keep the line if it hasn't mattered for the whole play?

I could go on, but as you can see from the smallest detail to the bigger picture Gold really doesn't care what Williams has written. He's going to do what he wants to do whether it makes sense or not. 

AC nailed the descriptions of the four actors, each in their own plays. Wittrock I guess is the most successful, but even his performance is jarring, being so unlike the other three before him. He's very chipper and energetic, like a version of Dandy without the murderous impulses. Field does mostly good work, but she is allowed to become a complete shrew in places and her party dress is absolutely atrocious and wrong. Mantello could be a great Tom in a different production I think, but right now it's just not quite working as well as I expected. Quinto- a complete revelation in the role- is a tough act to follow; nothing feels half as inspired here as the stage work Mantello last did in The Normal Heart. I did not care for Madison Ferris' Laura at all and I felt her disability was exploited for this production. 

I don't understand the cutting of the intermission, but I won't complain about that here because it at least got me out of that theater 15 minutes sooner. 

Updated On: 2/9/17 at 11:32 PM

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 2/9/17 at 11:44pm

Just out of curiosity Whizzer, where were you sitting?

[@z5]

Posted: 2/9/17 at 11:49pm

What's the running time since there's no intermission?

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 2/9/17 at 11:51pm

2 hours, 5 minutes

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 2/9/17 at 11:54pm

I was sitting in the mezz. I had no trouble hearing the actors, so complaints about projecting from the first preview must have been addressed. No issues with sightlines either. 

[BakerWilliams]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 1:16am

newintown, your comment got some traction on Tumblr for how unbelievably offensive it is. Congrats!

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 1:27am

BakerWilliams said: "newintown, your comment got some traction on Tumblr for how unbelievably offensive it is. Congrats!

 

"

I wouldn't exactly call 12 notes "traction".

[BakerWilliams]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 2:26am

Hey, it's more traction than I get on my tumblr (which is nonexistent)

[newintown]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 8:10am

"newintown, your comment got some traction on Tumblr for how unbelievably offensive it is. Congrats!"

Really? Got a link? 

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 8:31am

I'm disabled and I am not offended by your post at all. I definitely understand what you were understanding and I appreciate it.

At that said, I'm very disappointed by reviews, especially with Madison. and I'm going to forget this one. BTW: Do you think Madison's new Laura is under Sam Gold's direction? 

[AC126748]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 8:33am

disneybroadwayfan22, what do you mean by "Madison's new Laura"? Are you referring to how she's been directed to play the role?

[newintown]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 8:36am

Thank you very much, disneybroadwayfan22, that's an unexpectedly nice thing to read on here.

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 8:36am

Yeah, do you think it's because Sam wants this Laura to be bitter and cold?

And btw, bumped into this on Twitter 

http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/20170203_Ferris__Broadway_bound__one_determined_step_at_a_time.html

[AC126748]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 8:40am

Having seen this performance, I don't think I would describe her Laura as bitter or cold in any way. If anything, Gold's direction makes Laura a nonentity, defined almost entirely by her disability. (I agree with Whizzer that it often feels exploitative). I think that a stronger actress might have been able to overcome this, but Ferris isn't there. 

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 8:41am

newintown said: "Thank you very much, disneybroadwayfan22, that's an unexpectedly nice thing to read on here.

 

"

Oh, hell yeah, of course! We, disabled people, have our trials and tribulations. We may not be anxious like Laura, but sometimes our disabilities do caught up with us like Laura.  

[little_sally]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 10:47am

Overall I found this to be a conceptual mess. I agree with the poster who said all four actors feel like they're in different productions. Sally Field would probably make a great Amanda somewhere else but not in this version. Joe Mantello is really too old for Tom, and his performance made the character feel inconsequential (or perhaps I can't get Zachary Quinto's interpretation out of my head.) Finn Wittrock is overeager, like a puppy, and it takes away from the emotional impact of Jim's scene with Laura. I had tears streaming down my face during that scene in the 2013 production but last night I felt nothing. That being said, Madison Ferris really does come off too amateurish, and having Laura being played by someone in a wheelchair takes away from the character as she was intended. How are we to believe she spends her days walking around town instead of going to business school, or that she has a disability that Amanda claims is hardly noticeable, if we're spending long moments of the play watching the actress getting in and out of her wheelchair?

There's no sense and time or place, and the playing space is just way too big for this play. I always felt like The Glass Menagerie is a bit of a claustrophobic play, and setting it on a bare stage makes it too cold and distant. I didn't understand the point of the house lights remaining on for the first half hour, nor did I understand the point of making it rain on stage. I've been a fan of Sam Gold's in the past but this just felt like he threw everything at the wall to see what sticks. None of it makes sense for The Glass Menagerie as it's written. It's a brilliant play, and Gold should've trusted the material.

[AC126748]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 10:51am

How are we to believe she spends her days walking around town instead of going to business school, or that she has a disability that Amanda claims is hardly noticeable, if we're spending long moments of the play watching the actress getting in and out of her wheelchair?

Also, they clearly live on an upper floor of a tenement apartment building. In the 1930s. So, no elevator. Laura would essentially be housebound if we were to take this interpretation at face value.

[cknick]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 11:02am

This is my favorite play and I'm so sorry to hear it's back with such mixed results.  I too am still haunted by the Tiffany production.

Initially, I liked the idea of Laura being played by an actress with a disability, but I wonder if it would have better results if the actress had a less physical disability.  I'm thinking someone like Jamie Brewer.  Then Amanda's dismissal of Laura's disability would be more believable

[Kad]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 11:07am

Count me in as someone who was moved immensely by the Tiffany revival; I saw it twice and was blown away both times.

I don't think the text supports Laura being disabled, personally. If she is, it pushes Amanda's delusional optimism to something far greater. The play also seems strongly built around the idea that Laura uses the idea of being disabled to justify her stasis in life and her lack of self worth, rather than actually being inhibited by the limits of her body. I haven't seen this production so I can't comment on whether Gold's interpretation works, but I am finding myself hard-pressed to justify the decision based on my reading and experiences with the play.

Updated On: 2/10/17 at 11:07 AM

[Owen22]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 11:09am

About ten years ago (possibly more) I saw Sally Field's Amanda at the Kennedy Center. She was the finest Amanda Wingfield I had ever seen and have since seen (including Cherry Jones). Her's was the only Amanda I could easily imagine as once the coquettish Southern belle with a room full of gentlemen callers. Her entire history was written on her performance. As she was probably too old for the role even then (though she's always had a youthful veneer) I was a little surprised she was returning to Amanda. But with such a fantastic director I was so sure her performance would be a triumph once again. I feel so bad for her that she seems to be, as reported, stuck in a mess of bad concepts. She really once was spectacular in that role.

Updated On: 2/10/17 at 11:09 AM

[cknick]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 11:15am

Kad, 100% agree about Laura and Tiffany.  One of my greatest regrets is only seeing that production once.  I should have gone multiple times when I was in the city. 

If a production wanted to explore that (as this one seems to) then a less physical disability would seem the way to go.  That would also be more in line with Williams' actual sister.

Updated On: 2/10/17 at 11:15 AM

[HighFlyingAdored97]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 11:30am

I'm not really understanding the insistence that Laura isn't really disabled. She most definitely has a limp, and anyone who magnifies the extent of their limp that much that they imagine people staring at them all the time/throw up at the thought of attending a college class pretty clearly has some sort of severe social anxiety disorder. Mental illness is just as much of a disability as a physical illness.

[cknick]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 11:39am

HighFlyingAdored97, you are right.  That's what I'm getting at (and I think others too) in saying that such a severe physical disability in Laura isn't quite right.  Mental illness is absolutely a disability and much more appropriate to Laura. 

[Kad]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 11:47am

I apologize for using imprecise language, but, yes, clearly Laura has mental illness and clearly Laura has a limp. However, neither are the same as a physical disability requiring a wheelchair. I don't believe the play supports Laura having a physical disability that would require a wheelchair or another type physical aid for mobility.

 

I am aware this is a nonliteral take on the play, and certainly there are examples of casting that goes against the text in order to highlight something (see: the strapping Russell Tovey as  Rudolpho in van Hove's View from the Bridge, done in order to comment on the psychology of Eddie). But I just can't wrap my mind around this casting as of now.

Updated On: 2/10/17 at 11:47 AM

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 2/10/17 at 12:00pm

I'm such a huge fan of Sam Gold and some of this cast that I think even my tepid response after the first preview was the result of forced optimism, The more I reflect on this production, the more I have trouble with just about every element of it. I'm really surprised at Gold for having so little respect for the text and its author. Do whatever high-concept or stripped-bare shenanigans you want, but for god's sake, do it in service to the text and its specific heart. This is a real misfire; one that suffers even more by its proximity to the Tiffany revival.  

Updated On: 2/10/17 at 12:00 PM