Aaron Sorkin's TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD Adaptation to premiere on Broadway December 13, 2018- Page 3

[Robbie2]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 10:06pm

DaveyG said: "Wonder which theatre? The Kerr?"

 

Bart likes the Belasco so I believe it will end up there

 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 10:09pm

Robbie2 said: "Bart likes the Belasco so I believe it will end up there"

Although it's gearing up to be a surefire flop, Gettin' the Band Back Together is supposed to open at the Belasco in August.

[Robbie2]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 10:13pm

BroadwayConcierge said: "Robbie2 said: "Bart likes the Belasco so I believe it will end up there"

Although it's gearing up to be a surefire flop,Gettin' the Band Back Togetheris supposed to open at the Belasco in August."

 

O yea...lol we shall see

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 10:17pm

The Lincoln center backed Falsettos played the Kerr, which makes the most sense that this would play there too.

[Robbie2]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 10:30pm

Call_me_jorge said: "The Lincoln center backed Falsettos played the Kerr, which makes the most sense that this would play there too."

 

Dude, Falsettos was all about Jordan Roth as the Kerr is a Jujamcyn house

[JVJ93]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 11:10pm

I see this going to the Belasco after Getting the Band Back Together opens and closes within two months

[RippedMan]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 11:13pm

I feel like both Gideon and Celia are going to give the perforce we expect - awkward, scrunchy face - performances, which is less exciting.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 2/15/18 at 11:22pm

RippedMan said: "awkward, scrunchy face - performances"

...what?

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 4:36pm

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Harper-Lee-Estate-Sues-Over-in-Aaron-Sorkins-Broadway-Bound-TO-KILL-A-MOCKINGBIRD-20180314

"The author's estate is suing over screenwriter Aaron Sorkin's script of the play, claiming that it 'deviates too much from the novel, and violates a contract, between Ms. Lee and the producers, which stipulates that the characters and plot must remain faithful to the spirit of the book.'"

Oh, boy.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 4:44pm

Can't buy this kind of publicity! As long as they actually win the suit, this whole incident could be very useful to pique the curiosity of the public. 

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 4:47pm

Sounds like Atticus won't be such a perfect white savior in this incarnation, which is making me interested. I heard that the role of the maid was expanded to include some heated debates between the two.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 5:15pm

My guess is that if the estate doesn’t like the adaptation, we won’t be seeing this on Broadway. Pretty cut and clear.

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 5:22pm

Good for the estate. They should protect this classic novel. Lee did not have Atticus becoming Atticus in the novel. That's a huge change. Not to mention casting adults in the children's roles.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 5:29pm

KathyNYC2 said: "They should protect this classic novel."

 

The novel will continue to exist exactly as it is, regardless of what Sorkin does in his play adaptation. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:08pm

@JBroadway "As long as they actually win the suit"

I assume by "they" you mean the production and not the estate.

"this whole incident could be very useful to pique the curiosity of the public."

Yes, but when? That suit ain't gonna end between now and Fall '18, and no question an injunction would issue. And even if the issue were a close call (and I don't think it is), I would not bet on Scott Rudin in a federal court in Alabama. 

FWIW, I agree with QueenAlice and I also agree with JBroadway that the book will remain intact, but that of course is irrelevant to the lawsuit. 

[ggersten]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:14pm

I am curious what Sorkin allegedly did. But the Lee Estate already changed Atticus by publishing the "sequel". (Based on reviews and comments. I did not read it)

[SDV]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:22pm

Any changes to Atticus in the sequel came from Harper Lee, who created him.

Updated On: 3/14/18 at 06:22 PM

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:34pm

Is this being produced by Rudin?

[adamgreer]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:35pm

The “sequel” to To Kill A Mockingbird was actually written prior to Mockingbird and not a sequel at all, despite what the publishers billed it as. It was revealed to be a first draft, and one of Lee’s editors encouraged her to focus more on the scenes where Scout was young (much of Watchmen is told in flashbacks). Lee then produced To Kill A Mockingbird.

I refuse to read the book, as the more I learned about it, the more I realize Lee never intended for it to be published. It became clear it was nothing more than a cash grab by her estate, who took advantage of her diminished mental capacity in her later years in getting the book published.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:42pm

HogansHero said: "I assume by "they" you mean the production and not the estate."

 

I did, yes. Sorry to be unclear. 



"That suit ain't gonna end between now and Fall '18, and no question an injunction would issue. "

 

Fair enough. To be honest I don't know much about these things. I just feel like controversy of this kind has often led to more public curiosity. But yes, you're right, the timing is significant. 

 

[bk]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:47pm

I simply have no interest in Aaron Sorkin's To Kill a Mockingbird.  This isn't a movie.  And clearly whatever the contract is does not include turning the novel To Kill a Mockingbird into something Mr. Sorkin thinks it should be.  And Go Set a Watchman is irrelevant, since Mr. Sorkin is not adapting that first draft of To Kill a Mockingbird.  I wish Watchman had never been published and I, too, believe Ms. Lee was taken advantage of.  I do hope the estate wins here.

[Cat Guy]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 6:54pm

KathyNYC2 said: "Good for the estate. They should protect this classic novel. Lee did not have Atticus becoming Atticus in the novel. That's a huge change. Not to mention casting adults in the children's roles."
 

I agree.  Casting adults in the roles of children is, from my perspective, nothing more than a gimmick.  How else does Sorkin intend to "adapt" this classic story?  If it makes it to Broadway in this form, I won't be wasting money to see it.  Better to stay home and re-read the book as written.

Updated On: 3/14/18 at 06:54 PM

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 7:01pm

I'm pretty sure that it's been written as a memory play just like how the book is and that's the reason for the casting of adults.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 3/14/18 at 7:01pm

Casting adults as the children is not a gimmick, it is a viable directorial choice and many productions featuring the Christopher Sergal adaptation have also used adult actors playing the children.

The Sergel adaptation is horrible but apparently Lee turned down countless other requests to adapt the novel for the stage, reportedly including one from Horton Foote.

I think the estate will easily be able to make a case that this adaptation is thus not what Lee herself would have authorized and this is going to be a clear cut and dry victory for them.

Updated On: 3/14/18 at 07:01 PM

[newintown]

Posted: 3/15/18 at 11:41am

"Casting adults as the children is not a gimmick, it is a viable directorial choice..."

You say "eether" and I say "either."

Personally, I have no objection to the actions here of this (problematic) estate; I confess that I also have absolutely no interest in an "adaptation" of this great novel by a low-brow TV writer like Sorkin, attempting to "fix" the novel's "problems." If you want To Kill A Mockingbird, try picking up the book and reading it. If you want a play that's only somewhat similar to Mockingbird, write your own story.