FRANKIE AND JOHNNY closes July 28th- Page 2

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 11:13am

52889j said: "I do wonder if this could've been a smash at The New Group/NYTW/The Public/Signature/Second Stage, etc. built buzz, and then transferred for a limited run in the more conventional fall season and done okay."

To be fair, most people's speculation tends to chart a better path than reality on here... 

[JSquared2]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 11:19am

rg7759 said: "JSquared2 said: "rg7759 said: "Greedy in that they felt they had to open the show the instant a theater became available, instead of waiting 3 weeks and not be stealing anyone s thunder, and having a more open playing field and less press about other shows. Seeing the delay as lost income rather than the possible benefits of waiting"

Well that’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read on this board."

If you're not going to contribute to the discussion then I believe your comment can be deleted"

Well, not that your comments merit much response, but if you insist...  What is GREEDY about opening a show in the summertime?  We are talking about a 2 character play with 2 major stars, 1 of whom has a commitment to a TV series (Audra's starring role in The Good Fight) and the other a movie star with a stack of film commitments lined up.  They had a limited window where the stars aligned, a theatre was available, and they took it.  Pleas explain where the "greed" comes in?

 

[jayinchelsea]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 12:35pm

Damn shame. Audra and Shannon are terrific, and the play is one of Terrence's best. Hopefully the last few weeks will bring in bigger crowds.

 

[rg7759]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 12:37pm

It's obvious they were wrong. If they couldn't wait a few weeks they shouldn't have bothered at all.

[Mike Barrett]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 12:39pm

So that makes them greedy? 

[rg7759]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 1:23pm

Yes i don't think it's that controversial to say that wanting something now versus 3 weeks from now, regardless of the consequences, is the definition of greed

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 1:28pm

rg7759 said: "Yes i don't think it's that controversial to say that wanting something now versus 3 weeks from now, regardless of the consequences, is the definition of greed"

Sounds more like impatience.

[Mike Barrett]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 1:34pm

Yes but you aren't taking their schedules into account. 3 weeks is a long time to wait. Actors aren't available all the time, theatre aren't available all the time, so they jumped on it. I guess every broadway show/producer is greedy then by your standards. 

[JustAnotherNewYorker]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 2:04pm

I'm probably going to be a bit of a contrarian here. I don't think timing is the issue unless by timing you mean this year. I thought this was a play whose time had come and gone, at least as presented in this revival. After seeing that I thought that was an amazingly uncomfortable piece of theate, and not in a good way, partially because I know many of my friends would be triggered by this. I've confirmed this with the only female friend of mine who's seen it.

Telling a guy to leave and not having him leave is not romantic in 2019, and frankly wasn't really when this play came out. This was a really well acted and directed period piece that did nothing to address the fundamental creepiness of the character. In a year where Oklahoma found a way to be modern with a character (admittedly not the main love interest) who is, in the current vernacular, an incel, I thought this (and last year's Carousel) could have done better jobs of calling out their character's behavior somehow.

Anyway, when asked about it but friends who know I saw it, I've given that opinion. Most haven't bothered.

Updated On: 7/9/19 at 02:04 PM

[heartandpart]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 2:18pm

Super disappointing, I had tickets for August and won’t be able to see it before closing.

That being said, in my(admittedly amateur)analysis, I have to agree with an above poster that pointed out that perhaps this play just has fallen out of touch with the times. Last year’s Carousel revival faired better, but I think fell victim to a similar problem.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 2:18pm

rg7759 said: "What's most troubling is this is the 4th fairly star studded limited run straight play this year that couldn't stumble past an already short run to the finish line. Makes you wonder how long this can go on"

It is interesting, BUT.

-- King Lear did much better in its earlier weeks, then was crucified by critics

-- I know about 10 people who saw Gary.  Nine of them, including me, disliked - hated it. Word of mouth was bad for a show that should have opened in a 250 seat off-Broadway house

-- Frankie and Johhny did not warrant revival.  It is an okay, probably dated, play, but not up there with plays that usually get revived as often.  A lot of people opined on this board that it opened at the wrong time, a sentiment with which I agree, but I am sure that was based MacDonald's availability; but people just didn't want to see it.

I actually saw all three shows.  Loved King Lear, flaws and all, probably because I waist the second row, which was really good for that production.  I did not hate Gary, but I sat there after 10 minutes thinking 'and I could have seen X instead of this.  I liked Frankie, which I had never seen before, but didn't love it.  Shannon's approach to the role of Johnnie made me think that Frankie was going to regret this night for the rest of her life, if the relationship developed further.

Updated On: 7/9/19 at 02:18 PM

[bear88]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 2:43pm

The play never had an audience to lose, but I did find it dated and thought the Johnny character was creepy instead of an intense romantic. My college-age daughter didn't like it at all. My wife didn't care for it either.

The performances were quite good, but yeah, there was no reason to root for that relationship to succeed.  

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 3:06pm

rg7759 said: "Yes i don't think it's that controversial to say that wanting something now versus 3 weeks from now, regardless of the consequences, is the definition of greed"

Take the "L" and move on. You're not convincing anyone with your increasingly silly comments.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 7/9/19 at 10:51pm

rg7759 said: "What's most troubling is this is the 4th fairly star studded limited run straight play this year that couldn't stumble past an already short run to the finish line. Makes you wonder how long this can go on"

I'm not 100% sure which plays you're referring to but while starry casting can have a big impact, I think you also have to produce plays that people want to see. Audiences are not going to be dragged into the theater when there are so many other demands on their time. 

What Jarethan said. Not that I agree with every point but that it's not like these were perfect plays/productions inexplicably not beloved by audiences. 

[Pippin]

Posted: 7/10/19 at 9:43am

I saw it last night, the first performance after the closing notice. Bought a mezz ticket. It was 90% empty. A very depressing sight. I moved up to the second row center, so my view was fantastic.

I wasn’t familiar with the play, and I enjoyed it, I think mostly due to the fantastic performances by McDonald and Shannon.

But the saddest part of the night was during the curtain call. With the knowledge of the closing, Audra looked up into an empty mezzanine and I saw so much sadness and hurt in her eyes. It actually made me tear up a bit.


Shame this couldn’t find an audience, the acting was superb.

[rg7759]

Posted: 7/10/19 at 10:54pm

I'm now intrigued by the comparison with burn this. Assuming both plays equal on merit, if it were audra/Adam and Keri/Shannon whichever play Adam did would be the successful one. Since audras not singing, it unfortunately takes away her selling point. Side note, I saw burn this recently, so Keri had some time to improve and I was very impressed.

[devonian.t]

Posted: 7/11/19 at 5:45am

I'm sure Audra understands the reality of shows sometimes not finding and audience.  This is just a small episode before her next huge success.

[Mike Barrett]

Posted: 7/11/19 at 7:08am

Yep, she’s been around the business long enough to understand this. It’s sad though, but I have a feeling Audra can bounce back. She just may not be able to sell a straight play very well. I could easily see tourists who have even heard her name go “Why see her if she can’t sing?” It’s a shame. Think I might go next week

[astorian_ofthe_heart]

Posted: 7/11/19 at 10:09am

bear88 said: "The play never had an audience to lose, but I did find it dated and thought the Johnny character was creepy instead of an intense romantic. My college-age daughter didn't like it at all. My wife didn't care for it either.

The performances were quite good, but yeah, there was no reason to root for that relationship to succeed."

Completely agree. This was the major problem for me with this production. It's super dated. Add that to opening right at the beginning of the 2019 season, during summer, with plenty of starry, glitzy, award-winning musicals open--this was never going to end well.

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/11/19 at 11:47am

JustAnotherNewYorker said: "Telling a guy to leave and not having him leave is not romantic in 2019"

But, baby, it's cold outside!