| THE RIVER: New York Times Review | |
| Posted by: | pierce 06:49 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Ben Brantley says Hugh Jackman "ascends with assurance to a new level as a stage actor," although the production itself, while "guaranteed to hold your attention," is one that audiences will leave "feeling hungry." | |
| Link | The River |
| reply to this message | | |
| Waiting for Iain | |
| Posted by: | stevemr 02:10 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Times Review - pierce 06:49 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| I'm anxiously waiting to see 6-year old Iain's take on this one! | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: THE RIVER: New York Times Review | |
| Posted by: | ukpaul 01:42 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Times Review - pierce 06:49 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| I thought of this as similar in its beautiful stasis as 'The Weir', sharing not only its watery title. Plays transferring such as this would be better off aiming at a different audience than a Broadway one; especially at the ridiculous prices needed to make them work financially. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| THE RIVER: NY Daily News Review | |
| Posted by: | pierce 07:00 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Times Review - pierce 06:49 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Joe Dziemianowicz says Hugh Jackman gives a "striking" performance in Jez Butterworth's "slight but twisty drama." | |
| Link | The River |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| THE RIVER: New York Post Review | |
| Posted by: | pierce 07:09 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: NY Daily News Review - pierce 07:00 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Elisabeth Vincentelli calls Hugh Jackman "manly and stoic," but adds that he's "wasting his time, and ours, in The River" | |
| Link | The River |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: THE RIVER: New York Post Review | |
| Posted by: | twocents 09:57 am EST 11/18/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Post Review - pierce 07:09 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Jumbo is mostly shrill. You gotta love it! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: THE RIVER: New York Post Review | |
| Posted by: | Ann 09:04 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Post Review - pierce 07:09 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| That's a good description of his performance, and I would like to see it with a another cast (which I would have whether this production would have happened or not). I'm not sure his persona is the best one for this character. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| That's a review I agree with | |
| Posted by: | dramedy 07:24 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Post Review - pierce 07:09 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| "He knows, he was there" is a great! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| THE RIVER: Variety Review | |
| Posted by: | pierce 07:18 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Post Review - pierce 07:09 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Marilyn Stasio says "...While Jackman puts heart and soul into (Jez) Butterworth’s mystical meditations on the spiritual properties of trout fishing...after a while you feel the urge to throw these fishy speeches back into the water." | |
| Link | The River |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Of course in one of the Aengus myths... | |
| Posted by: | garyd 03:37 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: Variety Review - pierce 07:18 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| he turns himself and his lady friend into swans and they fly away, singing beautiful music that put all listeners asleep for three days and nights. A limited engagement no doubt. It appears, for many, Butterworth has done the same. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| THE RIVER: Hollywood Reporter Review | |
| Posted by: | pierce 07:23 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: Variety Review - pierce 07:18 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| David Rooney says "Despite the considerable charisma and commitment of its outsize star, Hugh Jackman, this new work is a sliver of a mood piece that never tightens its grip." | |
| Link | The River |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| THE RIVER: USA Today Review | |
| Posted by: | pierce 07:43 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: Hollywood Reporter Review - pierce 07:23 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Elysa Gardner says Jackman's performance is "one of the bravest and most carefully calibrated he has ever given" in Jez Butterworth's "absorbing but frustrating puzzle of a play." | |
| Link | The River |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| im surprised it's getting this many neg reviews | |
| Posted by: | dramedy 07:25 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: Hollywood Reporter Review - pierce 07:23 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Ny times is all that matters and it was a rave. And the show is critic proof and probably nearly sold out for the run anyway. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: im surprised it's getting this many neg reviews | |
| Posted by: | Jackson 10:00 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | im surprised it's getting this many neg reviews - dramedy 07:25 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| "Did He Like It?" classifies The Times review as on the fence. The only Thumbs Up review is from TONY. J | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| thumbs up from Tony | |
| Posted by: | Thom915 10:05 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: im surprised it's getting this many neg reviews - Jackson 10:00 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Since TONY gave the play its only rave apparently it helps this play to sit in an audience dominated by texters, people who applaud entrances and scene changes and talk and gesture during the play. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: thumbs up from Tony | |
| Posted by: | lowwriter 10:11 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | thumbs up from Tony - Thom915 10:05 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| I find myself agreeing with David Cote at TONY more than Ben Brantley. And when he's very enthusiastic I usually agree more. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| I'm surprised you're surprised -- you seem to be rooting for them (nm) | |
| Posted by: | MockingbirdGirl 07:42 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | im surprised it's getting this many neg reviews - dramedy 07:25 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| i just felt it was a show | |
| Posted by: | dramedy 09:41 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | I'm surprised you're surprised -- you seem to be rooting for them (nm) - MockingbirdGirl 07:42 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| that critics would rave no matter what they actually thought since they would follow the pack. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: i just felt it was a show | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 03:02 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | i just felt it was a show - dramedy 09:41 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| that's really not how it works. maybe for faux critics, not real ones. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: i just felt it was a show | |
| Posted by: | MikeR 02:52 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | i just felt it was a show - dramedy 09:41 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| How do critics follow the pack? They see shows on (mostly) the same days, they write their reviews at the same time, and the reviews get published at the same time. It seems highly unlikely that they would talk to each other about what they're going to write. If a critic from the Post or the Daily News writes a review that largely agrees with the critic from the Times, I suspect it's because the critics largely agree and not because the Post and/or Daily News critics are making an effort to fall in line with what they think the Times will publish. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic | |
| Posted by: | dramedy 06:56 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | THE RIVER: New York Times Review - pierce 06:49 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| A rave for this play. Ugh | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic | |
| Posted by: | TheOtherOne 08:11 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - dramedy 06:56 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| The continued clout of the Times' theatre critics is quite sad. Brantley and Isherwood seem far more interested in reviewing events and reflecting moods du jour than they do in allowing themselves to have, let alone write about, gut reactions to the shows they see. The Post and The News have far more reliable critics these days. They usually say a lot more with far fewer words. This play had very little appeal to me. I did not like "Jerusalem" and am more respectful than reverential when it comes to Jackman's talent. I do love the fact, however, that Hugh Jackman has brought three original pieces to NY. True, they had succeeded in other cities and/or countries beforehand, but they were not likely to see Broadway without him. He is not relying on revivals, he is continually using his stardom to take risks and he obviously likes to see chances taken on Broadway. These days it's hard for anyone to put such faith in Broadway into action whether or not they want to for reasons of cost alone. Bravo to him. May he never change. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic | |
| Posted by: | Delvino 08:28 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - TheOtherOne 08:11 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| I completely agree. Jackman took a risk with this play, no matter what anyone says. We need risk-taking, stars who embrace new work, knowing their participation ensures the project will have a high profile, and frankly, a shot at finding an audience. I felt the same way about Robin Williams doing "Tiger..." Nathan Lane in "The Nance." Linda Lavin in "The Lyons." The list goes on. I hope if Bradley Cooper sells out in "Elephant Man," he'll return in a new play. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic | |
| Posted by: | Ann 09:02 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - Delvino 08:28 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| What risk did Jackman take with this play? Saying that implies some kind of possible personal hit. I don't see anything risky about the play (which I liked, but did not find revelatory or daring, already being a fan of the playwright, who isn't an unknown) and even if it had bombed, I don't see how he would have suffered some kind of career damage. I can appreciate - very much = stars bringing new work to light, but for someone like Jackman, I don't think I agree that "risk" is the right word. (And, personally, I appreciate more their bringing attention to new plays being produced outside of Broadway.) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 03:05 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - Ann 09:02 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| >> Saying that implies some kind of possible personal hit. i couldn't agree more. not playing it entirely safe (coming in with a revival of a musical) is not the same thing as taking a risk. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Of risk and play development. | |
| Posted by: | Delvino 11:40 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - Ann 09:02 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| I take your point, but still somewhat respectfully disagree. This issue for me is the evolution/development of a play, which does have risks (of a sort) attached. I still subscribe to Marsha Norman's adage that every script takes three productions to get right. Many writers support her contention, there's a process built in; plays grow. And we know that Butterworth continued to work on this play in New York, adjusting the last few lines several lines, likely instigating other changes. Playwrights learn as they go, and texts are seldom frozen this early in the process (DISGRACED changed, moving from Chicago to London.) No, Jackman didn't take a personal risk except to lend support to a newish project still finding its stage legs. I can't help but compare that to Bradley Cooper -- and honestly, I'm not criticizing Cooper here -- who chose to return to Broadway in a role long polished by the playwright, proven, tried, and re-tried. It's been a vehicle for everyone from David Bowie to (fill in the blank). Ask actors, that's more of a risk-averse choice. So if we grade risk on a scale (and I know we do not need to), I'd certainly put Jackman's in a different league than Cooper's. It's still good news both men are here, pulling crowds. On the other hand, Jackman followed West's performance in London. Creating a role is where the (degree of) artistic risk is taken. No writer knows if a play -- or character -- work until a production. Sometimes more than one production, as noted above. Perhaps we're parsing risk, unfairly, inappropriately. Personal career risk is somewhat different from artistic risk. I 100% agree that artists more frequently taking risks outside of New York would be exciting and nurturing to new work and play development in general. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Meryl Streep went to Seattle Rep to do a workshop of AN AMERICAN DAUGHTER by Wendy Wasserstein. On B'way it was Kate Nelligan. But Streep helping Wasserstein find the play early on was a true gift to that play's development. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Of risk and play development. | |
| Posted by: | Ann 11:50 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | Of risk and play development. - Delvino 11:40 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| I think Cooper's situation is quite different, as he has a long history with the play and, from what he has said, was happy to be doing it at Williamstown, without initially thinking about Broadway. A really different track from Jackman and The River, to me. I'll agree to disagree with the risk here. The way I see it, even if it failed, regional theaters would still pounce on The River - simply because it was done. Jackman assured that - not risked it. And it wasn't an unknown to those involved. I'm just not seeing a whole lot of risk on this one, but that's why they make chocolate and vanilla (but, wait, I like both chocolate and vanilla!). ... | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Of risk and play development. | |
| Posted by: | Delvino 12:21 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Of risk and play development. - Ann 11:50 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Solid points, good discussion; thank you. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Just read the London reviews of the play | |
| Posted by: | lowwriter 09:56 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - Ann 09:02 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| I looked at the London reviews of the Royal Court London production last year with Dominic West (another wonderful actor). The reviews were very positive so I'm not surprised the show was produced here. The Royal Court is a small theater and so is the Circle in the Square. | |
| Link | Independent UK review |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Important note re the London venue for The River | |
| Posted by: | NewtonUK 11:06 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | Just read the London reviews of the play - lowwriter 09:56 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| The River was not produced in the Main House, but in the Jerwood Theatre Upstairs - which has a maximum capacity, depending on confioguration, of ninety (90) seats. (This is also, coincidentally, the theatre where Rocky Horror Show was first performed. Imagine THAT experience!) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| clout is probably the better word than risk | |
| Posted by: | dramedy 09:48 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - Ann 09:02 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| because taking on an iconic role like Willy Loman or Hamlet or Macbeth can be very risky for an actor since the comparisons to previous actors successes will find their way into the reviews. HJ uses his clout to get new works to Broadway and other actors should try to do the same. I've never really felt revivals are all that safe for actors--just investors. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: clout is probably the better word than risk | |
| Posted by: | Delvino 05:37 pm EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | clout is probably the better word than risk - dramedy 09:48 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Good points. Any reminted Willy or Blanche enters a crowded museum filled with ghosts, beloved ghosts, used as sometimes cruel yardsticks to measure work. As a first-time player, the creative risks are lower in that sense, because no one faces the gold standard(s) to hold the performance up against. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| That's what I wish ... | |
| Posted by: | jdm 08:21 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - TheOtherOne 08:11 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| Denzel Washington would do - stop doing revivals and star in a new show. With his appeal, it would be nice for him to support a new playwright. Well, maybe next time .... Jim | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic | |
| Posted by: | bythesea2007 08:11 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - dramedy 06:56 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| No, you would make an excellent critic, thebp,sy was simply awful. And the NYT was hardly a rave. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic | |
| Posted by: | bythesea2007 08:12 am EST 11/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Clearly, I would be a terrible,critic - bythesea2007 08:11 am EST 11/17/14 |
|
| |
| The play, that is. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
All That Chat is intended for the discussion of
theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)
Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.
[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Sound Advice Upcoming Releases CDs/Books/DVDs, etc. | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]
Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]
Time to render: 0.374775 seconds.