| re: A Delicate Balance tonight | |
| Posted by: | Delvino 07:00 am EST 11/20/14 |
| In reply to: | A Delicate Balance tonight - AlanScott 01:07 am EST 11/20/14 |
|
| |
| When I accept your premise that the production is set in 1970 (I've beat a dead horse, and re-beat it about the contemporary era in which the production claims it's set, built on Albee's stating this in the new published edition), I agree with just about everything you said, particularly about Lithgow and Plimpton. And above all else, the rather extraordinary, bold new Edna of Higgins, unfortunate bourgeois caricaturing costume aside (mink over polyester, 1970 or 2014), for me, a powerful new take with depth added to this woman. It is clear here for the first time the degree to which she orchestrates -- directly or via passive aggressive manipulation -- much of the unexpected home invasion that defines the plot. Harry is almost, but not quite, her puppy here. And McKinnon consistently gives Edna the strongest position on stage, usurping the very spot the Close Agnes dominates. Blocking often becomes crucial to an interpretation of course, and it's fascinating here to watch the Higgins Edna literally command center stage in both of her big moments. I found her work riveting. Were we to get further into the weeds of the Glenn Close Agnes, we might have to agree to disagree. The bottom line, she's a wonderful actor, ideally cast, and does much to make a persuasive case. I wanted (much) more at times, but she's strong and in the two weeks since I've seen the production, probably grown far stronger. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: A Delicate Balance tonight | |
| Posted by: | AlanScott 07:29 pm EST 11/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: A Delicate Balance tonight - Delvino 07:00 am EST 11/20/14 |
|
| |
| A spoiler below at the end of the post. I don't know whether Close has adjusted her performance since you saw her, or simply gotten comfortable enough with her lines to convey her interpretation more clearly, or if we just see and the play (and the character) differently. I think she gives the best and most revelatory performance here. Of course, it could also be that I'm just seeing the character and play differently now, with more experience of the play (and more years of my own on this planet). Perhaps I would now view any actress in the role differently than I might have in the past. But this was the first time that I could really see the play more from Agnes's point of view. For the first time, I saw a woman with vulnerabilities who is in a very difficult situation (group of situations, really), with no one helping her to deal with them. Indeed, everyone around her seems to be making things worse for her. In the face of incredible stress and challenges, she maintains her poise. If she can also be nasty and cutting and sometimes ruthless, who can blame her? Who would like to be in her situation dealing with all these things? Who among us would deal better with them? There is a real clarity here to the series of decisions that Agnes must make. And perhaps because she so seems to be playing Agnes from the inside out, finding the stresses with which she must — the mix of obligation, self-image and demands on her — perhaps that is why she may still be struggling just a bit with her lines. Because her Agnes is so much more deeply involved with the realities of the character's given circumstances than I recall Hepburn or Harris having been. Honestly, when I saw her (some way into the run), Harris seemed totally lost. A great actress treading water. And Hepburn did her Hepburn, which fortunately suits the character to some degree but didn't seem to go very deep. That is a very good point about the staging for Edna. Strong as Higgins is, I still wish I could see an actress who seemed to give Edna charm and a certain type of intelligence and wit that would help explain how she became Agnes's best friend. Agnes has wit and intelligence, and no one I've seen has found a way to play Edna with those qualities. The rejection by Close's Agnes of Higgins's Edna at the end resonated so strongly for me. She is protecting herself and protecting her husband, but also dooming herself to feeling more alone than ever. But she has no choice. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| A bit more on the production and the play | |
| Posted by: | AlanScott 08:37 pm EST 11/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: A Delicate Balance tonight - AlanScott 07:29 pm EST 11/20/14 |
|
| |
| I also see in this production, in a way that I don't recall seeing before (or perhaps I just didn't pick up on it), a shift during the play in Claire's behavior. She seems to gradually move from trying to provoke Agnes to trying to support her while maintaining her own persona. When it comes down to it, family is family, and Agnes is giving her shelter, and she does see the impossibility of the situation with which Agnes is dealing. And perhaps, just perhaps, she doesn't want the presence of Edna and Harry to lead to her own expulsion. So she tries to exacerbate the tensions raised by their presence just enough without creating too much additional anger directed at her. She, in her own way, is performing a certain balancing act. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: A Delicate Balance tonight | |
| Posted by: | bret17 01:12 pm EST 11/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: A Delicate Balance tonight - Delvino 07:00 am EST 11/20/14 |
|
| |
| I was at yesterday's matinee. As an admirer of the film and the 1996 revival, I found this production to be equally as successful but certainly different. The stranger sitting next to me who was also familiar with the play and I were both struck by the amount comedy in evidence. John Lithgow BEING John Lithgow got so many laughs in unexpected places. Both the cat monologue and the breakdown near the end elicited great laughs without compromising the seriousness. By crossing his leg or staring or with an inflection he just was funny yet was the character. Glenn Close had the patrician routine down pat and equally as droll and as effective. Yes, she fumbled over a few words but knew the lines. Sometimes getting them out is problematic but was it not a glaring flaw. Lindsay Duncan was dryer, and more understated than usual, and not as bombastic at Kate Reid or Elaine Stritch but comparable. Lee Remick, Mary Beth Hurt, AND Martha Plimpton did/do their best with such an overwrought, privileged neurotic role. Bob Balaban was his usual low key self and very good. He got laughs a few places because of the visual quality of his diminutive stature. Claire Higgins really takes a small part and makes the most of it. Very dominating. As he did with the revival of The Zoo Story and it's sequel, Albee instead of having the original time period in the program, puts "Now," seemingly to appear contemporary. One has to ignore that and believe it takes place when it was written or the clashing anachronisms are confounding. The main thing is that the power of the play endures. At 12:40 PM I went to the box office with the Playbill discount printout as it expired the next day. I got the first row of the first mezzanine on the center aisle. The London revival performed in acrimony. Maggie Smith, inspired by Stritch's success as Claire, instigated it, and then persuaded Albee to beef up the part with more lines, to Eileen Atkins' outrage. There was a feud. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: A Delicate Balance tonight | |
| Posted by: | AlanScott 08:28 pm EST 11/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: A Delicate Balance tonight - bret17 01:12 pm EST 11/20/14 |
|
| |
| "The London revival performed in acrimony. Maggie Smith, inspired by Stritch's success as Claire, instigated it, and then persuaded Albee to beef up the part with more lines, to Eileen Atkins' outrage. There was a feud." Did not know that. There seems to have also been a feud (or more than one) among the cast of the 1996 production. This is discussed, though nonspecifically, in the Gussow bio of Albee. It upset Albee because the cast (or at least a couple of them) refused to continue with the production when their contracts were up. I think the production was extended once, and I guess when it came time for a second extension, a couple of people refused. According to the Gussow book, the production was doing well enough that it could have run longer (this is confirmed by a look at the grosses). Albee, after having been so happy that the production was so successful and had enhanced the play's reputation, was very annoyed at the cast for not being able to get along with each other. And he probably was sorry not to continue to get the royalties, too. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: A Delicate Balance tonight | |
| Posted by: | bret17 10:02 pm EST 11/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: A Delicate Balance tonight - AlanScott 08:28 pm EST 11/20/14 |
|
| |
| The Smith Atkins feud was related to me by a London theater critic friend. Agnes is the lead but Smith was convinced by Stritch's success that she should play Claire. At her behest, Albee took lines of Agnes' and rewrote them as Claire's to build it up. Atkins was outraged but Smith was the muscle of the production. Since hearing this I've always been attentive to interviews of Atkins. Neither of them really mentions this production. The 1996 revival did end cryptically and prematurely considering the acclaim. awards, and grosses. At the time there was hearsay that Stritch and Harris didn't get along. Yet, Harris was at the Stritch memorial on Monday as a spectator. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: A Delicate Balance tonight | |
| Posted by: | AlanScott 10:12 pm EST 11/20/14 |
| In reply to: | re: A Delicate Balance tonight - bret17 10:02 pm EST 11/20/14 |
|
| |
| I was wondering if Harris would be at the memorial. Thank you for the info. It may be that they didn't get along, but she still greatly respected Stritch's talent and prefers to remembers the good times that perhaps they had in rehearsal and the early parts of the run. Or perhaps the biggest problems were not between them. I'll add that there may have been a bit more to Harris's being at Strich's memorial than meets the eye. Perhaps one day there will be a bio of one of the folks involved that reveals more about what went on. Of the three leads, only Harris is still around to speak about it, although it may be that others who were in the production and still around may have seen a good deal of the conflicts and may yet write or speak about them. Yes, I like gossip a lot. | |
| 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: 0.046629 seconds.