HOME ALL THAT CHAT ATC WEST COAST SHOPPIN' RUSH BOARD FAQS

LOGIN REGISTER SEARCH THREADED MODE

not logged in

Threaded Order | Chronological Order

re: Mike Nichols R.I.P.

Posted by: wmdmcree 10:08 am EST 11/20/14
In reply to: Mike Nichols R.I.P. - TimDunleavy 07:02 am EST 11/20/14

An incredible career, no doubt. I was not on this board when Nichols's production of "The Country Girl" came to B'way. It was one of his few disasters and I never heard anything about what went wrong there. Does anyone on this site remember what they learned about that production and its troubles?


reply to this message |

re: Mike Nichols R.I.P.

Posted by: AlanScott 10:03 pm EST 11/20/14
In reply to: re: Mike Nichols R.I.P. - wmdmcree 10:08 am EST 11/20/14

First, I would agree with Michael that disaster seems too strong a word, although my memory is that during early previews, posts here suggested that it was in very serious trouble. By the time it opened, it was more of a disappointment than a disaster. Some questioned whether the play was really all that good, while some thought the production was insufficient.

It seems to me that the play is so delicate that it's especially hard to realize effectively in performance. I recently read Stella Adler on the play, from the collection of her lectures on American playwrights. I was surprised by what she wrote. Her point of view on the play was almost totally in opposition to the general impression I have the play and its characters. I'm inclined to trust Adler, who knew the play much better than I do. Not to mention that she also knew Odets well, and that she was a pretty brilliant lady. I attended one of her lecture series (the one on Chekhov, Ibsen and Strindberg), and to say that her insights on those writers and on acting generally were brilliant would be an understatement.

Presuming that Adler's point of view on the play, which is very pro-Georgie, expresses what Odets intended, the play seems to me almost undramatic. In addition, we have to take so much about the characters on faith, which must make the decision-making process especially difficult for the actors and the director (and for the audience).

So the play seems to demand a perfect production or it risks falling very flat and seeming undramatic, which is a bit ironic given that it's all about theatre and the stresses of putting on a show.

The production was probably not helped by the casting of Morgan Freeman, who had been away from the stage for a very long time and seemed rusty. It's easy to understand why Nichols cast him, but it was a gamble that probably did not pay off.


reply to this message |

re: Mike Nichols R.I.P.

Posted by: wmdmcree 11:32 pm EST 11/20/14
In reply to: re: Mike Nichols R.I.P. - AlanScott 10:03 pm EST 11/20/14

I did see the production in previews, so it could have gotten somewhat stronger as it continued. But certainly, the performance I saw did not look like there was any chance of this truly becoming a successful production of the play. I remember how weak Mr. Freeman's performance was, but I could not get a sense of the origin of the problem at the time. Rusty is a good idea and a good description. And yes, Ms. Adler knew her stuff!!


reply to this message | reply to first message

???

Posted by: seeseveryshow 10:47 am EST 11/20/14
In reply to: re: Mike Nichols R.I.P. - wmdmcree 10:08 am EST 11/20/14

This board never ceases to amaze me. On the day we learn the shocking news of the sudden passing of one of the theater's greats, someone wants us to focus on what he characterizes as "one of his few disasters....and its troubles."

Is this the time to worry about one production that may have gone wrong? The man brought joy and enlightenment to millions through magnificent stage the cinematic achievements.

Let's discuss those things.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: ???

Posted by: AlanScott 09:37 pm EST 11/20/14
In reply to: ??? - seeseveryshow 10:47 am EST 11/20/14

I thought that the post was respectfully written and not out of line. I understand your reaction as well, but I was not bothered by the post and I did consider responding to it and trying to answer the question (and perhaps I still will).


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: ???

Posted by: Guillaume 12:52 pm EST 11/20/14
In reply to: ??? - seeseveryshow 10:47 am EST 11/20/14

Let's not tell others what they should or should not post.

Every wake I've ever been to includes retelling of stories about all aspects of the person's life.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: ???

Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 12:07 pm EST 11/20/14
In reply to: ??? - seeseveryshow 10:47 am EST 11/20/14

And although THE COUNTRY GIRL was not well received, I'd hardly classify it as a disaster.

I was thinking about Nichols recently. I've always thought it can't be a coincidence that the ONLY production of ANNIE I ever saw that was hilariously funny, heart warming, and with just the right tone was the original production -- the only one that Nichols was directly involved with, even if not as director (at least not officially).


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Jon Robin Baitz on Mike Nichols

Posted by: SidL 12:25 pm EST 11/20/14
In reply to: re: ??? - Michael_Portantiere 12:07 pm EST 11/20/14

linked

Link VF

reply to this message | reply to first message

re: Jon Robin Baitz on Mike Nichols

Posted by: garyd 09:20 pm EST 11/20/14
In reply to: re: Jon Robin Baitz on Mike Nichols - SidL 12:25 pm EST 11/20/14

"It’s mercantile, and literal, no longer a land of dreams, just another playground for the 21st century’s global rich. And with Mike gone, there’s one fewer person to find the glory in subtext, the code that is buried deep in American life, at that intersection where lust, nervousness, ambition, and comedy all meet. He ran that intersection for decades."

All true but so very pessimistic. I think Mike would have laughed but he had the talent to turn the truth on end. I guess I have to believe someone else will do the same.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: ???

Posted by: twocents 11:03 am EST 11/20/14
In reply to: ??? - seeseveryshow 10:47 am EST 11/20/14

Well said.


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: ???

Posted by: finally 10:53 am EST 11/20/14
In reply to: ??? - seeseveryshow 10:47 am EST 11/20/14

I'm sure Mike Nichols doesn't care one way or the other at this point, but could you please give us a date for when it's ok by you to talk about every part of his career?


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: ???

Posted by: SidL 11:11 am EST 11/20/14
In reply to: re: ??? - finally 10:53 am EST 11/20/14

well said as well


reply to this message | reply to first message

re: ???

Posted by: twocents 11:02 am EST 11/20/14
In reply to: re: ??? - finally 10:53 am EST 11/20/14

It's just a tawdry juxtaposition of posts. SMH. You really are as impatient as your user name!


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: 0.098787 seconds.