Threaded Order Chronological Order
| The Inheritance - Thank You! | |
| Posted by: CookieFan 06:05 pm EST 02/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| To all who have sung this play's praises, THANK YOU. Your enthusiasm moved me to see both parts recently. and I am heartily adding my voice to your chorus. I am heterosexual, although have gay family (of course), so this is not really my story, and yet it is all of our stories. It is our history as a society. And it is an important education for so many, straight and gay. I was moved to laughter (a lot) and tears throughout both parts. The performances are uniformly superb, with several incredible standouts. The direction felt fresh and spot on, and I never once felt like it dragged. I've read the criticism and comparisons, and frankly, I don't have the basis to judge The Inheritance on those terms. Nor do I care to. For me, as a standalone theatrical experience, this soared. And I am very, very grateful to everyone here who strongly suggested seeing it. Between TDF and other available discounts, this is accessible, wonderful theater that really shouldn't be missed. This one will resonate for a long time. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: The Inheritance - Thank You! | |
| Posted by: BruceinIthaca 08:53 pm EST 02/19/20 | |
| In reply to: The Inheritance - Thank You! - CookieFan 06:05 pm EST 02/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| It so warms my heart to read a post like this--and not simply because I was similarly a big fan of THE INHERITANCE and share many of your responses (though I am a gay man "of a certain age," and so my experience was necessarily different in some respects), but because I love reading about anyone's very positive experience of a live performance. There are many shows I have no interest in seeing, but I am always glad when there is even one person to whom the experience mattered. | |
| reply to this message |
| I went back last week | |
| Posted by: Genealley 02:16 am EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: re: The Inheritance - Thank You! - BruceinIthaca 08:53 pm EST 02/19/20 | |
|
|
|
| for Part 1 So many sweet, funny, observant moments. Fine performances all around (but I missed Hickey). But it's just too looooong. Found myself thinking..."ok, I GOT it!" And, not for nothing, but SPOILER the minimalist house at the end of the Act is sorely underwhelming. I mean...it's ABOUT the house! At least give us a FRONT DOOR!!! |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I went back last week | |
| Posted by: Delvino 09:08 am EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: I went back last week - Genealley 02:16 am EST 02/20/20 | |
|
|
|
| I think Hickey's performance is under-appreciated. When he strides into the play, the presence feels like the game changer he proves to be. I completely understood why Eric succumbs to his charm and money-fueled sway (though grasping the reverse is more difficult for me, and I lay that problem at Lopez's feet.). And Hickey was wonderful in pt. 2. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Agree | |
| Posted by: Genealley 02:19 pm EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: re: I went back last week - Delvino 09:08 am EST 02/20/20 | |
|
|
|
| He really does up the ante. And he's soo sexy too. (fangurllling.....) And yes, I think the casting for Eric makes Hickey's attraction a bit challenging. I think Soller does a fine job as Eric but as an audience member, I want, also, to be more attracted to him and his charisma. I don't get that from Soller (nor from Burnap). |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I went back last week | |
| Posted by: Deirdre 01:00 pm EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: re: I went back last week - Delvino 09:08 am EST 02/20/20 | |
|
|
|
| Agree. On both counts. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| More on that Pt. 1 SPOILER. | |
| Posted by: Delvino 09:05 am EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: I went back last week - Genealley 02:16 am EST 02/20/20 | |
|
|
|
| Agreed. I felt like we needed something akin to the reveal of Madame's facade at the end of "Night Music"'s first act. It didn't have to be entirely architectural, but somehow, considering the emotional weight the house plays in the story, a miniature doesn't cut it. I flashed on -- of all things -- "Tiny Alice." My guess is: they didn't want a showy piece of scenery to upstage the impact of those ghosts. Still, even a cutaway of the facade, something that's aged and crumbing, in the shadow of trees, feels required. The house was sacred space, a sanctuary and a transitional portal. That little doll house feels minimizing. And we stare at it anyway (I thought it would move, grow, do something...) In pt 2 we get a stylized cherry tree that is larger. I just rewatched "Howard's End" for the first time since seeing this play, and it underscores my take on the disappointing realization of the house. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Thanks for fleshing out my feelings | |
| Posted by: Genealley 02:24 pm EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: More on that Pt. 1 SPOILER. - Delvino 09:05 am EST 02/20/20 | |
|
|
|
| SPOILERS AGAIN I mean...the title of the play refers to the HOUSE! Yes...it's a sacred space housing those ghosts. We need to feel its weight/importance. I felt the same way...should have been a reveal like NIGHT MUSIC's mansion. And did we need to see EVERY ghost shake Eric's hand? got a bit drawn out IMHO. Again...I GOT IT!!! Just being picky... |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I went back last week | |
| Posted by: lowwriter 02:21 am EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: I went back last week - Genealley 02:16 am EST 02/20/20 | |
|
|
|
| I returned to see part 1 thanks to TDF and despite its length really found it moving, even though I knew what to expect. Hickey was still in it then. I may go back for part 2 to see Goldwyn. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Update: | |
| Posted by: Genealley 02:27 am EST 02/20/20 | |
| In reply to: re: I went back last week - lowwriter 02:21 am EST 02/20/20 | |
|
|
|
| no...I didn't find some performances to be OK. Especially Andrew Burnap as Toby Darling. Not the fault of the actor, but he's cast wrong. That person is much more angular, edgy, dissolute, charismatic. Maybe a young John Glover? Andrew Garfield? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.030568 seconds.