Anyone else notice the off-stage crises at DETROIT tonight?

[Auggie27]

VERY MILD SPOILER

The performance was shaky, not due to actors' issues, but to mounting, ever louder crises backstage, to facilitate intricately executed scene changes. The show is twice as busy as any musical (though the turntable doesn't seem to make the changes easier, not enough), and though the 11th hour coup de theatre is indeed impressive, the noise required, apparently, to create the effects, draw undue attention to themselves.

As a true fan of the published script, I noted seriously damaging (to me) alterations to the very final scene. The play scored its thematic points in the coda, a two-character exchange, but it's been truncated and reduced to a tag. Something poetic if ineffable is now missing, and the audience doesn't seem to know the play is over. That's a problem, production and script-wise.

The show doesn't open until September 18th, and things will no doubt become smoother. But it was jarring, and the noises off were off-putting in extreme. The company is uniformly fine. That said, there's a lot of work to be done in the next 3 weeks. Among members of the whole team.

[jeffmiele]

there's a lot of back stage commotion, and it is a shame that it is still happening. I was there Saturday and was hoping it would be fixed by now. It's real frustrating

[After Eight]

" That said, there's a lot of work to be done in the next 3 weeks. Among members of the whole team. "

In the first thread on this play, you sang the play's praises from having solely read it, and looked askance at those who criticized it.

Now you've seen it, and say there's a lot of work to be done.

Maybe you should be less dismissive of those who judge what they see on stage.

[Auggie27]

Uh, no, AfterEight, I certainly disagreed with you about the difference between spending time with friends in my home, and characters in in a theater, but I didn't "look askance" at anyone's take. And nothing posted here suggests I've changed my mind about any of those issues, just the production's noisy difficulties making transitions. Here's my entire original post, unedited:

"I read the published script, and found it a rarity: a page-turner. It has two surprises in its storytelling, one that can be guessed, one not so much. But it's a genuine portrait of 2012 America, and manages to make its points with a very engaging group of characters (though admittedly I wouldn't want to spend an evening with them). It's a frightening but all too recognizable quartet. Can't wait to see this next week. Ryan, in particular, seems very right for the role played by Metcalf in Chicago."

[Jordan Catalano]

After Eight is just pissy because his hospice nurse refuses to change out his catheter anymore.

[best12bars]

Auggie---do they play music over the big backstage noises? Anything at all to help cover it up? (Would music or sound FX help?)

[After Eight]

"As a true fan of the published script, I noted seriously damaging (to me) alterations to the very final scene."

Auggie,

So the play we see on stage is different from the one you read, and inferior. That's the play we were commenting upon.

As for the business of wanting to spend time with the characters, you said the characters were "very engaging." I understood that to mean "attractive" or "charming," as is indeed what the word means. Hence my question to you. You took it to mean, I guess, engaging one's attention. Well, I feel all four failed to do that utterly.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

When you engage with it, you become part of the problem

[SonofRobbieJ]

^ THAT...just brought up an image of Brooke Smith down a well. Lord love you.

[Mister Matt]

I didn't care for the play at Steppenwolf. Sounds like they made some big changes in the design. But the script itself seemed to be about annoying people becoming more annoying. It was obviously reaching for some sort of metaphorical insight into modern America, but for me, it failed as it constantly struggled with realism and the unbelievable actions of the characters. I really didn't know what the playwright was trying to say.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Matt, did you like CP? I can't remember.

[Mister Matt]

Actually, I did enjoy Clybourne Park. Not the greatest play I've seen, but I found it intriguing. Both acts started somewhat slow and awkwardly (sometimes the direction and sometimes the script), but I really liked the way it would build momentum through the act. And I thought the central device of building from Raisin in the Sun was rather ingenious. Of course, it helps to live in Chicago and understand the references as well.

But the Steppenwolf production of Time Stands Still was a letdown after seeing it on Broadway. Miscast and poorly directed.

[Sauja]

I was there last night as well, and the offstage drama did distract quite a few bit. Well done to the cast for never once reacting to the hubbub. The two women's scene alone had the most consistent noise, and I'm just not sure how you can cover that up. Adding underscoring or sound effects would be inappropriate to the moment, it seems. Which makes me think that while the set is impressive in a lot of ways, it may very simply just not work on a practical level. Even as it becomes a more efficient process, there's just only so much you can do.

I quite enjoyed the play. It isn't a masterpiece, but I think it's a wonderful effort from a young playwright. There are a few false notes, and the ending is glib, but there's real wit and feeling there, and it has a very definite point of view.

The acting was largely solid, but I found myself let down by Amy Ryan. Usually a tremendous actress, she doesn't appear to have found her legs in this role yet. Sokolovic is very mannered but also very effective. Darren Pettie was the wild card for me. I found him extremely compelling. And then, of course, John Cullum shows up for a few moments and performs with such grace and honesty, showing the youngsters how it's done. He's a treasure, and it's heartening that he's still treading the boards after more than 50 years in the biz.

In the end, I wasn't bowled over, but I'd happily recommend it. It was a solid like for me.

[Mister Matt]

I'm curious to know what the new set is like. The single immobile set at Steppenwolf was the most effective part of the entire production for me.

[WkdBARN]

I was there for the first preview. The noise was horrendous during the incredibly quiet scene between the two women. I forgave it because it was the first preview and hoped it would have at least been lessened by now, which unfortunately doesn't seem to be the case. What I found to be in poor taste was the crew member that was repeatedly saying "Oh Sh**!" in far too loud of a whisper. Hopefully that has ceased. I also was in the front row, so perhaps it was not heard by those farther back.

That being said, I LOVE Playwrights Horizons and thought this show was very good. I am in agreement with those who say they don't really know if they fully understood what the playwright was trying to say. It was just wild, but I enjoyed it. And I thought all the actor's work was great.

[Auggie27]

Sauja says it nicely. The issues with the backstage noise, seemingly minor, are in fact quite prominent if you're sitting in the theater. This is a small house, the sounds are beyond routine set-change rumbles. This is non-stop rattle, pound, thud, bump, slam. Suddenly you'll hear a loud Whaaap! And yes, end up jarred. Taken out of the story. The show downstage, quiet at times, even elegiac, dimly lit, must compete, and therefore, something serious is wrong with the way the seemingly too-complex designs have been executed. I hope they fix it. I like the play enormously, and would've enjoyed an experience of it that was purer, without an unprecedented level of distracting sound. This is not a small problem.

[WesternSky2]

Hoping to catch this soon. How is David Schwimmer?

[After Eight]

^

He's good, but sorely limited by the role and the material. He has nothing to play.

His most taxing assignment is grilling hamburgers.