| re: Eureka Day as a "Revival" | |
| Last Edit: writerkev 08:04 am EST 01/18/25 | |
| Posted by: writerkev 08:02 am EST 01/18/25 | |
| In reply to: re: Eureka Day as a "Revival" - bobjohnny 06:41 am EST 01/18/25 | |
|
|
|
| I think it has much less to do with dates, specifically, and more about the general “feeling” of whether the production seems like a continuation of the original production. Just something I’ve noticed. “Mary Jane” was directed by Anne Kauffman in both its Off-Broadway and Broadway productions, which goes some distance to the feeling that it was the same original play that simply took a few years to make it to Broadway. “Eureka Day” doesn’t have that same thread and feels like an utterly different production with a different director. It “feels” more like a play that was sitting on the shelf and picked up (because of a new timeliness post-Covid) and staged by a different director. This gives it more the feeling of revival. There may be more to it. Perhaps MTC asked that it be considered a revival. But I think this hard-to-define set of parameters goes into the consideration here. I bet if the director of the original Colt Coeur production staged it on Broadway, it would be considered a new play. I saw “Eureka Day” a few years ago in DC by a relatively small theater company, so I assumed it’s been done often in other regional stagings. I don’t know if that played into the calculus. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: Eureka Day as a "Revival" - bobjohnny 06:41 am EST 01/18/25 |
| Next: | re: Eureka Day as a "Revival" - Chazwaza 06:25 pm EST 01/18/25 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.018011 seconds.