Infinite Life - NT

I think if you're posting a rumour it would be good form to either post where it came from or provide a bit more substance from your own involvement with it.

But also I want this so bad, please let it be true.

EDIT: ok I've seen more info now I'm happy, EXTREMELY happy, queen baker returns

First preview tonight!

Around 1 hour 50 min no interval

Was very funny in places. Some black out scenes a little long and people nodded off.

Was interesting and fun overall with good acting. But not as good as the Flick

Profound, complex, subtle and in some ways (intentionally?) unsatisfying, this will definitely warrant/require a second visit...

One grumble; half the performances are (again, intentional?) piano-pianissimo. Theoretically this should force the audience to listen harder...but the effect is spoiled if sat next to (as I discovered too late) one of those strange people who laughs aloud at every single line, whether appropriate or not. (Why do they do that???) As a result I reckon I missed about 20% of the dialogue. Fingers crossed for next time.

Standing ovation as usual, but in this case perhaps slightly more justified than most...

I loved it, but I got lucky seeing it on Friday night with a rapt audience. I am glad that I slept well the night before though, because between the dim lighting and the prolonged silences, I can imagine some audience members drifting asleep. Still, I thought it did a brilliant job of transporting you to the headspace of these characters dealing with chronic pain and the low energy that comes from fasting, experiencing time differently. It's one of the few 90+ minute plays I've seen where the lack of an interval makes perfect thematic sense.

Saw this last night and LOVED it.

Don't expect drama. Expect a slice of life.

As with much Annie Baker, the drama is not in the fabric of the work, but hides, almost invisibly, in the seams.

All the actors are terrific.

Some spoilers follow. . .

The play is about six people (four older women, one middle aged woman, one middle-aged man) coping with pain and illness.

They lie on comfortable deck chairs, at a health resort, engaging in idle conversation, sharing stories of ailments, sharing tips on coping, sometimes lying in silence, in varying combinations.

The health resort seems to rely on calorie reduction as a principal means of coping with pain, a kind of "cleansing" which didn't strike me as a great idea, but what do I know? Pain is so debilitating that whatever works for you, do it!

If anybody is the main character, it's definitely Christina Kirk's middle-aged Sofi, who broke my heart by exuding a perpetual, weary, silent, uncomplaining agony so convincingly, that I could almost feel her pain myself.

By contrast, Mia Katigback's Yvette has by far the most ailments, but seems strangely preternaturally cheery, and the dissonance is funny, which is the source of a plurality of the laughs in this play, although the play resembles neither comedy nor drama, but real life.

Like Caryl Churchill's "Here we go," in which Patrick Godfrey's old man was wordlessly dressed, undressed, dressed, undressed by a carer, this play is a sobering reminder of how fragile we are, how much our quality of life is determined by our capabilities and health, regardless of our hopes and dreams

This play is less reductive than Churchill's, finding something worthwhile in talking with fellow sufferers, although whether community is a mere distraction from, or a partial cure to, pain, is in the eye of the beholding audience, as there is nothing didactic about anything that happens.

Marylouise Burke is immensely endearing as the helium-voiced Eileen, a Christian who steps away from "dirty" conversations, but compassionately makes herself available to others.

And in their own ways, Christine Nielsen's Ginnie (the talky one), Pete Simpson's Nelson (the private one) and Brenda Pressly's Elaine (the avoidant one) are all equally well-characterised and wonderful in their own ways.

So if you don't mind seeing a show with no perceptible plotting, no perceptible motivation to entertain (it's all in the seams), and you want to contemplate your own fragility and what's worthwhile in life, then this is your play.

I'd give it 4 and a half stars.

Rake looks fine to my eye.

Rows B and C eye lines are above stage level, and far back enough that you have a good view of everybody on their deck chairs.

Saw it this afternoon. Fascinating, gripping, beautifully written and directed and designed, nowhere near as naturalistic as it first appears, and something I'll be thinking about for a long time.

Was it a fun afternoon at the theatre? No, though it is occasionally very funny. It is very good indeed, but it is not an easy ride. It's also not something everybody is going to enjoy, so do your homework before you buy a ticket.

Last night we sat in A14 and A15… I’m convinced they were the best seats in the house. Tons of legroom and eye level above stage. Perfect for this very understated piece.

This is DELIGHTFUL! First time seeing an AB play live although I love reading her work. Deep and affecting, but everything comes off with a light touch. Felt like grown-up theater. MLB was so touching. It’s a privilege to see actors of a certain age tread the boards. Audience really into it. Closer the better to see every nuance and not miss any dialogue.

It’s OK - not as good as The Flick but way better than John and The Antipodes (which was dire.) The numerous scenes in near darkness are unnecessary and tiresome and the huge pauses in the final scene between the bloke and the younger woman stretched credulity (I realise that ‘awkwardness’ is here shtick but maybe I’ve just had too much of it.)

Can’t fault the tip top performances though.

A beautiful play. Annie Baker's world is tiny and more detailed than Chekov's - and often just as affecting. Nothing is wasted and so much is left of unsaid but when a company of great actors commits to her world it's simply wonderful. Clearly not for everyone, the woman next to me ( after the show) asked : why didn't they talk more? and why didn't they speak louder? I tried to explain it to her - but she was having none of it. Having been through a similar situation where one is sharing confidences with strangers whom one will never see again, Ms Baker captured that awkwardness perfectly. There is a quiet profundity to her plays and her people which I adore. A serious play for serious theatergoers.

New York Times as well: www.nytimes.com/2023/12/04/theater/best-theater-2023.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nyttheater

Annie Baker is one of those writers who should be made to write one well-made play to test if she could actually do it. What makes Picasso interesting is that he could paint beautifully but chose to pursue other lines of enquiry. Whereas Damien Hirst has a few good ideas but can't actually paint. I would suspect Baker is somewhere nearer to Hirst.

What we have here is the technique of opening with a very boring first 10 minutes so that the less boring minutes that follow feel more compelling and entertaining than they actually are. But it's less boring than The Flick because it doesn't go on all night.

It is a well-realised portrayal of contemporary American nihilism but it offers no exit ramp, or even the promise of one, which is surely the true calling for a contemporary American artist.

Front row perfect - zero restriction and very intimate.
Very subtle play but enjoyed overall. Some very harsh lighting when the scenes change, from dark to total brightness. Wasn’t too keen on some of the transitions.

Was engaged throughout and thought the actors were great.