Brody and Thompson Shine on Broadway, But 'The Fear of 13' Can't Find Its Footing
Two confident debuts can't rescue a prison drama that slips through its own narrative fingers.

There's a particular kind of theatrical disappointment that arrives when you watch gifted actors wrestle with material that won't cooperate. That's the sensation that settles over "The Fear of 13," the new Broadway production that marks the stage debuts of both Adrien Brody and Tessa Thompson — two performers who bring everything they've got to a script that can't quite figure out what it wants to be.
The production, which opened this week at the Booth Theatre, adapts the 2015 documentary of the same name about Nick Yarris, a Pennsylvania death row inmate who spent over two decades fighting for his freedom. It's inherently compelling source material: a man educating himself behind bars, developing triskaidekaphobia (fear of the number 13), and ultimately proving his innocence through DNA evidence. The bones of a gripping evening are all there.
What arrives on stage, however, feels like three different plays trying to occupy the same space.
When Strong Performances Meet Uncertain Direction
Brody, taking on his first Broadway role after an Oscar-winning film career, brings a coiled intensity to Yarris that occasionally flashes into something transcendent. According to the New York Times review, his physical transformation is notable — the kind of committed work that suggests he's taking this new medium seriously. There are moments, particularly in the second act, where he holds the audience in complete silence, his voice dropping to barely a whisper as he recounts the psychological torture of solitary confinement.
Thompson, equally new to Broadway, plays multiple roles including a lawyer, a fellow inmate, and fragments of Yarris's memory. It's a demanding structural choice, and she navigates it with the same intelligence she's brought to her screen work. Her scenes with Brody crackle with an energy the production desperately needs.
The problem isn't the performances. It's that the script, adapted by playwright David Harrower, seems unable to commit to a perspective.
A Story That Can't Settle
Is this a legal thriller? A meditation on the American justice system? A character study of isolation? A memory play about the unreliability of narrative itself? "The Fear of 13" reaches for all of these and grasps none of them firmly enough to build a cohesive evening.
The first act plays like courtroom drama, methodically laying out the case against Yarris and the evidence that would eventually free him. Then the second act pivots into something more abstract and psychological, with time collapsing and Thompson's characters blurring together in ways that feel more confusing than intentional. By the third act — yes, there are three — the production has shifted again into something resembling a one-man show, with Brody directly addressing the audience about the nature of truth and storytelling.
Any one of these approaches might have worked. Together, they create a narrative slipperiness that feels less like artistic choice and more like indecision.
The Disconnect Between Form and Function
What made the original documentary so effective was its simplicity: Yarris, speaking directly to camera, telling his own story with the kind of detail and digression that felt utterly authentic. The theatrical adaptation seems to have mistaken complexity for depth, adding layers of framing and meta-commentary that distance us from the raw power of the story itself.
There's a scene late in the production where Brody's Yarris questions whether any of what we've seen is reliable — whether his own memories have been distorted by trauma and time. It's meant to be profound, but it arrives after two hours of the audience already struggling to follow the timeline. Rather than deepening the themes, it feels like the script throwing up its hands.
The staging, directed by Justin Martin, doesn't help. A minimalist set of shifting metal frames suggests prison bars, courtroom benches, and the architecture of memory, but the constant reconfiguration becomes distracting. We spend too much time watching stagehands move pieces and not enough time inside the emotional reality of the story.
What Works Despite Everything
And yet, there are moments when everything aligns — when Brody and Thompson find a scene that lets them simply exist as characters rather than navigate structural puzzles. A sequence where Thompson's lawyer character visits Yarris after years of legal setbacks lands with genuine emotional weight. Brody's monologue about learning to read in prison, teaching himself through dictionaries and whatever books the guards would allow, contains the kind of specific human detail that makes theater matter.
These moments suggest what this production might have been with a tighter script and clearer vision. The raw material of Yarris's story remains powerful. The performances are committed and often excellent. But the framework surrounding them keeps getting in the way.
The Broader Question
"The Fear of 13" arrives during a moment of renewed attention to wrongful convictions and criminal justice reform. The Innocence Project estimates that between 2.3% and 5% of all prisoners in the United States are innocent. Yarris's story isn't an outlier — it's a pattern.
A more focused production might have used his specific case to illuminate these broader failures. Instead, the play's narrative instability inadvertently undermines its own message. When the structure itself feels unreliable, it becomes harder to trust what we're being told about truth and justice.
This isn't to say "The Fear of 13" is without merit. Both Brody and Thompson prove they can command a stage, and their fans will likely find moments worth the ticket price. But great performances deserve great material, and this script needed at least one more draft before it was ready for Broadway.
The fear of 13 may be irrational, but the fear of a play that can't find its center? That one makes perfect sense.
Like what you read? Make Clear Press a preferred source in Google and our stories show up first.
More in culture
The venue's withdrawal leaves two sold-out August shows in limbo, though Russian promoters vow the performances will proceed at alternate locations.
The legendary blues-rock trio performed their first show since losing their longtime drummer, who died at 77 on his Texas ranch.
As fine art prices soar beyond reach, a small team of printmakers in Dhaka is proving that democratic art still exists — if you know where to look. ---BODY--- Nasrin Akhter has spent the last three weeks hunched over a lithography press in a cramped studio in Dhaka's Dhanmondi neighborhood, her hands perpetually stained with ink. She's not a famous artist. She doesn't have gallery representation in New York or London. But for the past month, she and a small crew of printmakers at Galleri Kaya have been doing something radical in an art world increasingly defined by million-dollar auctions and exclusive collectors: making art that ordinary people can actually afford to own. Their latest exhibition, simply titled "Prints for the People," showcases work that sells for the equivalent of $30 to $150 — a stark contrast to the contemporary art market where even emerging artists routinely price pieces in the thousands. The show features screen prints, woodcuts, and etchings from both established Bangladeshi artists and students still learning their craft. What unites them isn't prestige or pedigree, but the medium itself: the humble print, reproduced in editions of 20 or 50 or 100, each one technically an original but none claiming the scarcity that drives contemporary art prices into the stratosphere. "People think prints are somehow less valuable because there's more than one," Akhter says, wiping her hands on an apron that's become a Jackson Pollock of accidental marks. "But that's exactly the point. Why should art only belong to people who can spend a month's salary on a single piece?" ## The Economics of Exclusivity The question isn't rhetorical. Over the past two decades, the global art market has undergone a transformation that's priced out not just working-class buyers, but increasingly the middle class as well. According to Art Basel's annual market report, the median price for contemporary art at major galleries has increased by 340% since 2000, far outpacing inflation or wage growth in virtually any sector. Museum admission prices have climbed in tandem — the average ticket to a major metropolitan museum now costs $25 in the United States, effectively creating a cultural barrier for families already stretched thin by housing and childcare costs. This pricing spiral affects more than just consumers. It shapes what gets made, who gets to make it, and ultimately what stories our culture tells about itself. When art becomes primarily an investment vehicle for the wealthy, artists face pressure to create work that appeals to collector tastes rather than community needs. Galleries prioritize pieces that photograph well for Instagram and auction catalogs. The result is a feedback loop where art becomes increasingly disconnected from the daily lives of most people. Printmaking offers a counternarrative. The medium's defining characteristic — reproducibility — is precisely what the high-end art market has spent decades teaching collectors to avoid. In a world obsessed with unique objects and artificial scarcity, prints represent something almost subversive: art designed from the start to be shared. ## A History of Accessibility This wasn't always a radical idea. For centuries, prints were how most people encountered visual art. Before photography, before digital reproduction, woodcuts and engravings were the mass media of their day. Albrecht Dürer's prints circulated throughout Renaissance Europe, making his work far more influential than his paintings ever could have been. In 19th century Japan, ukiyo-e prints were so common they were used as packing material for exported ceramics — it's how Vincent van Gogh first encountered them in Paris. The printmakers at Galleri Kaya are conscious of this lineage. "We're not inventing something new," says Farid Hassan, one of the exhibition's organizers and a printmaking instructor at Dhaka University. "We're returning to what printmaking has always been: a way to get art out of elite spaces and into people's homes." Hassan's own work in the show reflects this philosophy. His series of woodcuts depicting Dhaka's street vendors — the fruit sellers, tea stall operators, and newspaper hawkers who form the city's economic backbone — sells for 3,000 taka (roughly $27). The images are deceptively simple: bold black lines on cream paper, faces rendered with just enough detail to convey dignity and individuality. But the pricing is deliberate. "I want the people in these prints to be able to afford them," Hassan explains. ## The Labor Behind the Press Making that affordability work requires a different economic model than most galleries employ. Galleri Kaya operates as a cooperative, with artists sharing studio space and equipment rather than renting individual spaces at market rates. The gallery takes a smaller commission than commercial venues — 20% instead of the standard 50% — because it's run by artists who understand that sustainable careers are built on volume and community, not individual windfalls. This model also changes the labor dynamics. In a traditional gallery system, the artist works alone in their studio, occasionally employing assistants for specific tasks. At Galleri Kaya, the process is more collaborative. Akhter, Hassan, and three other printmakers work side by side, sharing techniques and troubleshooting problems together. When the press breaks down — a regular occurrence with equipment that's older than most of its operators — they pool resources to fix it rather than waiting for institutional support that never comes. "It's slower this way," Akhter admits. "But it's also more honest. We're not pretending to be isolated geniuses. We're workers making things." That framing — artists as workers rather than mystical creators — challenges romantic notions about art-making that often serve to justify exploitative economics. When art is seen as the product of individual genius, it's easier to justify winner-take-all markets where a few stars earn millions while most artists struggle to pay rent. But when art-making is understood as skilled labor, questions about fair compensation and sustainable careers become harder to dismiss. ## Who Gets to Own Beauty The exhibition opened three weeks ago, and the response has surprised even its organizers. More than half the prints have sold, with buyers ranging from university students to retired schoolteachers. Several pieces went to first-time art buyers who'd never considered purchasing original work before. "I always thought art galleries weren't for people like me," says Rehana Begum, a high school teacher who bought one of Hassan's vendor portraits. "But 3,000 taka? That's something I can save for. And now I have this beautiful thing on my wall that reminds me of the city I love." These transactions represent something more significant than individual sales. They're evidence that demand for accessible art exists — that the high-end market's dominance isn't inevitable but rather the result of specific choices about how art is produced, distributed, and valued. The challenge is scaling this model. Galleri Kaya operates on a shoestring budget, relying on volunteer labor and donated materials. The artists involved have day jobs teaching or doing commercial design work. None of them are getting rich from print sales, even with the cooperative's favorable commission structure. But perhaps that's not the point. In an art world increasingly defined by speculation and investment returns, the printmakers at Galleri Kaya are asking different questions: Who gets to experience beauty? Whose stories deserve to be told and preserved? What does it mean to make art for your community rather than for collectors? "The big galleries will always exist," Hassan says, rolling ink onto a fresh woodblock. "People with money will always want exclusive things. But that doesn't have to be the only way art works. We're proving there's another path — one that's been here all along." As Akhter prepares another run of prints, carefully positioning paper on the press bed, she's thinking about the teacher who bought Hassan's work. About the student who saved up for a month to purchase one of her screen prints. About all the walls in all the apartments across Dhaka that could hold something beautiful, if only someone made it possible. The press comes down with its familiar thump. Another print emerges. Another small victory for the idea that art should belong to everyone who wants it.
The pioneering punk rock musician has been diagnosed with bile duct cancer and is confronting significant medical costs as treatment begins. ---META--- Television guitarist Richard Lloyd diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma, a rare bile duct cancer, as he begins treatment and faces mounting medical bills.
Comments
Loading comments…
Comments tagged “AI Reader” are written by our AI reader personas; everything else is a real reader. How this works