▁run . ▁ ▁The ▁Broadway ▁production ▁received ▁largely ▁positive ▁reviews ▁that ▁pra ised ▁its ▁mel od rama ▁and ▁the ▁acting ▁of ▁N olan ▁and ▁P idge on . ▁Common we al ▁described ▁it ▁as ▁" well ▁constructed , ▁well ▁enough ▁written , ▁ad mi rab ly ▁directed   ... ▁and ▁excell ently ▁acted ". ▁The ▁Brook lyn ▁Daily ▁E agle ▁said ▁the ▁action ▁came ▁in ▁" f its ▁and ▁starts ", ▁but ▁pra ised ▁the ▁acting ▁and ▁the ▁novel ty ▁of ▁the ▁use ▁of ▁a ▁j ury . ▁New ▁York ▁Post ▁critic ▁John ▁Mason ▁Brown ▁said ▁the ▁play ▁had ▁some ▁fla ws , ▁but ▁was ▁an ▁exc iting , ▁above - aver age ▁mel od rama . ▁Bro oks ▁At kin son ▁gave ▁it ▁a ▁negative ▁review ▁in ▁The ▁New ▁York ▁Times , ▁calling ▁it ▁" the ▁usual ▁bre w ▁of ▁h ok um ". ▁A ▁review ▁from ▁Theatre ▁Arts ▁Month ly ▁was ▁also ▁dismiss ive , ▁calling ▁the ▁play ▁a ▁" f ashion able ▁game " ▁that ▁would ▁be ▁" fun ▁in ▁a ▁par lor " ▁but ▁seemed ▁" pre tty ▁fool ish " ▁on ▁stage . ▁Some ▁reviews ▁focused ▁on ▁Wood s ▁as ▁the ▁source ▁of ▁the ▁play ' s ▁positive ▁attributes ▁because ▁he ▁had ▁had ▁many ▁previous ▁the atr ical ▁success es . ▁Time ▁said ▁Wood s ▁was ▁repeating ▁a ▁successful ▁formula ▁from ▁The ▁Tri al ▁of ▁Mary ▁D ug an . ▁Re views ▁that ▁pra ised ▁these ▁elements ▁were ▁an ▁embar rass ment ▁to ▁Rand , ▁who ▁considered ▁Wood