s ' ▁changes ▁to ▁be ▁negative . ▁Again , ▁review ers ▁ignored ▁the ▁bro ader ▁them es ▁that ▁Rand ▁considered ▁important . ▁ ▁Professional ▁produ ctions ▁in ▁other ▁North ▁American ▁cities ▁typically ▁received ▁positive ▁reviews . ▁Austin ▁B . ▁F enger ▁described ▁the ▁production ▁at ▁San ▁Francisco ' s ▁Ge ary ▁Theater ▁as ▁" d arn ed ▁good ▁the ater " ▁that ▁was ▁" well ▁acted " ▁and ▁" c ris ply ▁written ". ▁Charles ▁Collins ▁said ▁the ▁Chicago ▁production ▁was ▁" a ▁first ▁class ▁story " ▁that ▁was ▁" well ▁acted ▁by ▁an ▁ad mi rab ly ▁selected ▁cast ". ▁Thomas ▁Arch er ' s ▁review ▁of ▁the ▁Montreal ▁production ▁described ▁it ▁as ▁" real istic " ▁and ▁" abs or bing ". ▁ ▁The ▁London ▁production ▁in ▁ 1 9 3 6 ▁received ▁mostly ▁positive ▁reviews ▁but ▁was ▁not ▁a ▁commercial ▁success . ▁A ▁rev iewer ▁for ▁The ▁Times ▁pra ised ▁F oster ' s ▁performance ▁as ▁" ten se ▁and ▁beautiful ". ▁In ▁The ▁Daily ▁Te legraph , ▁rev iewer ▁W .   A . ▁Dar ling ton ▁said ▁the ▁show ▁would ▁be ▁popular ▁with ▁aud ien ces , ▁but ▁the ▁production ▁ended ▁its ▁run ▁in ▁less ▁than ▁a ▁month . ▁The ▁review ▁in ▁The ▁Glasgow ▁Her ald ▁described ▁it ▁as ▁a ▁" strong , ▁quick ▁thr iller ", ▁but ▁with ▁inferior ▁dialog ▁to ▁The ▁Tri al ▁of ▁Mary ▁D ug an . ▁The ▁rev iewer ▁for ▁The ▁Spect ator ▁was ▁more ▁critical , ▁saying ▁the ▁play ▁itself ▁was ▁"