Theatre Talk: In Our Own Little Corner

[aradia22]

The production on the song is a little too much for me. It's the same problem I have with a lot of Broadway actors making pop albums. You're covering up those amazing voices! (One exception is Gavin Creel's pop albums which are pretty good.) But I love seeing all these great singers perform this song. I think Rachelle and Shoba are my favorites (surprising because she was my least favorite Natasha). 

I know Philippa is younger than Lin and Javier but some of these Elizas look so young. I didn't picture it as such an ingenue part. 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

10 hours ago, aradia22 said:

The production on the song is a little too much for me. It's the same problem I have with a lot of Broadway actors making pop albums. You're covering up those amazing voices! (One exception is Gavin Creel's pop albums which are pretty good.) But I love seeing all these great singers perform this song. I think Rachelle and Shoba are my favorites (surprising because she was my least favorite Natasha). 

I've noticed that when singers/musicians who I enjoy live then record albums, I usually feel like the stuff in the studio is overproduced. I guess they're excited to have all of these other tools they can use, but I find it unnecessary because they already sound great. It's not like these are some of the pop stars on the radio who clearly need all of the extra stuff to disguise their subpar singing. I still end up buying their albums because I want to support them with my dollars, but there are some that I listened to only once and then knew would never get played again because they are so much better live.

I definitely liked the angrier tone of the original lyrics. I always felt like the depiction of Eliza was a bit passive. But I also appreciate the final version of Burn which is more polished in the lyrics. I really enjoyed hearing all five of the Elizas sing together. I loved some of the harmonies. There are so many youtube videos out there are comparing different actresses singing the same roles, so I really like that Lin brought all five of them together. I remember when a few of them posted pictures of the recording session on their IG stories. I knew something had to be up but they didn't reveal what they were working on together. I was so excited when I saw the artwork and realized this was what they had done!

I kind of wish that they'd done this recording when Solea Pfeiffer was still in the Angelica cast though (no offense to Julia Harriman - it's just that I saw Solea when the show was here and loved her). I knew of Rachelle from her previous work, so I was excited when she was cast as Eliza in London. The really interesting thing was listening to the song on Sunday night (before the official video came out) because I was trying to guess who was singing each part. I was not at all surprised that Rachelle was awesome, but I was happily surprised by Shoba. Now I'm really looking forward to seeing her in a few months! I will always have a soft spot for Ari because she's from the neighborhood where I grew up.

10 hours ago, aradia22 said:

I know Philippa is younger than Lin and Javier but some of these Elizas look so young. I didn't picture it as such an ingenue part. 

To me, an ingenue role is defined more by the character than the actress, and I could see characterizing Eliza as an ingenue because she is sweet and innocent for a good portion of the show.

Although these Elizas look young, in real life Eliza was 23 when she married Hamilton so I think the actresses need to be able to convincingly look like they are in their early 20s. Phillipa Soo was only 24 when she began playing Eliza and 26 when she left the show, so most of these women are all older than she was.

Lexi Lawson is 32, Rachelle Ann Go is 31, Shoba Narayan is 28, Ari Afsar is 26, and Julia Harriman is 25. They just have great genes and look young!

[aradia22]

Quote

I definitely liked the angrier tone of the original lyrics. I always felt like the depiction of Eliza was a bit passive. But I also appreciate the final version of Burn which is more polished in the lyrics.

I feel like the final version works better because it is still angry but it the characterization of Burn + Helpless, etc. helps separate Eliza from Anjelica. If it's too angry, the characters start to sound the same. Listening to the album, I can follow the plot so easily in a way I couldn't with In The Heights. I don't love that Eliza is so passive but that's the story being told and it works. Instead of the line about her sister, the show works better if Eliza is essentially this wonderful supportive person who was so in love and charmed and then completely blindsided. And he has to earn her forgiveness and also it makes sense that she still "erases herself from the narrative" and does the charitable work she mentions at the end. It all fits with this version of the character.

Quote

Lexi Lawson is 32, Rachelle Ann Go is 31, Shoba Narayan is 28, Ari Afsar is 26, and Julia Harriman is 25. They just have great genes and look young!

Oh wow. Yeah, they just look young. But then, that's a valid aspect of casting. It doesn't matter what age you are, it matters what age you can play and what that implies about your character and your relationships with the other characters. I'm not familiar with all the Alexanders so maybe they look age appropriate together. 

[aradia22]

https://barringtonstageco.org/Season-Shows/royal-family-of-broadway/

This looks interesting. William Finn plus some good cast members. Anyone live near MA?

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Tony nominations!

Best Musical
“The Band’s Visit”
“Frozen”
“Mean Girls”
“SpongeBob SquarePants: The Broadway Musical”

Best Play
“The Children”
“Farinelli and the King”
“Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
“Junk”
“Latin History for Morons”

Best Revival of a Musical
“Carousel”
“My Fair Lady”
“Once on This Island”

Best Revival of a Play
“Angels in America”
“Lobby Hero”
“Three Tall Women”
“The Iceman Cometh”
“Travesties”

Best Book of a Musical
“The Band’s Visit,” Itamar Moses
“Frozen,” Jennifer Lee
“Mean Girls,” Tina Fey
“SpongeBob SquarePants,” Kyle Jarrow

Best Original Score
“Angels in America,” Adrian Sutton
“The Band’s Visit,” Music and Lyrics: David Yazbek
“Frozen,” Music and Lyrics: Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez
“Mean Girls,” Music: Jeff Richmond; Lyrics: Nell Benjamin
“SpongeBob SquarePants,” Music & Lyrics: Yolanda Adams, Steven Tyler & Joe Perry of Aerosmith, Sara Bareilles, Jonathan Coulton, Alex Ebert of Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros, The Flaming Lips, Lady Antebellum, Cyndi Lauper & Rob Hyman, John Legend, Panic! at the Disco, Plain White T's, They Might Be Giants, T.I., Domani, & Lil'C

Best Leading Actor in a Play
Andrew Garfield, “Angels in America”
Tom Hollander, “Travesties”
Jamie Parker, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Mark Rylance, “Farinelli and the King”
Denzel Washington, “The Iceman Cometh”

Best Leading Actress in a Play
Glenda Jackson, “Three Tall Women”
Condola Rashad, “Saint Joan”
Lauren Ridloff, “Children of a Lesser God”
Amy Schumer, “Meteor Shower”

Best Leading Actor in a Musical
Harry Hadden-Paton, “My Fair Lady”
Joshua Henry, “Carousel”
Ethan Slater, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
Tony Shalhoub, “The Band’s Visit”

Best Leading Actress in a Musical
Lauren Ambrose, “My Fair Lady”
Hailey Kilgore, “Once on This Island”
LaChanze, “Summer: The Donna Summer Musical”
Katrina Lenk, “The Band’s Visit”
Taylor Louderman, “Mean Girls”
Jessie Mueller, “Carousel”

Best Featured Actor in a Play
Anthony Boyle, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Michael Cera, “Lobby Hero”
Brian Tyree Henry, “Lobby Hero”
Nathan Lane, “Angels in America”
David Morse, “The Iceman Cometh”

Best Featured Actress in a Play
Susan Brown, “Angels in America”
Noma Dumezweni, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Deborah Findlay, “The Children”
Denise Gough, “Angels in America”
Laurie Metcalf, “Three Tall Women”

Best Featured Actor in a Musical
Norbert Leo Butz, “My Fair Lady”
Alexander Gemignani, “Carousel”
Grey Henson, “Mean Girls”
Gavin Lee, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
Ari’el Stachel, “The Band’s Visit”

Best Featured Actress in a Musical
Ariana DeBose, “Summer: The Donna Summer Musical”
Renée Fleming, “Carousel”
Lindsay Mendez, “Carousel”
Ashley Park, “Mean Girls”
Diana Rigg, “My Fair Lady”

Best Scenic Design of a Play
Miriam Buether, “Three Tall Women”
Jonathan Fensom, “Farinelli and the King”
Santo Loquasto, “The Iceman Cometh”
Christine Jones, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Ian MacNeil and Edward Pierce, “Angels in America”

Best Scenic Design of a Musical
Dane Laffrey, “Once on this Island”
Scott Pask, “The Band’s Visit”
Scott Pask, Finn Ross and Adam Young, “Mean Girls”
Michael Yeargan, “My Fair Lady”
David Zinn, “SpongeBob SquarePants”

Best Costume Design of a Play
Jonathan Fensom, “Farinelli and the King”
Nicky Gillibrand, “Angels in America”
Katrina Lindsay, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Ann Roth, “Three Tall Women”
Ann Roth, “The Iceman Cometh”

Best Costume Design of a Musical
Gregg Barnes, “Mean Girls”
Clint Ramos, “Once on This Island”
Ann Roth, “Carousel”
David Zinn, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
Catherine Zuber, “My Fair Lady”

Best Lighting Design of a Play
Neil Austin, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Paule Constable, “Angels in America”
Jules Fisher and Peggy Eisenhauer, “The Iceman Cometh”
Paul Russell, “Farinelli and the King”
Ben Stanton, “Junk”

Best Lighting Design of a Musical
Kevin Adams, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
Jules Fisher and Peggy Eisenhauer, “Once on This Island”
Donald Holder, “My Fair Lady”
Brian MacDevitt, “Carousel”
Tyler Micoleau, “The Band’s Visit”

Best Direction of a Play
Marianne Elliott, “Angels in America”
Joe Mantello, “Three Tall Women”
Patrick Marber, “Travesties”
John Tiffany, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
George C. Wolfe, “The Iceman Cometh”

Best Direction of a Musical
Michael Arden, “Once on This Island”
David Cromer, “The Band’s Visit”
Tina Landau, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
Casey Nicholaw, “Mean Girls”
Bartlett Sher, “My Fair Lady”

Best Choreography
Christopher Gattelli, “My Fair Lady”
Christopher Gattelli, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
Steven Hoggett, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Casey Nicholaw, “Mean Girls”
Justin Peck, “Carousel”

Best Orchestrations
John Clancy, “Mean Girls”
Tom Kitt, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
AnnMarie Milazzo and Michael Starobin, “Once on This Island”
Jamshied Sharifi, “The Band’s Visit”
Jonathan Tunick, “Carousel”

Sound Design in a Play
Adam Cork, “Travesties”
Ian Dickinson for Autograph, “Angels in America”
Gareth Fry, “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”
Tom Gibbons, “1984”
Dan Moses Schreier, “The Iceman Cometh”

Sound Design in a Musical
Kai Harada, “The Band’s Visit”
Peter Hylenski, “Once on This Island”
Scott Lehrer, “Carousel”
Brian Ronan, “Mean Girls”
Walter Trarbach and Mike Dobson, “SpongeBob SquarePants”

Special Tony Award for Lifetime Achievement in the Theater
Chita Rivera
Andrew Lloyd Webber

Special Tony Award
John Leguizamo
Bruce Springsteen

Regional Theater Tony Award
La MaMa E.T.C.
Isabelle Stevenson Tony Award
Nick Scandalios

Tony Honors for Excellence in the Theater
Sara Krulwich
Bessie Nelson
Ernest Winzer Cleaners

Edited May 1, 2018 by ElectricBoogaloo

[Silver Raven]

Was there new music for the revival of Angels in America?

[ElectricBoogaloo]

5 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

Was there new music for the revival of Angels in America?

Yes, Adrian Sutton wrote a new score for the London revival. 

[aradia22]

I'll be interested to hear what people think. I couldn't see this one if I wanted to. I'll be out of the city during the entire short run.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

This morning I mostly looked at the nominations for the big categories and only glanced at the technical awards, but now that I've looked at them again, I noticed the multiple nominations for a few people!

Best Scenic Design of a Musical
Scott Pask, “The Band’s Visit”
Scott Pask, Finn Ross and Adam Young, “Mean Girls”

Best Costume Design of a Play
Ann Roth, “Three Tall Women”
Ann Roth, “The Iceman Cometh”

Best Costume Design of a Musical
Ann Roth, “Carousel”

Best Lighting Design of a Play
Jules Fisher and Peggy Eisenhauer, “The Iceman Cometh”

Best Lighting Design of a Musical
Jules Fisher and Peggy Eisenhauer, “Once on This Island”

Best Direction of a Musical
Casey Nicholaw, “Mean Girls”

Best Choreography
Christopher Gattelli, “My Fair Lady”
Christopher Gattelli, “SpongeBob SquarePants”
Casey Nicholaw, “Mean Girls”

The last time there were people nominated for more than one Tony in the same season in 2016, there weren't nearly as many. It was just two guys who were each nominated for lighting design (Jan Versweyveld for The Crucible and A View from the Bridge, Justin Townsend for The Humans and American Psycho). The year before that, Bob Crowley was nominated for four categories and three different shows: scenic design for a play (Skylight), scenic design for a musical (An American in Paris, costume design for a play (The Audience), and costume design for a musical (An American in Paris). I always wonder if being nominated more than once in the same year ends up splitting your votes.

[aradia22]

Quote

Best Costume Design of a Musical
Ann Roth, “Carousel”

This is insane to me.

Also, I think all of these multiple nominees are white. When you keep hiring the same people, it's hard to argue there aren't sufficient opportunities to allow different voices into the room. There are. But you're choosing to not just hire the same kind of people but the same big names to the point that they're nominated for multiple awards for different shows.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Kate Rockwell discusses Mean Girls & her album Back to My Roots. Before Mean Girls, her other Broadway roles include Margot in Legally Blonde, Skylar in Bring It On, and Sherrie in Rock of Ages.

If any of you watched the 2007 reality show Grease: You're the One That I Want, Kate was Serious Sandy who wore light blue every week. At one point during the interview, she is asked whether she still keeps in touch with the other contestants and she says that she does (and that she still sees some of them in person because many of them are working in New York). Laura Osnes won the role of Sandy and she's them most famous/successful contestant from the show, but other contestants include Ashley Spencer (Broadway: Amber Von Tussle in Hairspray, Priscilla Queen of the Desert, and Sherry in Rock of Ages - she is also married to Jeremy Jordan!), Max Crumm (Broadway: Disaster, off Broadway: Matt in The Fantasticks), Chad Doreck (Off Broadway: Matthew in Altar Boyz). Kathleen Monteleone (Broadway: Hands on a Hardbody, first national tour of Legally Blonde), and Juliana Hansen (Millie in the first national tour of Thoroughly Modern Millie). I still have a soft spot for all of them so it's nice to see that many of them are still working.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Jo Bonney & Kevin Mambo discuss Mlima's Tale:

[Silver Raven]

Lin has released his first take on the Hamilton song "Burn", which he's calling "First Burn", and there's a video.

[aradia22]

I met Lynn Ahrens and Stephen Flaherty. Ahhh!!!

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Colman Domingo discusses S4 of Fear the Walking Dead & Summer: The Donna Summer Musical

[SimoneS]

I went to see The Iceman Cometh. First my positive thoughts about the play itself: Denzel was the highlight and we didn't get enough of him. He is a talented actor and very charismatic. Other than Colm Meaney, he was the only actor able to project his voice to the back of theatre. The supporting actors were all talented character actors that most people would recognize. The theme of the play was interesting, but totally undermined by the negative; it was waay too long. They should have cut out half of the characters and shortened the play. It was hellish having to sit for that long in those tiny seats. People were standing and stretching during the intermissions. I finally decided to head downstairs during the final intermission even if it meant standing for the rest of play because they won't let you go back to your seat during the play. It turned out to be a good move as I was able to stand in the back of the orchestra and watch Denzel's final monologue close up which was outstanding. For a small theatre the acoustics were terrible. You could barely hear most of the actors. 

Final thought: This is the most diverse audience that I have seen since going to Broadway shows and that was nice to see.

Edited May 9, 2018 by SimoneS

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Patti Murrin discusses Frozen:

[Charlie Baker]

Jim Parsons fell and injured himself at the curtain call of yesterday's matinee of Boys in the Band.  Last evening's performance was cancelled. No word yet on how bad the injury is or when he may return to the show.  The show didn't go on last night as I guess the standby(s) had yet to be rehearsed.

Cast mate Andrew Rannells had a nice program on Live from Lincoln Center on PBS Friday.  Worth checking for rebroadcast if you didn't catch it.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Grey Henson & Casey Nicholaw discuss Mean Girls:

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Paul Alexander Nolan, Alison Luff, Lisa Howard, and Eric Petersen discuss Escape to Margaritaville:

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Susan Stroman, Irina Dvorovenko, and Tony Yazbeck discuss The Beast In The Jungle:

[aradia22]

[aradia22]

[Rinaldo]

Now this is more like it, Encores. I don't see why we need Call Me Madam again (no, the explanation doesn't explain it), but I don't really mind seeing it again. And I Married an Angel and High Button Shoes are exactly why I signed on. That's very good news.

[aradia22]

I'm not sure what you linked to, @Rinaldo but I'm guessing it was something like this.

Quote

Led by Artistic Director Jack Viertel and Music Director Rob Berman, the 2019 season will revisit Irving Berlin's Call Me Madam (1950), originally mounted for the second Encores! season in 1995.

The series will also pay tribute to two titans of the dance world whose careers are profoundly linked to City Center and made a name for themselves on Broadway: George Balanchine and Jerome Robbins. The 1938 Rodgers and Hart musical comedy I Married an Angel featured choreography by Balanchine and starred his then wife Vera Zorina in the title role. For the Encores! production, Joshua Bergasse will direct and choreograph for his soon-to-be wife NYCB principal dancer Sara Mearns as the Angel.

The third Encores! show will be High Button Shoes (1947), music by Jule Styne, lyrics by Sammy Cahn, and book by Stephen Longstreet, which features a ten-minute dance number, choreographed by Robbins, known as "The Bathing Beauty Ballet."

MasterVoices will also celebrate City Center's rich musical theater history with a special tribute concert performance featuring Victoria Clark in Kurt Weill and Ira Gershwin's Lady in the Dark (Apr 25 & 26), last presented in New York City as part of the inaugural Encores! season.

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Breaking-New-York-City-Center-Gala-Will-Tribute-A-CHORUS-LINE-LADY-IN-THE-DARK-I-MARRIED-AN-ANGEL-Included-in-Encores-Line-Up-20180516

I've never really gotten A Chorus Line and with the price of gala tickets, I'd only see it with EXCEPTIONAL casting.

I'm mildly curious about Call Me Madam as it's a chance for "star" casting.

I feel like there have been a lot of ballet performers getting into theater lately (Irina Dvorovenko, Robbie Fairchild, Christopher Wheeldon, etc.) Ballet is not really my thing but I'm not mad at how it can affect the level of choreography and technical ability of the talent on stage. I wish I still had TCM so I might have a chance of watching the movie version of I Married An Angel.

The plot for High Button Shoes according to wikipedia does not sound... great. But I respect that reviving shows like this is closer to Encores' stated mission than some of their more recent productions.

I feel like out of everything, I'm most curious about Lady in the Dark because of how it's come up as a fantastic show I know very little about. 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Ben Levi Ross will star in the first national tour of Dear Evan Hansen

[ElectricBoogaloo]

The woman who killed Ruthie Ann Miles’ daughter and another child is being charged

Ruthie Ann was pregnant at the time of the accident. She lost the baby a few days ago. 

[aradia22]

I have nothing to report about UK theater. I considered seeing Strictly Ballroom but there just wasn't time. My trip was really a minibreak and I was too exhausted by all the sightseeing during the day to consider seeing a show, let alone figuring out how/where to get tickets.

This makes me think it's not coming to Broadway. 

But this gave me all the feels.

I think perhaps (other than vocal ability) part of the problem is scale. With a movie you can have both those intimate romantic scenes and that high camp in a way that feels appropriate. But Strictly Ballroom is NOT Moulin Rouge. The romance feels like it would be swallowed up on the big stage and the group dance scenes just feel typically gaudy instead of that weird gritty level of lurid that was so unsettling and yet perfect in the movie. 

The other show I considered seeing was the Tina Turner musical but it was entirely sold out for May. I love Adrienne Warren and I have no idea if it's any good but if that came to Broadway, I'd be willing to see it.

[ratgirlagogo]

18 hours ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

The woman who killed Ruthie Ann Miles’ daughter and another child is being charged

Ruthie Ann was pregnant at the time of the accident. She lost the baby a few days ago. 

Jesus.   Just when you thought this story couldn't get any more awful.   

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Gavin Lee discusses SpongeBob SquarePants:

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Michael Arden discusses Once on This Island:

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Ariana Debose discusses Summer: The Donna Summer Musical:

[Silver Raven]

Today's production of Broadway Sacramento was An American in Paris.  To be honest, I am neither a jazz nor a ballet aficionado, but i really enjoyed this production.  To begin with, the set design, the lighting, and the 40s costuming were superb.  I was blown away by the use of flies in the form of panels which were used to project lots of images.  And the production of "I'll Build a Stairway to Heaven" blew my mind.

The lead was Kyle Robinson.  He's the understudy for the tour.  The regular star is McGee Maddox, whom I don't know, but I know Kyle Robinson.  He's one of the co-founders and -owners of Travis Wall's Shaping Sound troupe, and he was a regular on their reality TV show.  I always thought he was one of the best dancers in the troupe, and he did not disappoint today.  I have to admit that he is not the best singer, or the best actor, but his dancing was superb.

Lise Dassin was played by Allison Walsh.

Adam Hochberg was played by Matthew Scott.  He was the comedy relief, but he gets very dark in the second act (the whole show gets very dark in the second act), and his singing of "But Not For Me" was great.

Henri Baurel was played by Ben Michael.

Milo Davenport was played by Kirsten Scott.

The entire ensemble's dancing was outstanding.  I loved it.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

The season finale of SNL had a skit about Mean Girls featuring Tina Fey and Lin-Manuel Miranda:

[Rinaldo]

9 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

The lead was Kyle Robinson.  ... I have to admit that he is not the best singer, or the best actor, but his dancing was superb.

As far as I can tell, this has been true of everyone who's played the role. It was the case with the one I saw (the scheduled matinee alternate on Broadway) and I heard similar reactions to Robert Fairchild. Even in a time when everyone is trained to be a triple threat, being a first-rate ballet dancer almost inevitably leaves little time to become an equally spectacular singer or actor.

9 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

Adam Hochberg was played by Matthew Scott.  ...  his singing of "But Not For Me" was great.

Matthew Scott is impressive casting for this role. He was one of the eight members of the Broadway cast of Sondheim on Sondheim (alongside Barbara Cook, Vanessa Williams, Norm Lewis, et al) and I saw him play Bobby in Company at Signature Theatre, very well.

[ebk57]

I saw Waitress Saturday.  It's the last show at the National for this season.  I liked it but if I hadn't seen it, that would have been okay, too.  Which brings me to my conundrum - should I renew for next season.  The shows coming in are:

Beetlejuice, Beautiful, Bronx Tale, Finding Neverland, School of Rock and Bat Out of Hell.  I thought, wow, I've not seen any of them, so that would be fun.  And then I thought the reason I haven't seen any of them (other than the 2 that haven't graced our stages in the US yet) is that I chose not to see any of them while I was in New York.  And seats aren't cheap here. In fact, I could get discount tickets in NY for any of them (except Finding Neverland because it's closed) for less money that I will spend to see them here.

I shouldn't renew, right?  I can always get a ticket to see just how bad Bat Out of Hell is...

[aradia22]

Quote

Beetlejuice, Beautiful, Bronx Tale, Finding Neverland, School of Rock and Bat Out of Hell. 

I'm curious about Beetlejuice but I have no confidence that it'll be any good. I enjoyed A Bronx Tale for what it was but I don't think it's a must see. Personally, I haven't seen Finding Neverland or School of Rock and I haven't lost any sleep over it. Beautiful could be fun and nostalgic but it falls under my category of biomusicals where if you're not trying to mimic the artist and you're not telling a super compelling story then I would rather stay home and listen to the original albums. I'd rather just see a concert of music by a particular artist or composer which is what they do at 92Y. 

And so yes, I agree. The only thing to consider is whether morbid curiosity about Bat Out of Hell will make you buy a ticket. 

I don't know if it will hurt or help but the only NY shows I see on the horizon as possibly being any good are Little Rock (off-Broadway) and Kiss Me Kate. Then you've got the all the shows I'm not optimistic about (Head Over Heels, Gettin' The Band Back Together, Pretty Woman, King Kong, The Prom) or you can hope The Cher Show is good. So if you really want to see some theater, it may be a question of whether you want to spend your money in NY or closer to home if there are slim pickings either way. I think the plays are supposed to be good but I know very little about any of them. Hadestown, Moulin Rouge!, The Secret Garden, and Tootsie are also circling which could make it a better season since I feel like a lot of those clunkers might not last long, freeing up a theater.

[aradia22]

If you needed a reminder of how bad the musical season was aside from Once On This Island (and maybe My Fair Lady which I am seeing very soon!).

[aradia22]

I don't know if I forgot about this but I just got a mailer for Carmen Jones with Anika Noni Rose. Performances begin June 9 and it only says "limited engagement." WANT TO SEE

Edited May 22, 2018 by aradia22

[aradia22]

Got an email. The Secret Life of Bees announced for The Atlantic May 10 - June 23. Yay, Lynn Nottage and Sam Gold! Boo, Duncan Sheik! Yay, someone else writing the lyrics! As long as they continue their Back25 program, I'll check it out. I've had pretty good luck with their recent musicals.

[aradia22]

I am back from seeing Saint Joan tonight with Condola Rashad. Here are my very scattered thoughts. SPOILERS, but like, it's Joan of Arc so...

I thought the set with the pipes might be distracting but it was not. It's gold but it's not lit so that it becomes too bright (a valid concern when MTC has been known to use blinding lights at the Samuel Friedman). You don't get a great sense of place but I think it functions satisfactorily as an abstract set without being so stark that it feels like you're only left with the content of the play. I think with the costumes it works. Certainly if this was a plainclothes or modern dress production, things would be different. However, I did not think that the pipes/bells were so thematically resonant or even depicted in such a way to evoke the bells that inspire the voices that Joan (or Jehane) hears that it was deeply meaningful for me as a way of dressing the set. 

I thought all the veteran actors were great. Walter Bobbie, John Glover, Jack Davenport, Patrick Page... great. It goes without saying but they all knew how to deliver their lines so they felt like natural speech and true to their characters. I don't think they particularly distinguished themselves with their performances only because the play doesn't ask that of their characters. Walter Bobbie is fine in his debate with Jack Davenport (bishop to earl) on whether they will capture and then burn Joan but I admit it's not that interesting if you don't care about what Shaw is communicating. He does have some nicer more emotional moments during Joan's "trial." John Glover is very natural as the archbishop and then comes back in the epilogue to relate Joan's canonization. He's almost too casual as the archbishop but he does plead with Joan a little more affectingly when she's about to rush into danger in Paris. I mean, his performance could be different but I certainly don't think it's bad and it's not like he's leaving meaty material unchewed. Is Jack Davenport playing the Earl very much like his character in Smash minus some of the jadedness and the mooning over Kat McPhee? Yes. Did I mind? No. I think of all the characters, he was the most fun. He's just so dry and charming. Of these actors, I think Patrick Page has the most to do. He gets to have some fun as the squire in the beginning and then he gets to do some heavy lifting as the Inquisitor in Act 2. I'm not saying spend all your money, but if you like any of these actors, I think it might be worth the ticket to see them. OK, maybe not Glover. 

Adam Chanler-Berat's portrayal of the Dauphin then King is pretty one-note but fine for that. He's whiny and wimpy. If I had a criticism, it's that he doesn't really represent the "pretenders" well in the epilogue as he doesn't seem to have changed much in the 25 years. I liked him a lot better than I did in Amelie where I think he was miscast. 

Daniel Sunjata and Max Gordon Moore were totally fine but I wouldn't see this play for either of them. Sunjata's not giving a performance many other actors couldn't give. And Moore gets a dramatic scene during the trial but I don't feel like he's goes very far. Maybe it's just not enough time to build as an actor or for the audience to get invested in a character we've just met. I thought he was much better in Describe the Night. 

I give Robert Stanton a lot of credit for playing multiple parts. I think he's just fine as the chaplain (and I was unmoved when he does get emotional after the burning). But he does a great job differentiating the characters and doing credible accents. 

Matthew Saldivar was not great to me. He stands out from Sunjata and Moore because with his first character, his line delivery was not good to the point that he was a little hard to understand. It felt like he had little connection to the dialogue. He was better as the promoter/prosecutor during the trial but a better actor would have given a stronger performance. He had the material. 

I was disappointed with Condola Rashad. I haven't seen any of her other roles so I'm just going to assume that she was better in those other parts given her multiple Tony nominations. She wasn't embarrassingly bad or anything. It was just... odd. She made odd choices. I'm not sure you could call it an accent so much as she's not exactly using her normal speaking voice and also "projecting" and also adopting a strange cadence. I feel like the best way to describe it is like music or rap. It's like she chose a rhythm to deliver her lines and she's sticking to it regardless of what the dialogue is. In Act 1 it was particularly unnatural where I got the distinct feeling that she was an actor saying lines and not a character speaking for herself. Part of it is that Joan is prone to inspirational speeches and that sort of thing but it was definitely a choice on Rashad's part even in normal dialogue. I don't know who told her to shout all her lines. It was too over the top when everyone else was giving relatively natural performances and it was also a little hard to understand some words. She didn't drop it in Act 2 but I think she's given more heavy stuff to work with and so it was (thankfully) harder to maintain the artifice. 

So what about the play itself? I went into this wanting to enjoy myself so I think I was more indulgent with my laughter. It's not that Shaw's play isn't still funny or that the performances were bad but I don't think the actors landed the jokes as much as I chuckled because I was in a good mood and willing to go with it. I will say I definitely didn't feel the 3 hour running time. I didn't know it wasn't a two hour play until I checked my phone at the end. There are a lot of ideas in this play but I don't think they're the most coherent or compelling or convincing once you reach the end. Certainly there are Shaw witticisms and wisdom throughout but I have found his other plays more incisive and frankly, easier to pull quotes from. I am very glad this is a pretty traditional production and there was no attempt to clumsily map onto it a modern allegory or any kind of emphasis as I think the muddled nature and the specificity resists that kind of reading. 

Like, Shaw makes points about faith and then tries to pull it together in the end about whether the world will ever be ready for saints like Joan. But, at least to me, an atheist, I didn't feel like he made a very compelling religious argument. And the way the character of Joan is written + Condola's performance, she's kind of impenetrable to the audience. It's very hard to find her sympathetic because she feels the least like a real person of everyone on stage until the trial in Act 2 finally lets her be vulnerable. I don't think female characters have to be "likable" but they can't just stomp around with overwhelming enthusiasm making speeches. Even Kimmy Schmidt breaks and acts like a real person. And they can't just insist that they're right and bludgeon everyone around them. Characters like Annalise Keating both show their vulnerability and prove themselves. I do think part of the problem is that we don't get enough access to Joan. Maybe if there was a stronger way of representing her voices, maybe if she had a female friend or even a sheep to talk to... but Shaw isn't interested in making her feel human. Even during the trial, she momentarily breaks but it's more like a defeat than finally giving us access to an inner life with doubts and other wants than her main goals (crowning the dauphin, basically... winning). He flirts with it a little by portraying Joan as a... not quite a loudmouth or a chatterbox, but a character who can't help cutting in. And we do see from time to time that she does get a taste for war and victory. But he never takes the time to examine that or be critical of it in a way that gives the audience room to do the same. Like, maybe we should be a little skeptical and, even if we believe in the voices, think about how much of what is driving Joan by the end is the voices and how much is a little bit of conceit or at least the thrill of never having failed. But that would require knowing more about what Joan wants beyond the immediate and giving her more of an inner life. It comes out a little when she rejects her "salvation/repentance" when told that she would stay imprisoned. But that's too easy. You never have to fully examine her definition of freedom and if maybe her pursuit of her goals was about the pursuit of ultimate freedom. Which brings me to the feminist angle. As much as I tried to like Condola Rashad (come on, the lone woman in a cast of men? Of course I tried.), I tried to see a feminist reading but there isn't a neat one. Sure, you can pull quotes out of context. There's a lot about being proud and disobedient and a couple of times gender is referenced explicitly. But you can't divorce it from the religious context and that muddies any feminist reading. Like one of the lines in the epilogue is something about young girls understanding their direct connection to God or something like that. It's more Anne Hutchinson than some inspiring message about how all little girls can now realize they have more options and greater potential. There's also the problem of the character of Joan who doesn't really seem to be a feminist. She's more masculine, or at best, gender non-conforming. She's not really interested in other women or even in furthering her own cause as a woman. There's something striking in her outspokenness and her refusal to be cowed by any of the many male characters (though she is respectful of the archbishop and at times of the other church officials). And she does wear a soldier's (and therefore male) clothes. But the play is not making a feminist argument and to cobble one together, you have to piece together a bunch of scraps and ignore a lot of the context from which you plucked them.

tl;dr I did ultimately enjoy myself. There are some lesser performances but ultimately it feels like a fairly good production. I do wish Condola Rashad felt more like a real person but she does not because of some odd acting choices and also the way the character is written. But if you're interested or you like the play, I wouldn't dissuade you from seeing it. I can imagine a better production but not a MUCH better production, given the material. I'd say this was operating at about 75%. With Rashad bringing more sensitivity and depth to the part, I might bump it up to 80%. But personally, I don't see a fantastic play here. It's enjoyable throughout but too scattered and muddled to make a compelling argument, or at least one that I find convincing as someone who is not religious.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Sam Clemmett discusses Harry Potter and the Cursed Child:

[ElectricBoogaloo]

On 5/20/2018 at 7:36 PM, Silver Raven said:

Today's production of Broadway Sacramento was An American in Paris.  To be honest, I am neither a jazz nor a ballet aficionado, but i really enjoyed this production.  To begin with, the set design, the lighting, and the 40s costuming were superb.  I was blown away by the use of flies in the form of panels which were used to project lots of images.  And the production of "I'll Build a Stairway to Heaven" blew my mind.

The lead was Kyle Robinson.  He's the understudy for the tour.  The regular star is McGee Maddox, whom I don't know, but I know Kyle Robinson.  He's one of the co-founders and -owners of Travis Wall's Shaping Sound troupe, and he was a regular on their reality TV show.  I always thought he was one of the best dancers in the troupe, and he did not disappoint today.  I have to admit that he is not the best singer, or the best actor, but his dancing was superb.

Lise Dassin was played by Allison Walsh.

Adam Hochberg was played by Matthew Scott.  He was the comedy relief, but he gets very dark in the second act (the whole show gets very dark in the second act), and his singing of "But Not For Me" was great.

Henri Baurel was played by Ben Michael.

Milo Davenport was played by Kirsten Scott.

The entire ensemble's dancing was outstanding.  I loved it.

I saw the tour when they were in SF last year and I know that at least one of the main roles was performed by the understudy or alternate. I’m 99% sure it wasn’t Kyle but I’ll have to dig out my program and check! I agree that the dancing was really great. To be honest, I don’t always love Christopher Wheeldon’s choreography but I thought he did a nice job of integrating ballet into a Broadway show without turning it into a ballet with singing. Sometimes in musicals, the more advanced dancing is left to the ensemble so it was awesome to see the leads getting some really technical choreography. Of course, that does limit who can be cast because you need actual triple threats, not singers who can move. Heh or in the case of the show you saw, sometimes you get an understudy who is a dancer who can kind of sing and act.

[aradia22]

I don't think this fixes any of the story or music problems but it does make Pretty Woman seem a bit more interesting.

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Breaking-Andy-Karl-Will-Replace-Steve-Kazee-as-Star-of-PRETTY-WOMAN-on-Broadway-20180523

Also, God damn it! Tickets are so expensive. And I don't know if I want to go all the way to the Apollo. I've been investigating off-Broadway recently and I'm planning to see Carmen Jones, Little Rock, This Ain't No Disco, and On A Clear Day You Can See Forever. Oh, and The Beast in the Jungle if I can win the online rush. I wish she had done another show at Rockwood but I get it. You have to make money. 

https://www.broadwayworld.com/los-angeles/article/For-The-Record-Presents-Shoshana-Bean-At-Harlems-World-Famous-Apollo-Theater-20180514

[Rinaldo]

On April 17, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Silver Raven said:

Saturday is the annual season ticket holders' subscribers' showcase for the Sacramento Music Circus...  Jackie Piro Donovan will be starring in Gypsy, Francesca Arostegui will be Sophie in Mamma Mia!, and I'm guessing that Joey Barreiro will be in Newsies.

This Playbill article gives more details, and either Ms. Donovan was a placeholder for the showcase event, or she's now been replaced. In any case, getting Carolee Carmello as Rose in Gypsy is amazing -- it might make me fly out to Sacramento myself. Noah Racey as Don Lockwood in Singin' in the Rain would also be my dream casting. Lucky Sacramento!

[Silver Raven]

Donovan wasn't going to be playing Gypsy or Mama Rose, she was announced as one of the strippers. 

[Silver Raven]

Broadway Sacramento (now renamed Broadway On Tour) announced the fall/winter 2018/2019 season today.

On Your Feet!

Waitress

Stomp

Falsettos

CATS

Aladdin

Not all that thrilled.  Falsettos and Aladdin are the only two that have me enthused but I'll probably buy a season ticket.

Edited May 24, 2018 by Silver Raven

[DisneyBoy]

I am so excited Betty Buckley is going to play Dolly...but is that only in the US? Are there no Canadian stops? Come on now...I wanna see the best Norma!

To echo what was said about Jan Maxwell several pages back, her portrayal of Phyllis will stay with me forever. "Tell me, how can I leave when I left long ago, love?" So much humor and pain and sincerity and poise and love in there. She was incredible. To stand out in a cast with that much talent says a lot.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

14 hours ago, DisneyBoy said:

I am so excited Betty Buckley is going to play Dolly...but is that only in the US? Are there no Canadian stops? Come on now...I wanna see the best Norma!

So far, the tour schedule only lists U.S. cities through August 2019.

I found out she was in the tour around the same time that I got my season tickets for next year so I was pretty excited!

[aradia22]

Hello, my darlings! I am just home from the matinee of Lincoln Center's revival of My Fair Lady. You know how sometimes I pretend that I'm going to just do quick thoughts and then still write a couple paragraphs? This is not one of those times. Brace yourselves. I am about to give you ALL the thoughts. And if you are (like I was) staying away from anyone else's opinions before you see the show yourself, you have been warned. Stop reading. All good? OK.

First of all, a bit of my background on MFL. 

Spoiler

I love the original cast album. I've listened to it many times. I went to that 54 Below concert with Laura Michelle Kelly as Eliza. And I've seen the movie, but not start to finish because I find the dubbing painful. And of course, one can't escape hearing a number of the songs at concerts or as standards on various jazz/theater albums. So with Once on This Island, this is the second time this season I'm seeing a revival of a show I'm very familiar with and have great affection for but with all of my critical reasoning as an adult and frequent theatergoer. Whereas with Once on This Island, I was just so full of the joy of hearing those songs performed so well, I was definitely in a different mindset seeing MFL. I was completely open to it. No expectations. But I'm not going to laugh at a lyrical joke when I know it's coming. I'm a tough cookie that way. You need to earn a laugh from me. I won't just go along because the rest of the audience is laughing.

I found the opening rather disappointing, but thankfully it wasn't indicative of the quality of the whole show. 

Spoiler

Like, the overture seemed to drag and in one part the percussion seemed to be leading and it was way too bouncy. It felt like amateur hour. Maybe they were sleepy, I don't know. The opening is also not very magical. Eliza walks on behind a screen somewhat in silhouette and then the rest of the Covent Garden characters rush in. I can see where it would be like, OK, you're in the theater and these characters are alive but they're waiting in the wings for their entrance. It's like a middle ground between complete immersion/fantasy and a more abstract or artificial construction where you're hyper aware you're watching a play. EXCEPT, they kept having the lower class characters move set pieces on very obviously whenever we would go back to those scenes. AND, those set pieces were distinctly cheap looking. I did not get the concept at all. They're very flat 2 dimensional set pieces. And when Alfred and his friends go to the pub, they go in through the door... and come out on through a cloth screen on the side. I mean, come on. What was the thinking there? I racked my brain but I couldn't think of a reason for this besides the practical of how much space they have for set pieces. There's no conceptual justification. The way the actors were directed to move around and behave in these scenes were also very amateur. Like, amateur/community theater. This is the first Bartlett Sher production I remember where I can remember seeing the ensemble bumble around and mutter random (not in the book) lines to each other like we used to do in our high school plays (except they were inaudible to the audience because none of the ensemble was audible at that distance from the audience unless we were singing). And I may get into this more later, but I felt like a lot of the ensemble choreography felt awkward. It was really bad at the end of Wouldn't It Be Loverly where the ensemble joins in on the dancing because... well, it feels like they're supposed to. The end of The Rain in Spain when they dance was also like that. The direction didn't seem to give the actors a clear motivation. You can feel how awkward it is for them to jump into dancing. And really, it doesn't make sense. Especially at the very beginning, the show doesn't seem to have decided if it wants to be a traditional and lavish musical or a more realistic story and I don't think it ever ends up making that decision. It just goes back and forth, which is part of the reason it feels uneven. 

I will deal more with any feminist readings or directorial spins that Sher may or may not have put on the material later. But for now I'll say that I was missing some special sauce, particularly from Harry Hadden-Paton as Higgins.

Spoiler

What is so odd is that, if I hadn't been trying to give him a chance and trying to enjoy his performance, I might have enjoyed it more if I'd just let myself not look at his face. After watching the whole show, I think he is probably a little miscast. He can't do the bluster of Higgins. Look, I know what I'm in for when I see MFL. I'm not expecting suddenly nonmisogynistic lyrics from Higgins. In fact, the brilliance of those lyrics is that they're so clever and funny, you can't help but laugh even if you don't believe a word of their nonsense (which you shouldn't, but we'll save that for another day). I did not laugh at his Higgins. At least during his songs. For the kind of talk singing the role asks for, I thought he was actually quite good. And when you hear him on the album, he'll probably be quite good as well. And if you don't see the show, you'll think I'm crazy. Because again, if I just listened to him, he's spot on. It's fantastic. But seeing him? There's not enough life in his eyes during the songs. You know how some actors are accused of acting so you can see the wheels turning behind their eyes. That's necessary for a character like Higgins. I needed at least one or maybe 3 extra steps. I needed the intelligence behind the eyes. With H-P I got the one level. Delivering the songs fairly well. I didn't believe it. For God's sake, how hard is it to sell blustery misogyny? Instead his numbers fell flat, with some like "I'm an Ordinary Man" and "A Hymn to Him" going for high camp, again without any of the heat. You can't just run around being silly. I didn't actually believe he had any hatred towards women and the numbers felt so divorced from context that it made me start asking questions. Like, has had Higgins had bad relationships with women before? That seems like an underdeveloped part of his characterization and backstory. Only it wouldn't be, if you did the number the right way and I believed that his opinions had been formed from experience and not the misogyny of the lyricist. I also realized somewhere in the middle of the show (definitely when Eliza showed up asking for lessons) that part of the issue was a lack of tension. You don't have any sense of the stakes for a lot of the show. The way H-P and Ambrose act it, you don't have a real sense of what it means for Higgins to call Eliza baggage or his power over her, etc. Their relationship hasn't been directed to have weight until later in the show(I will get to that). To come back to it, I feel like there were two issues. One, like Ambrose, I think having to do a musical was distracting to him. I'm not sure he was fully able to act and sing at the same time. Two, I do think he was miscast because his gentler, more sensitive Higgins was much better than his blustery, misogynistic Higgins. The end of both acts stand out to me. In act 1, right before The Rain in Spain, he finally sees that Eliza is tired and comforts her and also inspires her with that little speech about the English language. And I thought OHHH, that's who he is. That's the character he should have been the whole time. It doesn't feel like a softer side to Higgins. It feels like Harry Hadden-Paton finally becomes a real person and doesn't feel the strain of pretending to be angry (which he does the rest of the time by sort of scowling but mostly just furrowing his brow a little). I don't think it's an coincidence that it's a book scene. The same goes for Act II with its book scenes after the ball and at his mother's house. He's not a bad actor at all. He was just miscast for the main part of the Higgins character. He's more of a Freddy than a Higgins. Well, maybe not that far, but you know what I mean. I think his one great musical performance was "I've Grown Accustomed to Her Face" and that's only because it's a more sensitive song than his earlier ones. And as soon as he started blustering again, the same thing happened and he lost me. 

OK, on to Lauren Ambrose. In some ways I was impressed. In some ways, I was not.

Spoiler

Eliza is a challenging role. You have to do the cockney side and you have to do the posh side. You've got to get all those screams and whines and belts and you have to do the beautiful legit soprano as well. I'm about to go song by song but overall, I was impressed by what Ambrose was able to do and disappointed in how much she picked her moments. I do want to say that I heard she was sick earlier in the week so I don't know how much of her performance today was affected by that or if this is how she always performs. I think that when you go into the theater, you want to have confidence in the person you're seeing. It helps create the illusion. You go see Audra McDonald and you're fully confident. You know she will be fabulous. You go see Ken Watanabe and you know he's going to do what he can manage and you set your expectations accordingly. Lauren was in the middle and it made me nervous. To go song by song...

Wouldn't It Be Loverly... She really soft-pedaled this one. It had me nervous about the rest of the show. (Side note: GREAT harmonies from the male ensemble.) She had a few moments but I was missing a lot of the cockney grit. No belting and you could already hear too much of the refined/legit part of her voice.

Just You Wait... She was a little stronger here. In the lower alto/mezzo range she let out some of her belt (a little shouty) but she pretty much avoided the high belt entirely and/or cheated the high notes and pulled back so they were spoken or "sung emotionally." It was another disappointment. She lacked fire. If you can't do the song properly, just make that choice and act the anger. She straddled the line and did neither. Again, like H-P, she seemed to struggle to act and sing at the same time. 

The Rain in Spain... OK, finally. I feel like she was saving herself for this point where she finally started to show off her voice a little more. She still couldn't act and sing at the same time which didn't make her the most believable but I could at least enjoy some nice vocal moments.

I Could Have Danced All Night... Much stronger vocally. And this time she went for the high belt. So I know she has it. I wish there didn't have to be a choice of when she can go for the songs as written and when she has to cheat it. 

Show Me... while a generally good vocal performance, this was a perfect example of Ambrose making choices. I've taken enough voice lessons to know those kinds of choices. There were the fingerprints of a voice teacher all over that song helping her to decide when to make compromises so she could let out that admittedly beautiful high note at the end. But it makes you nervous watching her because you don't know what's going to come out and for some reason, it still didn't leave room for acting choices. This had none of the fire I wanted. Julie Andrews can rest easy.

Now, like Hadden-Paton, it was a different story when we got to the book scenes. She plays her Eliza a little twitchy in the beginning and I didn't think those book scenes were that remarkable. But she does have a little sparkle. She has this smile post-transformation when she's feeling particularly self-satisfied or she's tweaking Higgins' nose in some way that is incredibly adorable and charming. If they do continue after she leaves and recasts, I wonder if they'll keep the same dress for the ball. I think it works particularly well with her hair. She doesn't go for the basic princess look. They make her a golden/orange goddess. It's a nice twist on the Edwardian look of the rest of the cast with a little more of that Regency (Empress Josephine-inspired empire waist). Her book scenes at the end of Act 2 were FIERCE. I was like, OHH, THERE IS AN ACTRESS IN THERE. I almost wanted to see her in a play, or at least Pygmalion instead of MFL.

I wasn't sure about Norbert Leo Butz's casting when it was announced, but he was great.

Spoiler

I mean, he's always great but I still think he wasn't spot on casting. There were more natural choices. Someone older. Someone British. But he fully embodies his character. I guess... where someone else could just be the part, he acts the part. And maybe there's something a little disappointing in that but he does an undeniably solid job. His musical numbers are great. "With A Little Bit of Luck" is the first really number where I felt like I could relax and he plays off Lance Roberts really well. (Side note: What do I know Lance Roberts from???) The only thing I did not like was the dumb (I'm sure historically accurate, but ugly and distracting) hat they put him in. The reprise is accompanied by some of the ensemble dressed as suffragettes for no apparent reason. They just march across the stage. His negotiating with Higgins over Eliza was excellent. Good old Norbert. And they had a lot of fun with Get Me to the Church on Time (though I felt it went on a little long). The whole ensemble joins in and it's as much of a big production number as the show has. There's also some random crossdressing and can-can dancers. 

I loved Jordan Donica as Freddy. He is handsome and he sang well and he had all the charm needed to have.

Spoiler

Could a lot of actors have played Freddy? Sure. But I loved some diversity in the main cast and he sang beautifully. I know "On the Street Where You Live" is in a tenor range but I appreciated that he had some baritone or at least baritenor depth to his voice and didn't make it too high and effeminate. Particularly with an older Eliza, you don't want such a youthful sounding Freddy. I mean, it's not his fault but Freddy is really an after thought, especially since unlike Pygmalion, he doesn't end up with Eliza (or it's uncertain). After "Show Me" the show doesn't know know what to do with him and he just trails after her for a while and then Eliza brings him up when she's fighting with Higgins and that's the end of it. 

Diana Rigg was delightful but in no way is it a Tony worthy performance. That nomination is ridiculous.

As for the ensemble in general it was a mixed bag.

Spoiler

Far be it from me to wish actors out of work but it was a little sloppy. I think it was largely a direction issue when it was an issue. Like either its amateur theater and they have too much leeway to make choices or its opera direction and no one gave them a good sense of what to do. "The Servants' Chorus" (Poor Professor Higgins) was sung well but it seemed to go on and on. Part of the issue (which I will get to later) was the revolving set. But also, like with some of the ensemble scenes I mentioned, it just felt a bit too random. Scenes with tighter direction or stronger direction worked much better. They nailed "Ascot Gavotte" (I will gush about the costumes later) and while some of the ballroom dancing during the embassy ball was a little bouncy/choppy from some of the pairs for my taste, it was generally well done. I'm sure the ensemble was very talented. I was in the first few rows so I was able to pick out some particularly strong voices. And it was nice to see a diverse range of ages. But while fun, "Get Me To the Church..." was also a little sloppy. High energy but hell if I can explain it as anything but controlled chaos. It was like they threw reality out the window.

 

My Fair Lady continued because I was afraid it was going to get erased. 

So... the set.

Spoiler

I've already commented on the lower class part of London being disappointing. Flat 2-D set pieces. A bar that you could exit out the side of through a cloth panel. No sense of reality. It made no sense if they were going for a gritty, realistic version of London to have such an obviously fake set. There's a difference between cheap and not real in a theatrical sense. You can do a 2-D set for something like a whimsical fairytale where you either have a high level of suspension of disbelief or you're super aware of the storybook fantasy nature of it. Mrs. Higgins' house was a similar 2-D wall. I wasn't that bothered by it because it was a short scene but for heaven's sake, it wobbled. On the other hand, Higgins' house was a GORGEOUS revolving set piece. Think of the most recent revival of She Loves Me. This was theatrical lavishness. However, when Eliza first got to the house and through some of her lessons and the Servants' Chorus I think they got too clever with it. There were too many revolutions of the set which created the same problem as the earlier, insubstantial sets of unreality. Instead of feeling like time was passing, or like you were watching a movie montage, you felt like a house kept spinning in circles and it created a level of abstraction that took me out of the world of the show. For the ball, they bring the orchestra on stage and there are chandeliers and a staircase and along with the costuming, it works pretty effectively.

On to the costuming...

Spoiler

I was less than thrilled with the depiction of the lower classes in the play. It all felt pretty standard and Norbert's costume with the bad hat and the very obviously "aged" and "dirtied" coat stood out as a disappointment. Again, it contributed to my confusion of... is this camp? Are we just like... this is a musical and things are fake dirty and we don't have to explain why we're singing and dancing? Or is this supposed to be real and gritty and in that case, you needed to do a better job making that coat look realistically aged and the realism of the lower class part should match the accuracy of the upper class part even if it's less fun to do the costumes and sets and props. 

There's some fine costuming once we get to Higgins' house but what really perked me up was Ascot Gavotte. The costuming work was STUNNING. Sure, there's historical accuracy to fall back on. But the subtlety of the color story and the skill in which each ensemble member was perfectly outfitted but worked as part of a whole... brilliant. I would never, but that's a moment you want a camera in the theater. Hello Dolly had a similar moment but it was able to play with color. MFL does the same kind of drama with shades of light purple, from the palest lavender to a very muted dusty plum with some pink in it and yet you get the impression that everyone is just wearing some off-white shade as it all fades to a soft pastel. The way the fabric from one dress is carried into a detail in another dress, the impeccable tailoring for the mens' outfits. If I had one complaint, it would be that up close, there is a slight nightgown-y feel to some of the outfits but that's the theatrical magic part where you don't have to put all the detail you would put into an actual dress. Eliza's ascot outfit is lovely. They go for black and white. I don't remember it well because I was so focused on the hat. That hat! It worked so well with her hair. Excellent millinery for Eliza in particular in the show.

The ball was another amazing costuming moment. I didn't love it quite as much as the races. Because, you know, you see plenty of pretty costumes in the theater. But this time there were some lovely colors and even with the fairly similar Edwardian silhouettes there was some lovely work with beautiful sparkly, filmy overdress materials. When they were spinning around and waltzing, it was gorgeous. (Side note: Steven Trumon Gray is in this show and it is impossible to not notice him because not only is he a beautiful dancer but he is FINE. Gorgeous face and he fills out a suit to perfection.)

The show overall in terms of structure

Spoiler

Since this is the first time I've seen the show the way it's meant to be presented, I was unsure if my issues with pacing and structure are baked into the show or if they were due to the some of the failures of the production I've already mentioned. I felt the three hour running time. Act 1 was an hour and a half and for a while, I thought the show just didn't have an intermission. It felt a bit like book scenes were brief and just wedged in there to get us from song to song. But maybe that's just because I found the musical numbers such a mixed bag and thought the acting was uneven. Of course Freddy disappears for a long time and his role never feels fully resolved but maybe part of that was acting and direction and Show Me not being a strong enough number. Act II also feels like it drags a bit and while I enjoyed it, and in particular, the book scenes where it felt like Ambrose and Hadden-Paton could finally just have proper dramatic scenes together, it kind of felt like Higgins and Eliza were circling each other for a while until we could finally end things. On to the ending, which is somewhat of a proper spoiler even if you've just been reading my thoughts so far. In this production, after the slippers line, Eliza walks up to Higgins. She places a hand on his face. And then she walks out. If you know how the Beaumont is constructed, she walks up the stairs (I'm fairly sure she goes out to the main level (where the audience enters the orchestra) and not through the hole in the seating where actors sometimes enter and exit. I found this an INCREDIBLE COP OUT. She's neither staying with Higgins nor walking out the REAL DOOR of his study. Instead she takes the third option, that doesn't exist in the world of the play. WTF, Bartlett Sher? That's not an answer. Which brings me to...

The question of a feminist reading of the play and whether the direction of this play forces a new interpretation or any additional insight.

Spoiler

I say no. As far as I can tell, the material is exactly the same. The only things I noticed were the choreography of the ending which I just mentioned, some direction of Hadden-Paton to act a little more sensitive, and possibly some lines in the later act 2 book scenes (particularly at Mrs. Higgins' house). I shall unpack this now. As I said, I think the third option is a total cop out because it doesn't make a decision in the real world of the play. And that would make a more powerful statement. It's like having suffragettes randomly march across the stage during/after the reprise of "With A Little Bit of Luck." WTF was that about? If you want to say something, have the balls to say something. Don't make me do the work or imply next to nothing and then pat yourself on the back for it. And also, don't short change me on some of Eliza's most awesome songs like "Just You Wait" and "Show Me." I needed that fire and intensity. As to Higgins... as I said I think H-P is miscast and when he's "angry" he goes more for camp than anything real or intimidating. Other than that, I do think the way he plays it, particularly from just before Rain in Spain onwards, you can see more of a romantic reading. Not that Eliza ever suggests she is interested in a romantic relationship. Her line about not wanting him to make love to her but more of a friendly feeling between them reads loud and clear in this production. But the way he softens to her, you can easily read it as some romantic feeling but he's too awkward to put it into words, especially after bumbling and hurting her feelings but being too prideful to apologize, especially after she's lashed out at him. I can't fully put it into words right now but that's what I mean by sensitive. Particularly at Mrs. Higgins' house, some of those lines read differently because he doesn't play it as blustery. He feels more uncertain of himself, agreeing with her sentiments about friendly feeling, and then trying to save face but inevitably blundering into offending her again when claims credit for her transformation into a "woman." And he plays much more unsettled and intimidated by her when she returns and he delivers the line about the slippers. I can't remember but I think he stands there for a while and then maybe goes over to sit behind his desk (I'm confused at this point because I was splitting my attention between the two of them just before the lights went out which is why I'm also not entirely sure where Eliza exits once she leaves the stage.) As for the lines I think might have been changed, it wasn't anything jarring or very specific. I just got the sense, particularly at Mrs. Higgins house that maybe one or two lines or words was different. It might have just been the delivery. I do really want to go back, not only because I enjoyed the show for the most part, but because I want to watch it with different eyes, paying less attention to the music and individual production choices and more attention to the piece as a whole. I think part of the reason I struggled to do that is that the show is uneven and to see this holistically, I would have to spend some effort stitching it together. But I want to do a better job tracking Eliza and Higgins' relationship throughout the play. I couldn't get a strong grasp on what it was trying to say about the creation of identity and the bit about physical abuse and what the ultimate takeaway is supposed to be. I think part of that is a failure of the production, but I do want to go back and work it out for myself before I read anything or watch any interviews. Of course, I know what's in the book, but I want a better understanding of what this production is trying to say, if anything, because those final dramatic (nonmusical scenes) were impressive even if they felt different from what had come before and I want to try and reconcile it all. But as of now, no, I don't see any coherent feminist reading or new interpretation though again, Lauren is FIERCE in some of those final dramatic scenes and they were when I truly appreciated why she might have been cast over other actresses (even if I still would have liked to have seen Lauren Worsham or Laura Michelle Kelly or someone else tackle the role and do a better job with the songs). 

tl;dr Lauren (Eliza) and Harry (Higgins) have some good and bad aspects to their performances but on the whole, I was impressed by her even if I wish she had been able to sustain a higher level of performance through the entire show and that they were both capable of acting and singing at the same time. Norbert was very solid. The costuming was generally great. I didn't like the lower class London city sets which looked cheap but the Higgins Wimpole Street house was a beautiful set. It's an uneven production but full of talent and the material is of course wonderful and I would recommend it. I think it's best to go with low expectations or know that it will be an uneven night.

Edited May 27, 2018 by aradia22