Theatre Talk: In Our Own Little Corner

[Milburn Stone]

I hope you'll be doing fine before long, aradia.  

[DisneyBoy]

That's the Highlights From Jeckyll and Hyde CD - I think it's only 8-10 songs. Anthony Warlow sings on the full version from 1994. That version also has Linda Eder and Carolee Carmello - their duet of In His Eyes is terrific and so is the Linda Eder/Anthony Warlow duet of It's a Dangerous Game.

...maybe I picked the wrong song then. This is the Moment was unbelievably awful. Colm can't save it. Maybe it's because I understand all the lyrics for the first time. This thing rhymes Moment with itself three times!!! In a single line!!!

I'll check out the other Eder cuts. I found her a little reserved in the official track of Good and Evil, which made me a little sad. She seems more relaxed in the bootleg video....oh well. I'm picky.

Is Eder on all three albums? Resinging the same songs? Is she better on one album more than another?

I hope you're all doing well wherever you are right now and whatever might be going on in your lives.

Right back at you, and thank you.

Edited February 14, 2016 by DisneyBoy

[aradia22]

No time to get into it now but if you have any interest in Shakespeare or you're a fan of Len Cariou go see Broadway and the Bard!

[Rinaldo]

Saturday in NYC (a rather breathless scramble as I had car trouble in the morning and my Philadelphia friend and I had to take the train at the last moment; we made all our lunch dates and showtimes, though).

 

Matinee An American in Paris: Lovely to look at (Bob Crowley is of course a magical designer) and listen to (duh, Gershwin, including lots of the instrumental works). Fine cast (I knew I would be getting Robert Fairchild's alternate at this performance). But I feel like they never really worked out the detail and structure of the new story they devised; threads are left hanging, or resolved offstage, or suddenly there'll be a huge blob of explanation. And the premise that we're following the adventures of three buddies is not completed: only one of the three gets a completed resolution in the end. I wonder if there were big cuts as it was being developed. And I gotta say, how do you cast Jill Paice as one of your leads and then give her essentially nothing to sing? Still, lots of dance, and fine dancers to render it. I'm glad it's found an audience. (And glad they picked some of the Gershwin songs that don't get repeated to death onstage; at least, no "Someone To Watch Over Me"!)

 

Evening Encores! Cabin in the Sky: It's one of those classic (but not actually well-known) titles that "must" be done if a series like this lasts long enough, but once selected is problematic in its content. A folk-tale sort of story about pious simple-living black folks, caught in a battle between representatives of Heaven and Hell... well, it needs a thoughtful adaptation for present-day performance, let's say. And it got one, from director Ruben Santiago-Hudson (though the abbreviations made the denouement unintelligible to me -- I couldn't figure out how Joe redeemed himself). It also got a really superb ensemble: wonderful voices, fabulous dancers. Evocative designs, gorgeous new orchestrations (the originals being lost) by the legendary Jonathan Tunick. The central role wasn't happily cast; I don't think we even have leading ladies with voices structured like Ethel Waters these days, and in any case LaChanze sounded to be in not-great vocal shape, scraping and pushing in several parts of the range. Well, it's been a 28-year career by now, she's had her great moments over the years, but it's a shame that Petunia's great Duke-Larouche songs weren't given great renditions. Fortunately the rest of the cast was on point: Chuck Cooper solid and fun in his best manner, Norm Lewis sounding great again after a rocky couple of years, Michael Potts doing everything possible for Joe, and Carly Hughes showing up in Act II to deliver a welcome injection of sin. Lots of good supporting bits, too many to name. I'm glad they did it and that I saw it, but it probably won't get further productions. For that very reason, I hope they manage to get it recorded.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Rinaldo

[Charlie Baker]

Thanks, Rinaldo, for your reports. Sorry you had to scramble on such a cold day here in the grand old metropolis. 

I hope LaChanze is not having serious vocal issues and that she is only strained dealing with these songs and maybe even the weather? This is one of the Encores I strongly regret not making. 

[Julia]

I think Ruben Santiago-Hudson was a perfect choice, based on the job he did with Their Eyes Were Watching God. And it's a shame Patti LaBelle is a little past the role, but I think she's not a bad match for Ethel Waters vocally.

It's a shame Nell Carter never got to take a crack at it.

[Rinaldo]

I agree about Patti LaBelle! Yes, the score is for that sort of voice, wide-ranging but with some roundness in it.

Sorry you had to scramble on such a cold day here in the grand old metropolis. 

IRRELEVANT PERSONAL SIDEBAR: It was my own fault. I did something with the car the night before that completely drained the battery overnight. AAA showed up in record time to jumpstart me, but it still wasn't idling smoothly or accelerating properly, and by the time I got to Philly to pick up my passenger I was sure I shouldn't drive the whole way up, so we parked at 30th St. Stn just in time to catch an Acela Express. The scary part was de-training in Philly at 1 a.m., walking a block to the lot in near-zero temperature, and wondering if the car would start. It did! Like, immediately. And it was now running properly in all respects too. What a joyful moment. I just had the 45 minutes to drive home ahead of me, which was nothing.

[Charlie Baker]

Had a Valentine's outing with a big Wayne Brady fan, and we went to see Kinky Boots.  It's an entertaining show--I guess the strongest part of it is the score.  I've said here before I'm a big supporter of established pop artists who write musicals, and I think Ms. Lauper did a good job.  The lyrics may not be complex, but they seem to fit the characters and the music is pretty infectious. The book is more of a problem for me.  I didn't see the movie, so I can't say how the adaptation compares, but I thought the books for comparable projects The Full Monty and Billy Elliot musicals were stronger than this one. In general, the ensemble work is pretty tight, and Andy Kelso does pretty well in the co-lead.  Mr. Brady? Well, he seems to be drawing the crowds and they love him from his entrance on. He comes across like he's having a great time and sings and moves well and looks terrific in drag.  I know he did a stint in the Broadway Chicago a while back and has done musicals elsewhere. ABC made a half-hearted attempt at giving him a variety series some years ago and I think that's where he could really thrive, but hey, he can absolutely deliver in musical theater. 

[aradia22]

Confession time. I'm not a big fan of West Side Story. I've heard most of the score of course and I like some of it better than other parts. I've never been able to get through the movie because of the dubbing and... yeah, so many things... the dancing, the grease. But I thought it was time to finally listen to the OBC album. I concluded that I still don't like most of these lyrics. But there's a really great energy to the music that I think I've missed when I've heard it other times. For instance, something like "Something's Coming" really has to be conducted properly and timed right with the performer. In the right production, this could be an amazing dance show. For me, it just still doesn't connect on the levels I most connect to musicals... story and music. Larry Kert did sell me on songs I've only been so-so on in the past but I still hate all the gang stuff. Carol Lawrence was distractingly not Puerto Rican.

[methodwriter85]

I'm just glad that we've safely passed the point where J. Lo could have played either Maria or Anita in any future production of West Side Story.

[JustaPerson]

I go back and forth on whether I would want a WSS film remake. I love the 1961 movie, but there's the pesky white people as Latinos thing. But the magic! The dance! Natalie Wood! Rita Moreno! I can't imagine who could replace them or if they god forbid, modernize it with present day trappings. 

 

aradia22 -- I suppose even Stephen Sondheim had his artistic growing pains too!

[aradia22]

By the way, if you're listening on Spotify, do try to find the anniversary recording of West Side Story with the symphonic dances. Those are fantastic. They have the richness and depth of sound that I miss in a lot of the songs as is... especially with those lyrics.

[Charlie Baker]

Sondheim has said from time to time he's not fond of some of his lyrics in West Side Story.  But I think the show still works, and agree with Just a Person about the movie.

[Milburn Stone]

Never mind.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Milburn Stone

[DisneyBoy]

I never really thought about it much, but I guess I'm also a little bit split on West Side Story. I really love some of the songs and melodies, but I don't know if the dancing really works and I'm definitely not fond of the officer Krupke song. I have never seen the show staged live so maybe that's part of the reason why it doesn't all click for me. I also find the 1961 movie alternately fun and incredibly boring and depressing. I guess it depends which scene is playing.

I am really starting to get into Heathers the Musical. There are at least four fun songs and the lyrics are generally really clever. I still can't entirely get into the story though, because of the twists it takes and how dark it gets. Maybe once I've seen the original movie I will appreciate the musical more because it's supposedly quite close to the source material.

[aradia22]

Just home from Manon Lescaut. Not going to get into it because I have a busy day tomorrow but Jonas Kaufman was out and the night was long and boring. Very competent. But not engaging. It left me cold. Also, almost an hour of intermissions and "brief pauses" is too much. I did like the first set and Opolais' costumes. I'm curious how much was lost in the simplified translation because I didn't find Manon that awful or that much to blame. She was like a lesser Cunegonde from Candide.

[methodwriter85]

I go back and forth on whether I would want a WSS film remake. I love the 1961 movie, but there's the pesky white people as Latinos thing. But the magic! The dance! Natalie Wood! Rita Moreno! I can't imagine who could replace them or if they god forbid, modernize it with present day trappings. 

 

aradia22 -- I suppose even Stephen Sondheim had his artistic growing pains too!

 

Wouldn't they basically have to change the location of the musical if they tried to set it in modern times? Aren't all the slums in Upper West Side basically bulldozed over?

Edited February 20, 2016 by methodwriter85

[Julia]

Well, Hell's Kitchen has gentrified, certainly, except for the housing projects. The equivalent these days in Manhattan would probably be Washington Heights/Inwood, which is largely dominican. East Harlem is the largest remaining puerto rican community, but probably not too much longer, since gentrification in Harlem is stepping up and Columbia just eminent domained a huge chunk of it.

[aradia22]

Long story short... decided to try the Aladdin lottery for the first time. I had a feeling I'd win but then it seemed like I wouldn't... and I ended up being the last name called. Hooray! Sat in a box, so I missed some of the backdrops farther upstage but that was OK since most of the show happened downstage anyway. I have seen the movie so many times. I didn't know if it would still have any impact on me. At first, yes, it didn't really have the magic. It was good but it didn't wow and it felt a bit like OK, this a bit theme-park show for the kids and for the nostalgic adults. The costumes are good and flashy but from close up I can tell they're not that expensive. And then they brought it. It happened before Friend Like Me but by the time Friend Like Me kicked in, they had me in the palm of their hands. I teared up more than once... when James Monroe Iglehart sang that Disney medley... and then I was legitimately throat-burning choked up at the end of the show. I can see the problems with it. For the most part, the added stuff worked for me. It didn't feel as clunky as anything with Glenn Slater (thank God) though those extended parts did sometimes feel like padding to make the show longer since the movie doesn't really have enough songs for a musical. Honestly, I'm not sure how it would work for older theatregoers because I know a large part of the magic is how attached I am to the movie and the music. But outside of that I thought all the principals gave great performances, particularly James Monroe Iglehart and Adam Jacobs. The former has such warmth and such range and the latter is capable of such sweetness and has such a pretty voice. Once I cued into the vibe they were going for, I thought the three friends were a cute addition.

 

Oh, and before I forget... that theatre though. Why did no one tell me how gorgeous the New Amsterdam is? I've never been inside. The lobby with all the reliefs and the Art Deco motifs and the Ziegfeld Follies photos. And the interior of the theatre is just breathtaking. It's like being in a museum. I don't know what show I'd put in there. Nothing feels quite grand enough. Around Friend Like Me I finally started feeling like Aladdin fit because as a stage show it now has that vaudeville/revue vibe. And there are definitely plenty of showgirls as a tip of the hat to the Follies.

Edited February 26, 2016 by aradia22

[Rinaldo]

Why did no one tell me how gorgeous the New Amsterdam is? 

That's the main reason I want to see Aladdin (actually that's not true, I think I would genuinely enjoy the show). It's a rare example of one of the historic old theaters that fell vacant and abandoned, and then was bought and restored to its former glory. There's a whole book about its history and restoration, which can be had pretty cheaply and is very informative (clearly has a Disney publicity angle, but still it's gorgeously illustrated for past and present, and has a full production chronology). I love its unique front cover that opens in the middle.

[methodwriter85]

I saw a community theater production of "Picnic". I've gotta say, I've always loved the movie, and it was cool to see what the play version was like. I think the movie version is pretty faithful, for the most part, to the play. The only thing that bugs me is how old William Holden is (he's 37 and his heavy drinking had aged him to looking 50)- it's a shame they wouldn't let Paul Newman reprise the role he originated on Broadway, but Paul Newman wasn't really famous yet. Although on the other hand, making Hal and Alan in their 30's instead of their early 20's does add some pathos and desperation to Hal.

 

I did like seeing Hal being a young guy though. He definitely had the young cocky guy bouncing from one thing to another vibe down pat. And  the movie version, the Millie actress pretty much stole the show. She's such a fantastic character. The thing I didn't get from watching the movie (of course, I watched this when I was 16), was that Flo was terrified of Madge getting with Hal because Hal reminded her so much of her own wild boy that turned into a shitty husband. So that was interesting to pick up.

 

I tried to watch a 1986 cable version with Greg Harrison as Hal, Jennifer Jason Leigh as Madge, Dana Hill as Millie, Rue McClanahan as Flo, and Michael Learned as Rosemary. It didn't really do it for me, but Dana Hill was wonderful casting. Someone really should have told Rue that she needed to drop her Southern accent to play a Midwestern housewife. There's also apparently a 2000 cable version with Josh Brolin as Hal, which might actually be good, but again, he's a bit old for the part.

 

If they revived Picnic, I'd love to see Ansel Elgort as Hal and Elle Fanning as Madge. (She could probably pull off Millie as well if she dressed down.) Ansel has that cocky charm down so pat.

[Rinaldo]

Thanks, methodwriter85, for a thoughtful reaction to the play. I've never seen the play onstage (it was revived on Broadway a couple of years ago, but word was negative enough that I didn't bother on any of my visits), but I've read it and seen both the movie and the cable production you tried. It's definitely an artifact of the 1950s, but an interesting one, I think.

 

Did the movie leave in a reference to the guys' ages? I had the feeling that we were supposed to "read" them as being in their 20s, even though that was patently not true (any more than it was for the girls). This is one of the movies (there are several others) where the reputation of Kim Novak as being a star for other reasons than acting is put to the test; there's something subtle and intriguing going on with her here. And (one problem of Hollywood casting), clearly Susan Strasberg as the "ugly duckling" sister is really a beauty in her own right (here's where Dana Hill was wonderfully, painfully real).

 

I do like the video production, though it has its quirks (adding dialogue from the movie, and trying to morph from the backyard to the park in Act II so as to copy the film, complete with its music). I do find Gregory Harrison terrific in this; the right age, the right look (though his physique is suitably enticing, he's not super-gym-buff like a present-day young actor would be), and he lets his pain and insecurity show through the bluster. The one who disappointed me was a good actress, Michael Learned. Somehow she was determined to look glamorous in a non-period way, and a way wrong for the teacher; there just wasn't any character there (especially compared to the fine work of Rosalind Russell).

[aradia22]

Saw the second night of MCP's The Secret Garden tonight. The train was trying to give me a panic attack. They started late but I still missed the beginning by a few minutes. Once I settled in, the show was great. Of course there were pros and cons and parts of the other concert were better than this concert and vice versa. But all in all I thought it worked pretty well. Let me know if you want more comprehensive thoughts later. It's a bit late tonight (again, the train home...).

[aradia22]

TNR update. So I still have to finish my last recap but I'm not sure if the TNR will be resuming because the Playbill site redesign has thrown me for a loop. Suggestions welcome.

[methodwriter85]

Thanks, methodwriter85, for a thoughtful reaction to the play. I've never seen the play onstage (it was revived on Broadway a couple of years ago, but word was negative enough that I didn't bother on any of my visits), but I've read it and seen both the movie and the cable production you tried. It's definitely an artifact of the 1950s, but an interesting one, I think.

 

Did the movie leave in a reference to the guys' ages? I had the feeling that we were supposed to "read" them as being in their 20s, even though that was patently not true (any more than it was for the girls). This is one of the movies (there are several others) where the reputation of Kim Novak as being a star for other reasons than acting is put to the test; there's something subtle and intriguing going on with her here. And (one problem of Hollywood casting), clearly Susan Strasberg as the "ugly duckling" sister is really a beauty in her own right (here's where Dana Hill was wonderfully, painfully real).

 

I do like the video production, though it has its quirks (adding dialogue from the movie, and trying to morph from the backyard to the park in Act II so as to copy the film, complete with its music). I do find Gregory Harrison terrific in this; the right age, the right look (though his physique is suitably enticing, he's not super-gym-buff like a present-day young actor would be), and he lets his pain and insecurity show through the bluster. The one who disappointed me was a good actress, Michael Learned. Somehow she was determined to look glamorous in a non-period way, and a way wrong for the teacher; there just wasn't any character there (especially compared to the fine work of Rosalind Russell).

 

I might give the 1986 production another chance, especially if I can find a quality DVD of it instead of a bootleg. I do really like the casting of Dana Hill in the '86 production.

 

My most vivid memory of Picnic the movie is the altered speech that Rosemary gives, where she talks about Hal, and basically suggests that he's at the end of his youth. So I'm guessing that they moved up the ages of Hal and Alan, especially because they take out the references to the fact that Alan is supposed to go back to school soon, and they already having him working for his father. But the movie is definitely vague about their ages, while the play version is pretty specific that Madge is 18, and Alan and Hal can't be any older than their early 20's.

 

As for body types, that is one thing I loved about the guy they had as Hal in the community theater production- he was tall and lean and believable as a still-fit former jock, but it was in a 1950's kind of way- flat stomach but not six-pack abs or bulging pecs.

 

BTW, in regards to your earlier comments about the movie vs. musical version of Diner...I was able to see the movie again and I found out that

the epilogue where they talk about the futures of all the characters is only from the musical version. In the movie, the photo just freeze frames and fades out, and we don't learn anything else about them.

In a sense, I really preferred it that way- it gives the sense that we're focused on this particular group of friends for one very short period, and that's that. It mimics that feeling you have when you have someone that is in your life for a very short period- maybe even just a few hours- and you very much like them, but then they go off on their own and you never see them again.

 

I feel Barry Levinson chafed at the criticism that nothing happened in the movie, and so for the musical version

they added the bit about how the diner burns down in a few hours and Fen is going to die, etc etc etc.

I just don't think it's needed, like they want to smash over the head with the metaphor of how the end of the 50's coincides with the end of childhood and the end of life as they know it.

 

I do think one thing they fixed that's worked well was the idea that they were going to have an "older" Boogie that narrates. Instead, they just went with Boogie doing asides. I think Derek Klena pulled it off well. I hope if they can manage to book Broadway for the '17-'18 season he's able to reprise his role. Boogie and Beth were probably my favorite characters.

[DisneyBoy]

Did anybody see Something Rotten? I've just started watching it and find it fluffy fun. Not quite Spamalot levels, but still good.

[aradia22]

 

Did anybody see Something Rotten? I've just started watching it and find it fluffy fun. Not quite Spamalot levels, but still good.

I saw it a while ago. I can't remember if I posted about it here. Kate Reinders (Portia) and the minstrel character were out. Otherwise, I thought the highlights of the evening were all the principals. I disliked Brooks Ashmankas' character and his performance. I thought the show was very flawed but the performers carried it and there were two strong spectacle numbers that were worth the price of admission. Brian d'Arcy James was charming through sheer force of will saddled with a very unlikable character. The bit with the brother got old quickly though others liked it. Heidi Blickenstaff sounded great though I wish she'd been less of a plot device. Christian Borle and Brad Oscar were fantastic. James anchors the show but those two get to really go crazy with their comedic bits. I'm glad I saw it but it's far from a must see.

 

Also, I have to say that while I have no objection to bootlegs, particularly if there was no way you could have seen the show (e.g. it closed 20 years before you were born), I do think you should stick to watching them for closed shows or in the case of something like Wicked, after a replacement has ended their run. Otherwise, I urge you to go support live theatre. Watching bootlegs should not be a regular practice in place of going to see shows. 

[DisneyBoy]

Oh, I completely agree...but unfortunately I haven't been in a position to travel to New York and see anything in quite a while and I'm unlikely to be able to do so looking ahead. I love live theatre and I really would enjoy seeing these shows live, believe you me. The bootlegs are like a message in a bottle - I'm grateful for every one of them. I'm rather envious of your schedule of shows, by the way! You seem to check things out weekly! That's the way to be. There is a lot to take in and I wonder how many NYers actually make the effort...

I agree with your thoughts on Something Rotten. Portia was quite a stand out and I thought she and the brother made for a cute couple. I felt like the wife character was rather wasted in the show after a nice introduction, posing as a man. CB was decent as rockstar Will but I could imagine other actors better embodying that kind of swagger. BDJ was good but I wanted him to get a great song.

The piece was really under written and nowhere near as clever as I think it wanted to be. The references to other musicals were pretty much predictable by a certain point and I was surprised to hear the audience laughing throughout. I think this is probably a show best suited to high school kids studying up on Shakespeare and/or musical theatre. And the dancing...could they possibly have fit more dancing in there to pad the show out? I doubt it.

Did it tour? I would be surprised.

"Welcome to the Renaissance" is stuck in my head, though. They can be proud of that!

[aradia22]

Still figuring out things with the TNR. Thanks for your patience.

 

Saw Noises Off tonight. My full thoughts can wait. It took me a while to warm up to it. I don't laugh on cue. You have to earn my laughter. The audience was eating it up. But by the start of act 2 I thought they really found the magic and things just took off from there. Some great casting and work from those cast members as well as excellent direction and choreography for a piece that cannot be easily to pull off so effortlessly.

 

Oh, and update... If you have Spotify, First Daughter Suite (missing a few tracks) and Amazing Grace are now available for streaming.

[aradia22]

I finally decided to listen to Marie Christine (LaChuisa). There are definitely parts of it I love and parts that sound really pretty but it... doesn't feel tight. It's not a mess but it doesn't have the tight storytelling of really great musicals. Still, Audra McDonald is singing, so I'm good. What I was most surprised by is how much it sounds like Jason Robert Brown. Parade and Marie Christine came out one year apart. For those who are more in the know, do you think one influenced the other or is this a contemporary musical theatre sound and just kind of what was in the air around this time?

[Charlie Baker]

I think Rinaldo can address this more authoritatively than I, but I do think MLC, JRB, maybe Andrew Lippa (?), among others, did indeed represent a pervasive contemporary style, influenced by Sondheim more than anyone else. I liked Marie Christine very much.  Audra McDonald's performance, the staging, the design, helped a lot. But I did like the score.  Overall, I liked it more than Parade. 

[aradia22]

Encores 1776 casting. I still haven't listened to 1776 so I don't know how I should feel. I do like a lot of these people but not enough that I'm jumping to buy a ticket. What do you guys think?

[Rick Kitchen]

It's odd that Santino is playing John Adams, I see him as more of a Thomas Jefferson.  But it's a big role, and he has a great voice.

Edited February 29, 2016 by Rick Kitchen

[Rinaldo]

Santino has also shown on Crazy Ex-Girlfriend that he's at home in roles that call for a sarcastic edge.

[Charlie Baker]

I would agree that Santino is an interesting choice.  So is Bryce Pinkham as Dickinson.  And Garry Hynes as director--she's known mostly for plays, but did a good job with the Encores Juno a few years ago. That said, I'm not exactly chomping at the bit to see 1776 again, though I like it, more than some people who've posted here.

[JustaPerson]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/movies/mark-rylance-interview.html?smid=tw-nytimesarts&smtyp=cur&_r=0

 

In honor of Mark Rylance winning an Oscar, an article about how Stephen Spielberg thinks he "rescued" Rylance from the theatre

[Charlie Baker]

The below article is a little wonky, and may just as well belong in the TCM forum, but I found it very interesting.  Have we been hearing an incorrect version of An American in Paris?

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/theater/have-we-been-playing-gershwin-wrong-for-70-years.html?smid=tw-nytimesarts&smtyp=cur

[Rinaldo]

That's the sort of problem that haunts editors of critical scores (a racket I'm in too, and I know several of the people quoted in the article). It always seemed to me that if the names were ordered A, B, C, D, they were likely just convenient identifiers. But I agree with Rob Fisher that it's naive to take Gershwin's own recording as a permanent statement on what he always wanted. As long as they're effectively dissonant, I'm all for trying different solutions in different performances.

[aradia22]

I disagree with the people who say that She Loves Me is a perfect musical. That said, this production is very cute. I don't think it's completely firing on all cylinders yet but the parts that work really work and they assembled a fantastic cast. The set is gorgeous. I don't want to spoil anything but if you've been underwhelmed by the promo photos, wait until you see it in person. I still think The Shop Around the Corner (my favorite Christmas movie) is a better way of telling this story but the score had plenty of great numbers, I laughed quite a bit, and I left with a good feeling. The show was like vanilla ice cream. Sweet but not too saccharine. Satisfying but insubstantial. A pleasant treat. It'd make for a fantastic date night.

Edited March 5, 2016 by aradia22

[Rinaldo]

I disagree with the people who say that She Loves Me is a perfect musical. 

I'm always ready to be disagreed with, as I tell my History of Musicals students. :) Thank you for the report, in any case.

 

I can't wait to see this production, though I'll have to; my ticket is in May (on the last Encores Saturday). My cross-country international email list of theater-loving friends first met in person 20+ years ago for the last revival of She Loves Me, and we're planning a reunion for this one. For all the changes in our various lives since the first time, we're all still devoted to this lovely musical.

[bosawks]

I'm a little trepidatious to see it because I hold my Judy Kuhn/Boyd Gaines memory of the last revival sacred.  Not to mention Howard McGillin and Sally Mayes.

 

Judy singing "Vanilla Ice Cream", sigh.....

[aradia22]

Right now in my mind, Laura is the star of this production. She's almost giving too much for how small the house is. Sometimes I think her voice is a little too hard and harsh where she could pull back and sound sweeter. But there are definitely songs where she shines and my assumption is that the rough edges will soften with time. I think if Zachary Levi and Laura Benanti can really find that sense of chemistry, that magic that goes beyond just going through what's on the page, that's when this show will really click. I don't think they're there yet. I'm familiar enough with most of the people on stage that I can sense that they're relying on what they know how to do and the show hasn't really gelled as a whole production yet. That is, the actors aren't totally feeding off of each others' energy. No one is bad. I don't think this cast could be bad. But Jane Krakowski is doing what you'd expect, albeit very well. Gavin Creel to me is the most questionable casting though it fits his voice. He's just not who I picture as a smarmy womanizer. I suppose he could be a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing with a pretty boy face but he doesn't really convey that lascivious energy. Levi is totally competent for someone who is not exactly a theatre actor. I think there were a few notes in "She Loves Me" when I was like, 'oh, yeah, he can sing.' I mean, moments where he was up to the standard of any other Broadway actor. Generally, though I think his strongest selling point is his comedic acting. He also just has the right physique for me. It's somewhere between traditional leading man and that Jimmy Stewart lankiness. There's a bit of physicality here but I could have used even more of it.

[aradia22]

I have moved on to Giant in my investigation of LaChiusa. It's a really good score. But this is definitely one of those shows I wish I'd seen in person... though for a different reason than usual. Usually an album sounds so good that I wish I'd seen the performance live.... Ragtime, Man of LaMancha, etc. This time, I feel like the album doesn't capture what the live vocals must have been like. It's not just that I know Brian d'Arcy James sounds better than this but that I went to that Kate Baldwin concert and heard Kate and Katie Thompson sing songs from this show and I know they sound better than what's on the album. It's not that what's on the album is bad. It's just that there was a performance factor and a vocal power that for some reason isn't here. I continue to be fascinated by the similarity between LaChiusa and JRB. I think I might be leaning towards preferring LaChiusa. I also feel many other composing teams in the societal indictments in Giant. Anyway, I'm glad I finally gave this a chance.

 

Did anyone catch this show during its run?

[aradia22]

On to Hello Again. This is bonkers. It's not difficult in a Light in the Piazza kind of way but I have no idea how to feel about it. There are parts of it I like, little snatches of melodies and ideas here and there. But it's hard to tell what's intentionally comedic and what's just a bit too arch and affected for me. It's also kind of weird to hear John Cameron Mitchell sound... normal. That is, not like Hedwig and not like Dickon. Just another straightforward musical theatre voice. Speaking of confusing voices, there was someone that I thought I kept recognizing. I think it was Carolee maybe sounding like a combination of Susan Egan and Jodi Benson and maybe someone else. I don't love or hate it. It felt like an experiment and I liked going on the journey it was taking me on but I don't know how I'd feel about watching it as a show. My attention would probably wander. Scene Five was probably my favorite because it was the most straightforward and all the focus went to writing a good song instead of a sung-through scene.

 

Side note: I know a lot of it is sung but why are the wikipedia pages of some of these LaChiusa shows so unhelpful when it comes to the plot? If someone can point me in the right direction to find out some more about Giant or Hello Again, I'd appreciate it.

[JustaPerson]

With the whole #oscarssowhite stuff going on with the Oscars, Eclipsed with its all black cast and creative team (I heard) is pretty f*cking awesome. That and Hamilton, even On Your Feet! (a mostly/all Latino cast) you could argue Fiddler (Jewish stories!) -- when did theatre become more diverse than Hollywood? Granted it's probably not that high of a bar in the first place. And I'm by no means complaining. Go diversity!

Edited March 8, 2016 by JustaPerson

[Charlie Baker]

Plus the forthcoming Shuffle Along with its cast of heavy-hitters.

Which prompts me to recommend this piece on Vulture on Audra McDonald:

 

http://www.vulture.com/2016/03/audra-mcdonald-back-on-broadway-c-v-r.html

[ExplainItAgain]

Has anyone seen The Humans? I'm going to be in NYC next week and my friend really wants to see this. It's not high on my priority list (I prefer musicals) and I'm not sure if I'm down for spending Broadway $$$ on it.

[aradia22]

 

Has anyone seen The Humans? I'm going to be in NYC next week and my friend really wants to see this. It's not high on my priority list (I prefer musicals) and I'm not sure if I'm down for spending Broadway $$$ on it.

Bear in mind that I am in the minority on this. People strangely love The Humans for some reason. I thought it was a perfectly average family drama. The performances were fine. The play was fine. The novelty of the two story set was nice but not remarkable. I don't know how much you know about the show, but anything that could be interpreted as supernatural or some big extended metaphor I just found tedious and distracting. Sure, you could see The Humans. But you could also skip it and I think your life would not be impacted in any way. To me, there was absolutely nothing special about this play. No special insights embedded in it. Rather bland family dramas. And that's my opinion off-Broadway with a comped ticket.

[aradia22]

[ExplainItAgain]

Bear in mind that I am in the minority on this. People strangely love The Humans for some reason. I thought it was a perfectly average family drama. The performances were fine. The play was fine. The novelty of the two story set was nice but not remarkable. I don't know how much you know about the show, but anything that could be interpreted as supernatural or some big extended metaphor I just found tedious and distracting. Sure, you could see The Humans. But you could also skip it and I think your life would not be impacted in any way. To me, there was absolutely nothing special about this play. No special insights embedded in it. Rather bland family dramas. And that's my opinion off-Broadway with a comped ticket.

 

Thanks so much; super helpful. I'm trying to convince her to see Lion King or Aladdin, but we may just have to go our separate ways on this one!