THEATRE GOSSIP #376: "ADELE DAZEEM IS A FUNNY GIRL!" Edition

She looks like a 50 year old woman wearing a 12 year old girl's hairstyle.

Should have included OUAOMT in the intro!

So are they changing the choreography for WSS? Or is it still 'sweating in the rain'?

Meanwhile Lea Michele is seething with jealousy at the injustice of it all.

Chess... in Japan!

So is it true they are selling premium PPV tickets for "Take Me Out"?

In this case, PPV stands for "Penis and Pubes View" seats.

This always makes me laugh.

This always makes me laugh.

R5 Casting by J.Lange?

HAHAHAHA!! it never gets old R10.

The best part is Lea's look to the bank of photographers after Jessica fails to return her attention. Brutal.

Wow, how embarrassing for Lea. Is there bad blood between them? Have they ever worked together? Maybe Lange didn't know who she was?

Right R12? And the instant hair fussing. It's the equivalent of breaking into a jog after tripping.

Lange either didn't know who the fuck she was (most likely) or actually saw her performances and thought "this bitch is too desperate and hungry." That can be a big turn off. I've worked with people like Lea before and they almost always give you a headache even when they're on their best behavior.

I doubt knowledge of Michele was even part of the equation. Lange is both old and a (former?) boozer. Neither group is known for their patience.

drag

Why are they using a still of Dolores Gray?

R15 I get a headache just looking at her.

Let me add to the "Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice" comments made in the prior thread...

I was also at the first preview last night. And like the first commentator, I normally give first previews the benefit of the doubt. But for every rule there is a needed exception.

This show is shit.

Shockingly awful.

It will not be redeemed. Cannot. The book is endlessly long, the direction bewildering, the music and lyrics ghastly. (And there's very little music, especially in the first hour. No opening number, only two short songs in the first 45 minutes.)

Scott Elliott and company have made sex boring. This isn't one of those bad musicals that's fun and will be great fodder for future dinner party conversations. Nope. It's just dull and lifeless, inert for almost all of its endless two hours.

I don't blame the cast. They're fine. They're trying hard. Suzanne Vega is fairly clueless (and slow on cues, even while still on book), but she has a nice presence and is not to blame for walking into this mess.

Smoke fills the theatre slowly but surely, and I was praying for it to become cloudy enough for me to escape, as there was no intermission in this two-hour deathtrap, and I didn't want to be rude to the other patrons or the performers.

Why is this being produced? Why was it even adapted? It says nothing and aspires to less. The first major turkey of 2020 has arrived!

What's Duncan Sheik's story? Is he going through it?

C'mon no Queen here has ever liked a show that has opened since Datalounge began.

I can't believe that Jessica/Lea encounter was over 5 years ago. It feels only 2 at most.

What the fuck is this shit? And more "woke" casting of course.

Jones seems a little underpowered in that clip like her voice is too light to handle that score. I don't think the casting is woke. At least it's not something that doesn't make any sense. There are interracial couples all around us every day.

R25 I think what R24 meant by "woke casting" was the pairing of a black male lead and a white female lead, which has become the standard the past few years; white male leads are personas non grata on Broadway these days.

I don't care what race they cast what. I just want the casting to make sense and for them to be good and make me believe they're the character.

right on,,,,white males are a repressed minority and are being cancelled

I didn't mean just Broadway, but the entertainment industry in general, particularly the theater crowd has swung so far left in recent years that they seem to despise anything white, masculine, or American.

I just heard a rumor that Scott Rudin's next big splashy musical is going to be a revival of Mame starring Toni Collette for the 2021 or 2022 season. Could this be true? Anyone in the know on here?

"no Queen here has ever liked a show that has opened since Datalounge began."

And THAT'S what makes us Queens in good standing of the first order.

I can't imagine the dreary kind of world these SJWs/CCJ (Cancel Culture Junkies) live in. It must be akin to an Orwellian nightmare, where everything is toxic and everyone's a victim and nobody is to be trusted and love is suspect. The funny thing is, the very vast majority of people live very happy and satisfying lives without their input...

Not the people who complain on these fucking threads, though. Shit.

R22. Ha! So not true. I've seen eight shows since the start of the new year. Liked all of them (or parts of them) for one reason or another., and a few were even superb. Until "Bob & Carol..." landed with a thud, I was sort of encouraged by what I was seeing.

We already have a "foursome" musical. It's called I Love My Wife.

"Woke" casting going into Frozen too. The new Elsa is black. Forget Latinos and Asians or anything else. Just black. That's enough diversity! R26 Thank you. That's exactly what I meant. Just annoys me that it always has to be black too. R25 R27 I agree with that.

[quote]I just heard a rumor that Scott Rudin's next big splashy musical is going to be a revival of Mame starring Toni Collette for the 2021 or 2022 season. Could this be true? Anyone in the know on here?

i really like Toni Collette as an actress. But she's not a Mame.

She's a Phyllis and Mame needs to be a Sally.

Neither Angela Lansbury nor Roz Russell are/were a Sally.

Angela could be a Sally. Her performance in Murder, She Wrote was more Sally than Phyllis.

Lansbury and Collette are both pure character actresses though. They could have both played Sally and Phyllis and probably been pretty terrific at both (with some key adjustments I'm sure).

Toni Collette is a very good actress, but she's not whimsical enough for Mame. She could probably do a decent Vera.

It really should be done with Catherine Zeta-Jones, someone who carries "style".

Toni Collette as Muriel in "Muriel's Wedding" is very budding whimsical, thank you very much.

[quote]I just heard a rumor that Scott Rudin's next big splashy musical is going to be a revival of Mame starring Toni Collette for the 2021 or 2022 season. Could this be true? Anyone in the know on here?

That was the original plan, but it looks like she'll be replaced by Norm Lewis. With Billy Porter as Vera.

[quote]Toni Collette as Muriel in "Muriel's Wedding" is very budding whimsical, thank you very much.

No she wasn't. She was the ugly, schlubby girl. Maybe at that point in her career, she could have pulled off Gooch, but never Mame.

I doubt there will ever be a Mame revival. Anyway, CZJ would actually be perfect for a Kiss of the Spiderwoman revival. I can't see a full scale revival of that show happening without a name and how many NAMES out there have the requisite mix of stage presence, glamour and legit dance and vocal talents to pull off that role?

CZJ has vocal talent?

I'd be more excited to hear that Collette was playing Rose in Gypsy. Not that we need another revival so soon, but with her attached, it'd be worth seeing again.

I remember seeing KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN 25 years ago with Vanessa Williams, Howard McGillin, and Brian Stokes Mitchell, all of whom were quite good.

But is it a really great show? My memory of the movie is clearer than the stage show, and I only watched that once back in 1985 or so.

I really like Kander & Ebb but I don't think this is great work on their part. Tell me if I'm being unfair.

You're not being unfair, R48. What made KISS so compelling was Prince's direction, the stark, but cinematic design and of course Chita's presence and talent and a the best score Kander & Ebb wrote since the 70s. The book/the bones of the show...? Not so much.

So soon? Isn't it a decade since the last GYPSY revival?

Wait. What?? There's another Gypsy revival???

Oh, God...we're going down the Gypsy quicksand bog already and we're only in the 50s.

FOLLIES!

Kiss of the SpiderWoman was built around Chita. Who needed anything else? We just wanted to watch Chita dance.

But you're right, some of it is really third rate K&E. And a bit cringeworthy.

Dear one, I don't miss you inside me

I bet Liza was visiting the day they wrote that line. She probably thought it up.

Dear one, I misshhh you inssshside me!

Well, kids, I'm going to pile onto the Bob & Carol... complaint window. I, TOO, was at the first preview last night, and while it wasn't the worst thing I've ever had to sit through, I was mildly bored throughout the entire thing and was looking forward to it ending.

It is true- there is barely any music in this show, which begs the question- what was the point of musicalizing it? The few songs they had were absolutely unnecessary. They didn't tell you anything the long, rather unwieldy book hadn't already spelled out. Even more puzzling is- I'd like to know what compelled Sheik and Amanda Green to musicalize it (outside of a paycheck). What were they trying to say? I sure can't tell.

And if memory serves, the film had some kind of satiric elements to it, with the encounter group and the EST and Gestalt, etc. And this book had none of that. The writer wasn't asking us to laugh at these people or to enjoy how silly that whole fad was- he treated the book almost like an earnest drama.

I felt a little more warmly towards the cast. Joel Perez, who played Bob (but who looked more like Elliott Gould) was sex on a fucking stick. A super hot cub. Sang wonderfully (the very few times he did sing) and was engaging and did his best to rise above the material. I thought Jennifer Damiano made the same effort and was nearly as successful. I didn't know the actress playing Alice, but she was fine. For me, the weak link was Michael Zegen, partly because of the four, they gave him the least to do and his character was the most thinly written, and partly because his attitude felt like- WTF am I doing in this turd.

And yes, I am going to echo everyone's sentiments about Suzanne Vega, who tried, but clearly had had MAYBE one rehearsal with the actual cast, and then (if they did one) an invited dress. She was woefully unprepared and stumbled through many of her lines. I do know she did a one woman show where she played Carson McCullers, so I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt and say she just didn't have enough time, and likely spent most of the time she did have working on the songs, on which she was much stronger and self assured. I still wish Duncan had stayed in that role. Those songs were made for him (though Vega acquitted herself nicely).

The score itself was actually Sheik's strongest since Spring Awakening, but that's because half the numbers sounded a lot like songs FROM Spring Awakening. And because all the rest of Duncan's post-SA shows have been fucking garbage.

It will die there and never see the light of day again, even in community theater.

Scott Elliott is the worst director in NYC, and that includes Scott Ellis. If it wasn't for his own company, Elliott would never work again.

[quote]For me, the weak link was Michael Zegen

They need to let him walk around naked. It will be SRO every night. I'd go to see it for that.

Both the men are shirtless a lot, and at one point, they both take off their underwear under the covers. When Joel Perez gets up, he faces one side of the audience and pulls the covers back to put on his underwear. He stands, and our side of the audience saw his ass clear as day, so I assume the other side got a full cock shot.

Zegen puts his underwear back on under the covers.

Baby Benanti in A Little Night Music. She was very good.

She never really looked like an ingenue, did she?

That's true, R61. She's always read older.

Mame is both a "Sally" AND a "Phyllis".

The patrician, iciness of Phyllis at times and then the messy emotionalism of Sally at others.

CZJ would be great. But as it is set in a South American country, I don't think there'll ever be a Spider Woman revival with a white actress in the lead - not in the current climate, anyway.

Wasn't there a workshop held last year or the year before, with Audra as Aurora and Alan Cumming as Molina?

Billy Porter would actually be a better Mame than Toni Collette

Apparently, Isaac Powell is back in WSS.....

I saw Kiss of the Spider Woman years ago with Bebe Neuwirth in London. The whole show is so laughably bad with lyrics utterly cliched.

My friends and I laughed about it during our entire European trip.

Bebe Neuwirth? GROSS. Audra and Alan Cumming better not step foot in SPIDERWOMAN. Yes there was a reading with Steve Pasqual some years ago.

'Milky lotions, scented creams / She's the climax of your technicolour dreams.'

I kind of love that line.

[quote] I just heard a rumor that Scott Rudin's next big splashy musical is going to be a revival of Mame starring Toni Collette for the 2021 or 2022 season. Could this be true? Anyone in the know on here?

Oh Sweetie, are the voices back?

[quote]Bebe Neuwirth? GROSS.

Gross, what? She's amazing onstage.

As has been covered on this board repeatedly in the past, there is no point in a MAME revival. You have to have had your head planted firmly up your own ignorant ass since the Summer of Love for MAME to have any sizzle, bite, or purpose. That's now more than 52 years ago.

While that criteria (Head, up ass, for 52 years) can easily be met on the Data Lounge Theater Gossip threads, it is not so easily achieved in the general ticket buying public, very many of whom were born after MAME had any relevancy whatsoever. Even Angela Lansbury could not make it work any more way back in 1983. There is no way that MAME can any longer be financially successful on Broadway.

Please, you MAME Queens... let it die with some dignity. Let it fade away.

Howard McGillin really sold the hell out of "She's A Woman".

Kaye & Bebe....

Wow. Kay is really lezzin' it up in that clip.

Go, Butch! Go!!!

I saw Beth Leavel's cabaret show at 54 Below earlier this week, and she performed a new song from the upcoming Devil Wears Prada musical. It was a ballad, taking place in the scene where Miranda talks about her divorce to Andi while wearing no make-up. If it's one of the better songs in the show, that musical is in trouble. Musically it wasn't awful but it wasn't anything special and was lyrically dull. Beth did say it was still a work in progress and the song may or may not make the show.

The rest of the show was great though, she did her big numbers from The Prom/Drowsy Chaperone, a Gypsy medley, Not While I'm Around/Children Will Listen, pretty much the setlist you'd expect but in a good way. Worth seeing if you can for the rest of her short run there.

R76 -- I'm not surprised. Elton John might have written some amazing melodies in his past, but he has been an incredibly lazy writer for the last 30 or so years. His songs sound unfinished and uninspired.

I heard her talking about that show (and the song from "Prada") on Seth Rudetsky's SiriusXM show. They also mentioned she's going to be on one of Seth's upcoming Broadway cruises.

Shaina Taub is actually the lyricist on PRADA. Elton is writing the music.

She shows promised, but she's pretty inexperienced as a lyricist for a high-profile musical adaptation like this. I found her a surprising choice: not sure if it was Elton who selected her or not.

And yes, I love Elton's older work but he's gotten incredibly lazy as a songwriter.

It’s so strange that we’ve already had three people on here who've seen Bob & Carol..., but no one seems to have seen West Side Story yet. Or maybe they have and they’re just not talking about it?

theater maven friend saw wss last week and recommended it very highly, calling it "a masterpiece" but then he likes van hove. those who hate the director will probably hate this one too.

have tix for thursday

[quote]Even Angela Lansbury could not make it work any more way back in 1983.

That's not really a fair comparison. That Mame revival was brought in from a road tour. The scenery was not Broadway quality and looked like a cheap road tour. It was brought into the Gershwin which is a one of the biggest houses on Broadway. The producers were too anxious to get it to Broadway and they brought it in without any advance publicity IN THE MIDDLE OF SUMMER when all the gay fans were on Fire Island or Provincetown and all the matinee ladies were in the Hamptons or the Berkshires. That revival bombed because the producers rushed it in too quickly and the gay fans and matinee ladies didn't have enough time to spread word of mouth, as was done in pre-internet days.

Mame may need a few tweeks to the book, but it could still run for six months to a year with the right personality in the lead role. Everyone still gets the message of "life's too short, you have to have a good time" and if the production emphasizes that and brings in a woman who can sparkle, it could have a decent run. It's a personality show with some beautiful songs.

The problem is that I don't think there are any directors these days that can make the show fun. It's not a show where an actress can just stand in the middle of the stage and scream-sing. There actually has to be movement on the stage like we haven't seen in musicals in years.

I thought that when Kelly Bishop was doing Gilmore Girls that they might have done a limited run with her. Perhaps she's a bit too metallic, and more of a Vera, but I think she had enough name recognition and Broadway credibility to do it.

What about Lea Salonga? I know she's not a high power name, but I think she could pull it off. And yes, I know she's Asian, but I think most people could look past that after the first five minutes.

I saw 1983 production. The house and the stage were definitely too big. The venue swallowed everything.

The bigger problem was that all the actors were from the original production. And they were all now 16 years older. Not a big problem for the Upsons. But Lansbury performed those dance numbers with a frozen face. She was not tossing off any of it with ease. It was a Herculean effort to get through. I applaud her professionalism, but I thought she was going to pass out after "That's How Young I Feel." She cleared upstage and mopped her face in a towel and got a drink of water before continuing the scene. Then there was the 58 year old pregnant Gooch.

The production was a mess. But the biggest problem of all is in presenting Mame in an era with much less social conservatism to rebel against. And today? The book was published 65 years ago. There is your problem. Right there. Patrick Dennis is lightweight source material. He's no Thornton Wilder nor an Edna Ferber. And none of the creators of the musical added anything bigger and weightier than they found in Patrick Dennis. It was light stuff 65 years ago. It's nothing now.

I'm one of the BOB & CAROL people. I tend to see more off-Bway work, anyway: I'm more interested in new work than in endless revivals of the same things over and over again. Off-Bway is still (marginally) cheaper and more accessible, it's more intimate, and I generally have a better time.

I didn't see WOKE-LAHOMA because 1) I have no interest in yet another retread of that material and 2) I suspected, based on word-of-mouth, that I would truly hate this interpretation. And I don't sign on to go see things I know I'll hate. I'd prefer to cherish my memories of past OKLAHOMAs.

Short of being led to WSS at gunpoint, I very much doubt I'll ever see this version of WSS for precisely those reasons.

Some of us on these threads really do care about and support new theatre.

r84, what is your source for learning about shows off-Broadway? I used to go to lots of off-Broadway and loved seeing it, even the stinky stuff. But I somehow lost touch with what is playing.

There's coverage of new work on Playbill.com and other sites, R85, and of course, the ATC board, which is just a blizzard of press releases about new projects.

It's a labor of love to keep up with it all.

Also, TDF and other ticket discount services are a must. I try to avoid paying full price to anything if there's an alternative.

I wonder if Roundabout would consider doing a revival of Auntie Mame instead.

[quote]Please, you MAME Queens... let it die with some dignity. Let it fade away.

Alright Bitch, sit your ass down.

[quote]I thought that when Kelly Bishop was doing Gilmore Girls that they might have done a limited run with her.

Kelly played Vera to Cristine Ebersole's Mame at Paper Mill in '99

Poor Elaine Paige. All her signature songs were stolen by American actresses. Her Evita was bettered by Patti LuPone. Her Grizabella was bettered by Betty Buckley.

Elaine Paige has had a better musical career than both Patti LuPone and Betty Bucklet. A musical theatre star with a genuine recording career? The other two would have killed for that.

*Buckley

[quote]Elaine Paige has had a better musical career than both Patti LuPone and Betty Bucklet. A musical theatre star with a genuine recording career? The other two would have killed for that.

My dear, you forget, we both have been very active in tv series. No one can see you on record.

Elaine Paige regularly appears on TV. She even did one of those cinema broadcasts of her farewell tour. I'm not a fan (and I think her voice is very much past its best) but she's had an extraordinary career.

Betty Bucklet, hee.

[quote]but she's had an extraordinary career.

Yes, but she wasn't the star of two tv series like I was.

Fresh Fields

French Fields

Yes. Best leave it at two, Julia.

We’re all excited to see a Michael Zegen from Mrs Maisel naked or in his underwear? The standards of hot guys on this thread has reached a new low.

I saw him, R97. Down to boxers only.

He's... okay.

As I stated in #375, IMHO, BOB & CAROL is 2 hours of actors in their underwear (chainsmoking) that I don't really want to see in their underwear. It may be the least sexy show about sex in the history of theatre.

If you want gratuitous male nudity, you're really better off getting a gym membership somewhere.

Zegen has a better face than Chris John Borle. So no, standards are not lower than they were.

Or waiting for Take Me Out.

[quote]We’re all excited to see a Michael Zegen from Mrs Maisel naked or in his underwear?

We all have different tastes, dear. He may not live up to your ideal of hot, but I find him sexy.

I saw Elaine Paige in "Cats" in the original production. She was sensational. Betty Buckley was very good in the NY company, but her voice, while admirable, is quite metallic, plus it seemed like the sound department really amped up the final "Touch me, it's so easy to leave me" unnecessarily, so it made what she was doing (quite good actually) seemed kind of fake all of a sudden.

Anybody here who has seen this?

Or this?

She looks like Nana Visitor.

Ah, so it goes well with Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice, the least sexy movie about sex ever.

No r103-r104, but I have seen this one.

R71 I don't think so. And she most certainly doesn't belong in the role of a beautiful sexy latina star. Yuck. Yes I know Chita is not the prettiest thing but she's a real spicy Latina and kickass dancer. She was too old though. Audra McDonald would be a joke.

The first line of the Bradford Ropes novel 42nd Street, published 1932:

"Three good tunes and a kick in the pants for your wow blackout. Can you make a hit show out of it?"

Julian Marsh answers, "I've managed with less."

Hope Jesse accidentally gets hard on opening night and becomes a slit legend.

Jesse Mueller?

Ginger Jesse.

[quote]Elaine Paige has had a better musical career than both Patti LuPone and Betty Bucklet. A musical theatre star with a genuine recording career? The other two would have killed for that.

Honey, their ain't a creature in all of America that has an Elaine Paige album. So it doesn't count.

[quote]I saw Elaine Paige in "Cats" in the original production. She was sensational. Betty Buckley was very good in the NY company, but her voice, while admirable, is quite metallic, plus it seemed like the sound department really amped up the final "Touch me, it's so easy to leave me" unnecessarily, so it made what she was doing (quite good actually) seemed kind of fake all of a sudden.

Elaine Paige is wonderful but Elaine Paige can't do this.

[Quote] Honey, their

I'll stop you there.

I wonder if Buckley has done CATS after CARRIE, would she have balanced her innate steel with vulnerability better? "When There's No One" is much more affecting than her "Memory" or "Knowing When to Leave."

I really don't get Betty Buckley at all. I've really liked her in many of her film and TV gigs and I think she has a very distinct, powerful voice (or did), but I've never liked her on stage. She always seems low in energy, too ladylike, and somewhat weepy in all of her roles. She's sort of cold. Why people ever thought she was right for Dolly or Rose is a question for the ages. She has none of the fire and humor those roles need to work. She's not really a broad.

Why didn’t Paige try for a career in the US? No one knows her here

R117 - she did Sunset Blvd. and, well, you asked for it, FOLLIES in New York!

SB

[Quote] Why people ever thought she was right for Dolly or Rose

Because fierce beltress, qwayne!

I saw Elaine Paige in Sunset Boulevard in New York. She was so short that she only came up to Joe's belt. When they were dancing, it looked like she was trying to give him a blowjob.

A SHORT Norma Desmond? How dreadful.

Elaine was so short that when she's sitting in the director's chair before "As If We Never Said Goodbye" a chorus boy had to get on all fours so that she could step down out of the director's chair.

How did her voice compare to Patti’s?

[Quote] a chorus boy had to get on all fours

Did he have to do that at the audition too?

[quote]How did her voice compare to Patti’s?

Her diction was very clear.

Patti was steely determination, which worked for certain aspects of the character but not for others.

Elaine sang it nicely, but her New York performance it sort of lacked energy. I think she was the last replacement and I think the show was a bit tired by that point. Serviceable, but nothing exciting.

Pet Clark was too girlish in the role, you never understand how she could get to the ending that happened in the story.

Karen Mason (performing when BB was out for a few weeks) was quite good and one of the few that you could actually believe used to be a movie starlet. She was able to bring to the role the humanity that eluded both Patti and Betty. You sort of felt sorry for Karen's Norma, whereas with Patti and Betty, you sort of felt relieved that the police were intervening for the sake of public safety.

Paige was funny. It was refreshing to see some humor in the role after Betty Lynn.

elaine paige is a very, very LIMITED actress

R104 Who's that great big clump of no talent playing Nicky Arnstein?

Star-LET, r126??? Fuck you.

They did have to lower the bannister for Elaine.

Elaine had the distinction of somewhat resembling Gloria Swanson a bit once she was all done up and she was one of the funnier Normas. Betty was her usual ice cold self, but it seemed to work for that role as it did for Carrie.

[quote]If you want gratuitous male nudity, you're really better off getting a gym membership somewhere.

With my luck, I'd sign a long-term contract with the gym where the cast of "Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice" works out.

I thought Paige was better when she subbed for Buckley in London though the performance verged on Swanson imitation but I don’t think she had a lot of rehearsal. The height thing didn’t bother me much. I didn’t find her as fresh or quite as Swanson-like in NY. And she was funny, and at times, even cute. Saw her many times in NY and I think overall she was the most consistent and the most enjoyable.

Buckley was interesting for about 15 minutes but I thought it was overall a bit one note (i.e tragic), too serious and just not a lot of fun (and as much as I dislike Close, she was at least fun although I thought she took the most obvious and most cam approach of any of them).

I had a very mixed reaction to Patti but it played like a very different show and I thought she did approach it as an actress creating a new character and not a Swanson knockoff.

Pet. Well, as with her run in BLOOD BROTHERS, I questioned if she could still sing. Having heard Pet singing Pet, I don’t know what it is but she sounded really off key and her mannerism just didn’t translate effectively to either show.

Peter Paige for Norma

Ummm.... someone's getting fired.

Saw The Band's Visit tour tonight in Philly and am shocked that the show got such acclaim and 10 Tony's. I know it didn't have the greatest competition that year (Mean Girls/Frozen/SpongeBob) and obviously it may have been better with the Broadway cast, but none of the songs stood out, the book is just there, and there seemed nothing very special about it. Can anybody explain what I'm missing here?

There was simply no one else to give anything to that year and for some reason the Bway community was trying to make a statement that season against the plethora of movie to musical productions (which made no sense since even more of them opened right around the corner).

I didn't really care for The Band's Visit that much, but really, they didn't actually take the prizes for Best Musical/Score/Book/Director away from anyone deserving. The awards I was annoyed with were Best Lead and Featured Actor. Tony Shalhoub did nothing to deserve that Tony and Ariel Sta'chel did even less. I guarantee we will never hear from Ariel again. He'll be the Michael Maguire of this decade.

....

I liked THE BAND'S VISIT. I was shocked at how bad Ariel was. I can't believe he won a Tony for that but then I can. When I saw it the guy from the movie played Shalhoub's part. There is no singing for that role. Not fair to be in musical catergory and win. Band's Visit was more like a vibe to me. A musical play. It was the only respectable choice to win that year for best musical. Just like "Hadestown" last year. Wait til you see "Hadestown". haha. Contrived bullshit.

R139 - That was very good. Bet they sold some tickets off that performance. Two things... is that orchestra backing her representative of the experience at the show? I kind of figured a jukebox/bio-musical would have a small orchestra. Did they augment "the band" for this appearance? I'd be disappointed if I bought a ticket after seeing that performance only to find that the smaller band in the theatre could in no way replicate that wall of sound.

Anyway, as good as that was, NOTHING will beat hearing the incomparable Darlene Love sing that very same song, in that same theatre and backed by a dramatically augmented CBS Orchestra. Paul Schafer did a fantastic job of translating Phil Spector's wall of sound to a live setting.

The Darlene Love performance was great. She's backed by two of her "Leader of the Pack" castmastes (Ulla Hedwig of the Harlettes, and Patti Darcy James, who has since died).

R142 - I LOVED how into the performance Patti James was!

*Pattie Darcy Jones

No, she's not actually "right" for the role, but if you announced Bette Midler in "Mame" it would have a similar run to her "Hello, Dolly".

Mame is a tougher role, isn't it?

It is more physical. And, she is on stage pretty much the entire show, so, yeah....I'm not saying Bette WOULD do it (or be willing/able to physically do it at her age) but she can certainly do the comedy and sing those songs. She's not really Mame...for one thing, Mame isn't a funny, short, Jewish woman but....Bette has the comic timing for it, even if it's a parody of what Mame really is: a kooky grande dame.

Could they re-stage it so that Bette sits a lot, a la Sue Mengers?

Maybe do it with Bette using walkers on a series of rotating platforms like they were going to do with Barbara Cook!!!

Lainie Kazan can be Matinee Mame!!!

I wonder if Jerry Herman ever wrote, or considered writing, a dream sequence for the proposed Jewish Home for Unwed Mothers, perhaps led by a dancing, waddling Gooch? It could have been funny.

oh, I mixed up the Jewish home for refugee children and the unwed mothers home (one was in "Auntie Mame') -- the unwed preggers mothers-to-be might have been funny though.

MAME, FOLLIES, GYPSY. When the boomer eldergays die off and it's just Gen X/Millennial eldergays, what shows will they obsess over? I guess Gen Z will be Evan Hansen, Mean Girls, and something else asinine.

Don’t count on it, r153. Even shallow people move on from outdated crap. Remember when {title of show} was the voice of a generation?

Can someone explain R136? The Twitter post no longer exists.

[quote] I wonder if Jerry Herman ever wrote, or considered writing, a dream sequence for the proposed Jewish Home for Unwed Mothers, perhaps led by a dancing, waddling Gooch? It could have been funny.

On it!

It was an ill-advised social post for Company saying: "Friends + Sex in the City = Company." It wasn't enthusiastically received.

They really want that Company revival to work. It won't. haha. So I guess it's modern then? If they are comparing it to those two shows. Talk about desperate to be relevant. Even those shows are dated now.

[quote]It wasn't enthusiastically received.

I can't imagine why.

Those shows started 26 and 22 years ago, respectively. I'm assuming it's a cynical attempt to grab an even younger audience who grew up with those "retro" shows in syndication, not loyal adult viewers the first time around, who would be 40 or older. Yes, it's terrible.

Let's break this down: has COMPANY ever made money on Bway? Was the original run profitable (it ran just under 2 years)? Were any of the revivals (Roundabout, Papi Raul, etc) profitable?

What makes these investors so sure that the gender-bender Katrina and Patti version is going to do what other versions have not done, and make them money?

Just a reminder that the director Marianne Elliott's well-received, award-winning revival of ANGELS IN AMERICA in 2018 failed to turn a profit.

I have a feeling these people who do not like The Bands Visit are seeing it in a huge theater.

No Broadway production is great in that size house, but that is even more the case with The Bands Visit.

I saw BAND'S VISIT in previews on Broadway. I remember wishing there had been more music and more "big moments," but I also loved it and LOVED Lenk and Shalhoub.

Should you be moved to revisit the score, the original cast recording is great. Besides "Omar Sharif," "Answer Me" is a gorgeous song that already has a life outside the show (I've heard it in cabaret). And the ensemble numbers for the band are great. It's a very delicate little show in an age when most scores are huge vocal powerhouses. This is not.

link to "Answer Me" OCR

[quote] I have a feeling these people who do not like The Bands Visit are seeing it in a huge theater. No Broadway production is great in that size house, but that is even more the case with The Bands Visit.

This is true for me with respect to most Broadway shows. I've pretty much given up on seeing the touring shows here in LA in the huge Ahmanson or Pantages. I'd rather go to NY for a week and see a bunch of shows on Broadway. (It's better when they make it to the somewhat smaller regional theaters like Musical Theatre West in Long Beach or La Mirada, but then they're not the official touring productions--but at least they have decent live orchestras.)

The Band's Visit was at its best off-Broadway. It BARELY worked in the Barrymore. The idea of putting it in one of those huge road houses is insane.

I lived in NYC for years, and went to the theater all the time. When I moved to Nashville, I started to see touring productions at the theater that books Broadway shows. It is huge, modern, cavernous, and wholly uninviting. It had been years since I had seen a production in a smaller theater,, but was recently in London where I saw 4 shows, and they were all in tiny, old, beautiful theaters. Sure, the seats were small and there was no leg room, but being in a jewel of a theater is part of the magic of seeing a show. I had forgotten how integral the scale of the theater is to the entire experience.

I can't think of many newer shows that will have the shelf life of Gypsy, Follies, Company, Chicago, Cabaret, Guys and Dolls, etc. They're just nowhere near as good.

[quote] I can't think of many newer shows that will have the shelf life of Gypsy, Follies, Company, Chicago, Cabaret, Guys and Dolls, etc. They're just nowhere near as good.

In all fairness, you haven’t seen the Britney Spears musical yet.

Oh, what the hell, I'll bite ... what would we consider part of the New Canon (1980 onward) of essential musicals?

WICKED has been playing on Broadway since October 2003--almost 16.5 years. Love it or loathe it, an entire generation of young theatregoers have been raised on it, know every note of the score, every line of the script, and have seen productions all over the world. Often multiple times.

It's not their generation's OKLAHOMA or GUYS & DOLLS: it's much bigger than that, actually, in terms of attendance and dollars.

Wicked will live on. It has its issues, but the score is pretty decent and the message is good.

Hairspray is probably another that will live on. Truth is that I really hate it, and Wicked, but they both will have a life for a long while.

Hairspray and Spring Awakening seem to be done a lot in community and regional theaters, so I have a feeling they'll stick around for a while.

Why did the original Spring Awakening not run that long? Bad recasts?

"Ragtime" had a really good score, though it requires a big production, so it may not be done too much, which is a shame. "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels" has a funny book and really catchy score, probably among David Yazbek's best, and "Hairspray" is a lot of fun, so there are a few at least.

Probably because, R174, the score mainly sounds like someone throwing an armful of pots and pans down a stairwell.

The Disney musicals -- especially Beauty/Beast and Lion King, but probably also some of the lesser ones -- will definitely be with us for decades to come.

When it opened, I thought The Producers would carve a place for itself in the canon. That was really more a case of "you had to be there."

I'm surprised SPRING AWAKENING is still being done. It was touted as this great earth-shatteringly fresh and new Broadway Musical for the "NOW" Generation ("BROADWAY WUILL NEVER BE THE SAME!") but it seems to have been forgotten in the wake of other :"troubled youth" shows that followed: (NEXT TO NORMAL, DEAR EVAN HANSEN). I remember I was surprised SPRING AWAKENING closed when it did. Given the Tony and the publicity I expected it to run a year more at least.

If the "In the Heights" movie is successful, I could see it leading to the show having a longer shelf life. Especially with the upcoming changes in our demographics. I've already seen it done at some very small community theaters. Even in a dinner theater.

What about the blockbusters like Les Mis, Phantom, Miss Saigon, et. al.?

Mamma Mia

The Producers is a hard one to do, even though is has been done in schools and community/regional theaters, because the two leads have to be wonderful with brilliant comic timing for it to work or it runs the risk of offending everyone.

Geez, I know there’s a lot of Hamilton hatred here, but I’d say the odds are pretty good that it will enter the canon.

Hamilton will be good for community theaters because at least most of the music isn't really sung in the traditional sense. Tone deaf Becky from HR can finally have a lead role.

RAGTIME has to have a big beautiful orchestra. I saw a stripped down regional theatre production where the score was arranged like actual Ragtime music and it was torture. I've seen two IN THE HEIGHTS regional productions and they were great. Last one was Westport Playhouse. Marco Santos directs most of them. I've taken friends and family and they LOVE it. It's a feel good family show. I LOVED "Waitress". That is a show that can be easily done. I feel like MISS SAIGON needs the helicopter like POTO needs all its gimmicks. LES MIZ can get really tedious. You need a nice orchestra for that too. And awesome singers.

What...the....

Jack and Jan and John and Miss Nichols.

Miss Farrell had great pipes.

[quote]Hairspray is probably another that will live on. Truth is that I really hate it,

Whaaa whaaaa WHAT? You hated "Hairspray"? I can honestly say since the day of the first preview at The Neil Simon Theater I have never heard a person that didn't love the show, let alone hate it.

I don't hate HAIRSPRAY but the original is there... the musical seems pointless in comparison.

R190, you don't know the right people.

If we're talking post-1980 - Little Shop of Horrors should also to be added to the canon of new musicals.

R181 - I actually think it's too early to know if the megamusicals of the 1980s or the Disney stuff will become part of the canon, as despite having been performed all over the world and having run for decades and being the highest grossing entertainments in history, there have actually been very few 'new' productions. I think shows need to be restaged and reinterpreted before we know if they're in the canon or not.

There's been - what? - two major different versions proper of the Cameron Mackintosh stable of shows, Phantom, Miss Saigon, and Les Mis - and all the new versions exposed weaknesses in the material that weren't quite so prominent in the first productions. Cats works on stage (and Gillian Lynne was a genius), but as the film showed - mess with that delicate formula and it soon starts to fall apart. Starlight Express ran in London for almost 20 years - nobody's queueing up to restage that (although the Bochum production's been going for over thirty fucking years). Similarly with the Disney stuff. Say what you will about Julie Taymor, but she made something quite brilliant out of material that is, in parts, pretty mediocre.

I'm unsure if any of these massive shows could maintain their position in the canon when being staged by Scott Ellis/Rob Ashford/hack of the week, or performed by Becky from HR.

The original Company was a financial success though not a big one. Genius staging though it might have been it was not an expensive show to run but it looked great. I don't believe it ever had one sold out week.

If you want to see naked men in a locker room you might want to get your gym membership in 1973. Or go to Take Me Out unless they've got the ballplayers in this one doing the towel dance.

No comments about the hot men in Soldier's Story?

FOLLIES!

R193 I think the new canon will depend on simple production values and a small orchestra that still engages an audience.

Spring Awakening: I've seen it multiple times in big Southern cities and it was great. Really simple staging (stairs, benches) was not an issue at all.

Come From Away: Diverse cast, inspirational message, and simple sets, like Broadway, could make it popular.

Fun Home: Same as Come from Away.

Little Shop: The only big effect is the puppet plant, which can look low-tech and still be fun. This is also a good pick because of the movie, which directors can use as a guide.

Assassins: I've seen simple sets and a small, talented orchestra shine with decent actors. The actual Broadway version coming up is probably not much different overall, besides a bigger orchestra.

Be More Chill: I've only seen clips of the Broadway and off- Broadway versions, but this looks like a pretty easy thing to recreate for a local organization. The fact that the book is well-known among teens and the social media fans are all over the place could convince a reluctant director. The music doesn't sound too complicated.

What probably won't work well: Sunday in the Park: It needs a really good painting and orchestra. I saw a local production that was just flat, compared to the recent Broadway one.

Hamilton: This won't work. I loved it but... it requires a lot. You need a relatively complex orchestra and people who can rap about as well as they sing and act.

Most of my old music teachers hated rap, so they may do something like cut those songs up! We're going to see disastrous local versions on YouTube: people WILL stumble over the rap portions, try and FAIL to harmonize R&B style, and it is going to be hilarious.

r186 Stripped down RAGTIME sounds rough! Any specific problems you noticed due to the arrangement?

I hope to see that and Camelot but at relatively large theaters with proper orchestras. I don't know if that will ever happen since those have kinda fallen out of fashion.

"Camelot" has a gorgeous score, but the book is a huge problem.

I’m not a big fan of Into The Woods myself, but I think it will endure more than of any of Sondheim’s post-Sweeney shows.

[quote] What probably won't work well: Sunday in the Park: It needs a really good painting and orchestra.

Not to mention that fucking Lomochrome

Into the Woods is easily the most popular of all of Sondheim's work. I'm sure there are probably 20 productions planned, rehearsing, or playing right now in the U.S. alone. I've seen a few less professional productions and a lot of them seem to at least semi-work even if the talent on stage isn't always ideal. I think that show has a few flaws, but it seems to be a crowd pleaser even when performed with less than ideal singers, a piano, and a 1980's Casio.

Camelot has one of the most beautiful scores I've ever seen, but the book is awful and goes on and on until everyone in the audience is asleep. You need really strong singers, a big beautiful orchestra, and great costumes/sets to keep most people's attention in that show. I don't see a stripped down version of that show ever working.

[Quote] Camelot has one of the most beautiful scores I've ever seen, but the book is awful and goes on and on until everyone in the audience is asleep.

So true. I first encountered Camelot by its score. I would listen to it over and over.

When a big production toured through my city, I jumped to get a ticket.

Wow, what a bore. The book is all over the place.

The book of "Camelot" goes downhill fast from the moment Mordred arrives. He's such a cardboard villain, he might as well be twirling his mustache. And Arthur, in refusing to deal with Mordred or try to counter his destruction, becomes a passive bore.

And Pellinore should be shot the moment he makes his entrance. What a bore that character is, with his painfully unfunny comic relief, and of course he's always played by an insufferable ham.

I must be the exception then because I love everything about Camelot, including the book. It has one of the great, if not the greatest, ends on act one of all musicals.

Dorothy's Mrs. Lovett....

R199 Nah, not really. Maybe "Sarah Brown Eyes" came across as silly. The Ragtime arrangements just sounded bland and depressing. It made the show feel almost like one extremely long sad song. There was no energy. Kinda like the Wokelahoma Revival last year. The orchestra is definitely needed for lush beautiful dynamics.

Dorothy Loudon didn't really have a big voice, did she? Just loud.

r158 I'm going to see the new COMPANY soon, but why do you think it will fail?

It seems like the gender swap would make Bobbie's desperation more realistic to me. is it the marketing or something else that smells off?

I like the recent versions of it and can't imagine it failing like a low-budget, non-rapping production of HAMILTON!

[quote]Dorothy's Mrs. Lovett....

Before Angela Lansbury was offered the original "Sweeney Todd" it was offered to Patricia Routledge. She turned it down because she was superstitious about the subject matter. I wonder if that was the real reason.

I believe Routledge thought it was tasteless. She didn't like the violence/gore.

It was because of the vee-oh-lahnce!

Dottie Loudon never met a piece of scenery she couldn’t chew. Notice how she loses her accent in the song in that clip. Too busy trying to sound “good” rather than inhabiting the character.

[quote]I believe Routledge thought it was tasteless. She didn't like the violence/gore.

In one interview I saw with her, she said, "I grew up with the Sweeney Todd story, that Sweeney Todd was going to get you."

New Faces '52

Dorothy Loudon was quite lovely and unham-like in "Ballroom". Michael Bennett really directed her. She was very charming and her "50 Percent" was marvelous.

What about one of the biggest hits that's still running -- Book of Mormon? Too controversial/problematic to have a long shelf life around the country?

How many good roles did Dolores Gray do herself out of? At the very least "Fifty Percent" could have added to her repertoire of signature tunes.

Some stupid community boards will start petitions that it mocks a specific religion and try to shut it down.

R179. Spring Awakening has been done and will be done for a long time by private, non-churchy colleges and by adventurous public ones in fairly liberal public ones. It is one of those rare shows where student performers can play roles they might actually be cast in after graduation. Of course, one shudders to imagine "Spring Awakening Jr," where the Jonny Groff character wears Dr. Denton's and the Lea Michele character died of a burst appendix.

[R219] The humor in Book of Mormon isn’t aging well, especially with how “woke” younger audiences want everything to be. It’ll seem impossibly dated and possibly racist 20 years from now.

I've seen Ragtime done with a pared down cast, meaning they don't have a big dance ensemble (but full orchestra) and it was lovely.

Shows live a long time if they can be done by schools and community theaters and are easy to produce. They also tend to love big cast shows so EVERYONE can have a part...they're amateur shows so they don't have to worry about paying anyone. For those reasons, I think some shows might not get done as often (Miss Saigon and that damn helicopter; the recent trend to small cast musicals). And, obviously adult themes can cause problems...Book of Mormon is R rated. And, maybe a very liberal high school might get away doing Fun Home, most are not going to deal with a tiny cast show with a gay dad and a lesbian lead that includes a 10 year old version singing about her love for dykes with big key chains.

[quote] Whaaa whaaaa WHAT? You hated "Hairspray"? I can honestly say since the day of the first preview at The Neil Simon Theater I have never heard a person that didn't love the show, let alone hate it.

I saw it in its pre-Broadway tryout in Seattle and fucking loathed it. I was shocked at its (undeserved) success.

I don't love HAIRSPRAY. I don't hate it either. It's just whatever. It's definitely overdone at this point. Do we really need three film versions? Two are the musical version. It's like RENT. There are three film versions. Like really?

R190, yes, I hated it. It was like some impressive new airplane that taxied the runway for two hours and never took off.

1. Removing the amusement park was stupid. Nobody cares about integrating a TV show. The record shop is a hell of a lot more fun. Integrating the amusement part is important because there is no alternative for the blacks.

2. The musical misses the symmetry of the original movie. In nearly all cases, the songs mirror each other, e.g., The Roach and The Bug.

3. The entire point of the original is the social change from the rigid hairstyles, the rigid dance steps, and rigid clothing or the 50s to the do-your-own-thing, let-it-all-hang-out 60s. This is completely lost in the musical. Having Mr Spritzer from the Hairspray company save the day undermines that in a big way. Ditto having Edna's big entrance from a can of hairspray.

4. I swear Poison Ivey Long had no budget for the original costumes. Far too much actual vintage clothing on stage- which is not musical. Ditto with the dancing. Jerry Mitchell went on at great length about the historical accuracy of the dance steps. The problem was that they were often not theatrical They were too small.

5. They really blew it by overselling all of the PR about the specialist they brought in for stage effects. The poster coming to life was beyond ordinary. If you are going to use special effects for PR, you better produce some damn effective special effects.

Wow R227 what a complete lost opportunity. Can you imagine what a true success it could have been with your infinite wisdom.

R227, you are leaving out the biggest change. The film is a parody of "issue" films. The musical is completely in earnest.

It is a bit hard to see the musical if you like the film, because you start laughing in all the wrong places.

R229, I left that part out because I think it would be difficult to bring that to the stage. As I remember, even Reefer Madness kind of let that fall by the wayside.

I do agree with your last sentence. The original film is a pretty damn perfect exercise in film making.

r227, do you honestly think vintage clothing can withstand the rigors of a Broadway run?

Ha! r228. You're right. It might have been a success if they had only consulted r227!

R230, you are actually arguing against your point. The film Reefer Madness is indeed in earnest, and the musical is a parody of the film and anti-drug propaganda in general.

Which shows that one could have created a Hairspray musical that kept the satire. The stage is not immune to satire--in fact it often enhances it.

r227 - Mr. Waters was perfectly happy with what they did to his "pretty damn perfect exercise in film making".

R231, there are always folks posting at Data Lounge who will believe ANYTHING.

This lack of insight and discernment is especially acute in the theater-related threads. Those folks are often lost.

And yes, vintage clothing could not be used because the rigors of an 8-performance a week schedule requires duplicate costumes. (There is no time to launder between matinee and evening shows.)

No to mention replacements and touring casts.

R231, It is done all of the time. There is nothing unusual about it. However, it is done less often for musicals for the reason you stated and the fact that vintage clothing is not generally theatrical enough for musicals, but it is not unheard of. A simple 1950s shirtwaist dress cost $700.00 from a reputable costume shop in the 1990s.

R236, only "body parts" are washed between shows. The only thing that has duplicates are shirts. Nearly everything else goes out for dry cleaning on the dark day.

R234, this may come as a shock to you, but after the debacle of Interview with the Vampire film, it is standard for there to be a non-disparage clause in all adaptation contracts. I know that this was the case in Hairspray. Waters could not say anything but positive things about the musical.

It also made him a ton of money, and he’s not stupid.

r227 = Smarty pants...

[quote] They really blew it by overselling all of the PR about the specialist they brought in for stage effects. The poster coming to life was beyond ordinary. If you are going to use special effects for PR, you better produce some damn effective special effects.

Wow. You are irrationally holding on to a lot of negativity about HAIRSPRAY.

The above quote could apply to "Into the Light." But it is silly to argue the producers of HAIRSPRAY 'really blew it' anywhere at all when factoring in 2,642 Broadway performances, plus the West End, plus national companies, regional productions, international productions on land and at sea, a television production AND a movie. Whatever the perceived shortcomings of the publicity efforts of the production, which possibly only you remember, they are subjective. The net effect of the work done by the folks who created HAIRSPRAY was an obviously whopping success.

So what is really eating away at you, R227?

Do high schools tend to stay clear of "Cabaret"? If not, I would imagine they at least steer clear of the raunchy Sam Mendes version, which I think over the years has become the dominant take on the material.

[quote]I'm surprised SPRING AWAKENING is still being done. It was touted as this great earth-shatteringly fresh and new Broadway Musical for the "NOW" Generation ("BROADWAY WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!") but it seems to have been forgotten in the wake of other :"troubled youth" shows

I never really got the fascination with "Spring Awakening" and the fact it was marketed as "the first rock musical on Broadway" (or something to that effect) as if "Hair," "Godspell," "Jesus Christ Superstar," and "Rent" never existed, which was just ridiculous. I even downloaded the cast recording because I wanted to give it a really close listen and thought it was just barely passable but whatever.

In my opinion the best thing about it was the fact it made a star out of Jonathan Groff, whom I adore.

Marathoned The Inheritance yesterday. I was expecting to be bitterly disappointed and let down, based on the WOM I'd been hearing, but I have to say that I found it very effective and moving. Far from perfect and definitely overly long, but really what we need at this time to remind people (especially gay men) about what happened and how important it is to never forget.

Very good cast. Surprised to find that all three of the young leads are straight. Doesn't bother me, but I know that it can be an issue for others, and with the woke culture invading Broadway, I would have assumed that this would be caught up in all the "appropriation" bullshit. Tony Goldwyn fit right in and is doing very good work. I have a feeling he may exude more of the remoteness needed for the role than John Benjamin Hickey, but I would have liked to see both their interpretations.

I would love to see the actor who played Forster/Walter and Lois Smith take the featured actor Tonys this year, Smith especially.

I found the 2nd part to be better staged and more compelling than the first part (with less overt agenda and more storytelling).

Both parts were very well attended (though I know there are discounts up the wazoo). So perhaps it is going to settle in until June.

I think Ragtime will be done in the future because it has a lot of speaking parts and high schools and community theaters are always looking for shows to include everyone.

I actually pulled the Ragtime cast recording out a few days ago because I hadn't listened to it in a long time. It's a bit overwhelming because it has so many storylines. I had heard that when it went out on tour, they cut some of the material. I think they cut the song "He Wanted To Say" which really pares down Younger Brother's role to almost nothing. I never understood why they ignored Younger Brother in favor of the lesser characters. In the final song when they are each telling what happened to them, Younger Brother starts the song and then we have to listen to the fates of Evelyn Nesbitt and Booker T. Washington, who were lesser characters in the show.

R241, if you go back to my original comment (R172), I wrote that even though I hate it, I think it will have a long life as a stage property. I can loath something and still acknowledge that it is not going away anytime soon.

[quote] If you are going to use special effects for PR, you better produce some damn effective special effects.

Also, if it's actually a part of the storyline. I remember seeing The Secret Garden on Broadway and thinking, "That's it? That's your Secret Garden that you've labored so hard on?"

"The Inheritance" has its problems but I think it deserves more credit than it's receiving. I agree that it's too long and a bit soapy in spots but it's still a good, well-written, and well-acted play that I hope will hang on at least through the Tonys.

[quote][R227], you are leaving out the biggest change. The film is a parody of "issue" films. The musical is completely in earnest.

This is also the trouble with modern productions of Little Shop of Horrors. The original musical was a parody of low budget horror movies, which the original musical was based on. That fact has been lost in every major production since the original.

[quote]As I remember, even Reefer Madness kind of let that fall by the wayside.

Reefer Madness was able to get it because the original movie it was based on was an actual serious documentary that they showed to schoolchildren. They could use camp in that show to great effect. The original Hairspray already had a camp factor built in, so the musical couldn't go any farther than the movie. It was the same thing with Rocky Horror. The stage show already had a certain amount of camp built in, so when they made the movie, they couldn't go beyond what the stage show already had built in.

Thank you, r217. "The Boston Beguine" is one of the very few theater songs that makes me laugh every time I hear it.

Favorite lyric: "We went to the Casbah --- that's an Irish bar there......the underground hideout --- of the D.A.R. there"

Well, this isn't gossip but I'll join- Adapters are damned if they do and damned if they don't. The best adaptations aren't slaves to their sources but make the best choices, inspired by the originals, that work in their chosen medium- in this case, as live stage musicals. Hairspray did a great job of that, with enough originality (and better songwriting than we've heard in years, before or after). Like it or don't, but unless it just artistically fails - which Hairspray most assuredly does not - it's just pedantry to compare it beat by beat to the movie.

Interesting comment, R248. That quality of being a parody of low budget horror movies came naturally to a very small production in a low budget Lower East Side theater. In 1982, it was still a bit of an adventure just getting to the Orpheum. There, it came naturally. In that theater and in that location, it would be difficult to be anything else. Like with Dames at Sea, the bohemian venue was part of the nature of the show itself. Move it and you change it.

I also marathoned The Inheritance yesterday and found it one of the weakest plays I’ve seen in a long time, including at regional theaters. The Tales from the City dinner party scene was harder hitting than 7 hours of this shallow, feel good yammering.

I also haven’t seen such a weird Mary Sue plotline since The Assembled Parties, which I liked for many other reasons. Do we really need to spend 7 hours hearing about what a kind, sweet person Eric is? Why can’t Lopez just show that?

R252, by 1982 the East Village was gentrified.

And the Orpheum was on 2nd Ave. Not exactly a bohemian location. The WPA in Chelsea where it played originally was a lot more "off the beaten track."

R254, in 1982, the East Village was most certainly not gentrified. The WPA was off the beaten track because it wasn't as near public transportation, but the East Village was still very Bohemian.

Agree with r255.

r252, yes you are correct. I loved off-Broadway in the 1980s and early 90s just for that reason. Seeing Rent just blocks from Tompkin Square Park. Seeing Falsettoland just steps from the gay bars where gay men were still fighting the AIDS battle. I am saddened by the loss of so many wonderful off-Broadway venues and the general decline of off-Broadway. I saw many great productions in those small houses.

The problem with Little Shop of Horrors today is that you can't force the characterizations. It's a very delicate balance. If the actors don't give honest portrayals, the show becomes a cartoon, which is very different from the intention of the show. Lee Wilkof and Ellen Greene had magic. They were electric. (Listen to the link, please! It's from a live performance). But they even had this problem with the original. Once Ellen Greene left, Faith Prince was one of the replacements and she started to veer off into the cartoon portrayal.

I am going to amend my comment above (R255). I reacted to the notion that the West Village was gentrified. I lived there in 1982 and it certainly was not gentrified. *However* The WPA was in an area that was primarily zoned commercial. There was not a lot of residential or retail near the WPA which did give it a different vibe from the East Village.

I think the idea that there was no public transportation to these theaters is a good point. All of these shows, some very experimental, could be done because only true theater audiences would make the effort to get there. Tourists wouldn't go out of their way to see these shows. So what developed was an audience of people who were truly theater lovers and not just there because it was the place for people to say "they had the experience." In some ways, the internet has ruined the experience. Now hidden gems are no longer hidden. The moment a good piece of theater is discovered, it's broadcast to the world and people flock to it to say they've had the experience, not necessarily to appreciate it for the good work that it is.

Reefer Madness

r244 I think one of the best things the stage version of "Ragtime" did (in contrast with the movie) was to give roughly equal treatment to all three groups/storylines (like the book did.) The movie version focused almost exclusively on the Coalhouse story.

Lest we forget, there was an entire (unsuccessful) television series about the challenges faced by a high school attempting to stage "Spring Awakening."

The Orpheum is close to a subway, which is why it always seemed to host tourist friendly off-Broadway shows like Little Shop, Key Exchange, Stomp, Without You I'm Nothing. Hell, back in the dark ages, Little Mary Sunshine.

It was not exactly Limbo Lounge or 8BC.

Those ages weren't so dark. I saw LITTLE MARY SUNSHINE at the Orpheum three times,

"The Inheritance" will run until June, Hickey will probably return to the cast for a few weeks, Lois Smith will FINALLY get her TONY, but "The Lehman Trilogy" will kick that POS "Slave Trade Play"'s ass and win Best Play. Even though only the rich will be able to afford it.

[quote]The Orpheum is close to a subway

Not really. It's also about the general atmosphere of the neighborhood. There was a world of difference between getting off at Astor Place and going to the Public Theatre and schlepping over to Second Avenue. They were completely different worlds in the same neighborhood.

People want to go to a nice restaurant before the show and the Lower East Side doesn't have that. In the 1980s, places like Veselka were not the slick restaurants they are today. There were no lines waiting to get in. Veselka was a run down Ukranian diner. The neighborhood really didn't change until the late 1990s.

Recently at work, we had an employee from a branch office come into town. She said she wanted to go eat at S'mac. Now I like S'mac, but it's not really a place that I would seek out as a tourist. People only go into that neighborhood because it's become the hot new neighborhood to experience.

R262 That reminds me that the old tv show "Room 222" had a storyline where the kids wanted to put on a production of "Hair" but there was a lot of tension over whether or not to do the nude scene. (I think they chickened out at last minute.)

There have always been good restaurants in the East Village. So you bring up a diner because if you mention any of the actual restaurants of the time, it will be clear that you just do not know what you are talking about.

Then you bring up the Public which is an avenue away and has always had fewer restaurants nearby?

And you claim that it is now a hot new neighborhood, yet at the time Little Shop opened and the East Village was all over the media and film, but was not?

This just gets more and more bizarre.

Head of the Class also did two episodes about them putting on Little Shop of Horrors. They actually performed some of the songs from the show. 11:00 for Rain Pryor's audition song.

I always forget how fraus come to DL to rewrite history. I am sorry I over reacted to R286.

Whatever you say r268. I live in the city, I was there, I know what it was like.

In 1982, 2nd Avenue between Houston and 14th Street was safe, enough, but it was not by any means gentrified. Those same blocks on 1st Avenue was a bit more marginalized than 2nd Avenue. But each avenue into Alphabet Land got more and more dicey. Going there at night was usually a drug buy. Going there at night for theater was only for the hardy theater fan who was probably a bit bohemian him or her self.

Which side was Alice on, r267?

R271, nice try.

I led walking tours of the neighborhood for folk from Connecticut, New Jersey, UES, etc from 82 to 85. Even when I was not working that job, I passed the Opheum every day back when Little Shop was running. With the Colonades, the Public, the Entermedia, and La Mama that area was a theatrical center.

If the only "restaurant" you knew was a diner, it demonstrates a lack of firsthand knowledge. (Orchidia, Johns, Mogodor, Saporo, Miracle, etc.)

Why pretend and make pronouncements when there are people here who have first hand knowledge? Do you think we forgot the emigration from Soho by galleries and fashion. Do you think we forgot the magazine spreads and news stories? The music video's and film? And the influx of tourists cluttering the sidewalk.

I know you want to create a specific narrative, but when it does not match the facts it is natural to push back.

Was at the closing night of SLAVE PLAY last night. It was a mob scene, with a long cancellation line of folks hoping to get in. (And I doubt any did.)

Alas, the excitement ended when the play began.

Now having finally gotten to see the play I have to say: Really?

I am glad to see a different, daring kind of play make it to Broadway, but there are far, far better-written plays than this one. It's woke but not awake, especially in its second half full of endless academic yakking and finger pointing.

This play is not going to win the Tony for Best Play. In fact, it shouldn't even be nominated. The Lehman Trilogy, The Inheritance (yes) and The Sound Inside are far likelier to be nominated and far more deserving. But if there are five nominees, there's a good chance many will want to nominate it simply for its unlikely journey to Broadway in the first place.

But a win? Hell to the no.

The area around the Orpheum Theater also had Theatre 80 St. Marks where parents not that many years earlier had taken their children to see "You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown", so while the area was somewhat off-the-beaten-track and a bit grungy (there used to be the methadone clinic around there to help drug addicts), it wasn't like there hadn't been theater done around there before.

[quote] ...it wasn't like there hadn't been theater done around there before.

Exactly. Which is why no one made such a silly statement.

They were implying it, like it was this great trek to the unknown, clutching their pearls.

Bicker, bicker, bicker

Right, R278. And in the context of selling months or years worth of tickets to the general public, it was a great trek to the unknown.

Also, Charlie Brown opened 15 years before Little Shop.

r280 = Reva Rose

A lot of folk do not learn from observation. They have to wait until the Times tells them a neighborhood is being gentrified before they notice. And that also infects theater culture. They wait for the critics to tell them if a play is good or not. They only go to Broadway because by the time the Times tells them the show at St. Ann's or NYLive Arts is worth seeing, it has closed.

WSS is selling very well. I tried to get a ticket for next week and there are very few seats remaining. I am surprised

Well singing and dancing in the rain has always been popular.

Did you get a rash though, Gene?

Yes but Stanley put some balm on it.

If WSS is doing good business, but is surprising that there has been such little word of mouth, and a lot of conflicting reports. I would love to see it, if I were in NYC.

My friend has never seen Phantom of the opera, so we are going on Thursday, via TDF, how is the show holding up?

I saw it a couple of decades ago, probably more than once, and thought it was beautifully produced but kind of bland and a little dull, with every song ending in a big finish. I kept expecting an intermission that took forever to arrive.

Hairspray is a fun, canon musical. It's NOT as good as the original film (they dumbed it down and sweetened it up) and "Miss Baltimore Crabs" is a floppo number but all in all it's going to be produced for many many years to come.

Ditto with Little Shop of Horrors which is, in my opinion, almost a perfect show. Sweet and sour and funny and melancholy with great songs and characters...and, really, pretty hard to completely fuck up. And, I've seen some mediocre productions, but the show has enough charm to overcome the weakest of actors and directorial concepts.

The East Village and specifically Alphabet City wasn't the slightest bit "gentrified" in 1982. How ridiculous.

The Inheritance lists many "producers." Many! When producers are running around New York trying to raise money for a show, does anyone here know? ..... how much is the minimum buy-in? Do you buy a share or a ;piece of a share? How much?

R289 How can you hate on Miss Baltimore Cravs? That’s one of my favorite songs in the whole show! Much better than anything in the 2nd act aside from the closing number.

R288 It's a machine. No emotion, bland, and dull just like you remember. But probably even worse now. Everyone is just going through the motions. The production value is still good.

I love Hairspray, disagree completely with r227. Since it's all subjective, r227 and I are both right.

But the show has been a raging success, so it would indicate that there are more people who have an opinion similar to mine than to r227. And yes, it has already become part of the "canon."

Didn't Prince when he was alive occasionally visit it and try to keep it up? I saw it at the beginning with Crawford and Brightman. I felt it was a machine even then. Beautiful in its stage craft but empty. The silent film though as contrived as some of it is I find very moving. And if you see it in a movie theater with its original in color party on the opera house grand staircase it is more stunning than anything Prince came up with on stage.

Did I miss the discussion of Seth Rudetsky on Will and Grace two weeks ago? I thought he was very funny.

Nothing on Wall & Griss is funny. Thank you.

r296, Hi Megan!

John Waters did not sign a "non-disparagement clause" for HAIRSPRAY. He didn't need to. They wanted what he had, and he approached the project wholeheartedly endorsing it. He knew from the start that it would be a new score, and that there would be changes to make it work onstage.

He is thrilled with how it all turned out and, yes, with the fortune he's made off of it, which has been pointed out.

Trust me, if you got together with John Waters for a private chat, you wouldn't get any different an opinion of the musical that his public opinion.

[quote]I remember seeing The Secret Garden on Broadway and thinking, "That's it? That's your Secret Garden that you've labored so hard on?"

I know, I thought the same thing. In a way, it was the same thing with "Titanic. But it had the good fortune to come out at the same time as the movie (or just before it). The movie had all the spectacle that you would want. The musical made it clear from the start that they were doing something more "organic," and there would be no major special effects. If you wanted a huge Titanic you could just go see the movie.

Yeah I saw an interview with John Waters and they asked him about HAIRSPRAY and he said he doesn't have anything to do with the musical really and he's fine with it. I think he also said something like he knew it would become more commercial and it's own thing. The feeling I got was that he was basically fine with all of it.

Remember this production?

Their Miss Saigon....

A question for those who've seen West Side Story - is Bernardo in this production a particularly challenging role to dance? I'm still puzzled as to why they cast Ramasar, given the baggage he brings with him.

Holy shit - they had people falling into the water? And that one couple who slowly sank were clearly on some kind of contraption. How did they get out of it? And did everyone who was cast have to swim? That's going to kind of an extreme. The Opera Wallonie in Liege did an impressive job with it in 2000, they had a ship (but no one falling in the water)

Opera Wallonie Titanic

Some background, r304....

Well if Jones Beach still did musicals Titanic there would have been a hoot.

I'm actually jealous I didn't see their Titanic and Saigon. Utmost respect for a cast that really commits. They even flew a real helicopter over the audience.

That supposedly brilliant observation about the original HAIRSPRAY film being a "parody of issue movies" while the musical is "completely in earnest" is actually a stupid comment. Yes, the musical is in earnest about the integration plot, but there's a tremendous amount of humor in the show. And the original Waters movie may have been a parody of the FORM of "issue" movies of the late '50s and early '60s, but of course, it was also in earnest about the integration plot.

[quote]This is also the trouble with modern productions of Little Shop of Horrors. The original musical was a parody of low budget horror movies, which the original musical was based on. That fact has been lost in every major production since the original.

I think that sensibility has been caught by every major production of the show that I've seen, including the current one. You people should really stop with all this over-analyzing bullshit, because it keeps leading you to dumb comments.

[quote]Lest we forget, there was an entire (unsuccessful) television series about the challenges faced by a high school attempting to stage "Spring Awakening."

Unfortunately, the writing of that show was garbage level.

[quote]Hairspray is a fun, canon musical. It's NOT as good as the original film (they dumbed it down and sweetened it up) and "Miss Baltimore Crabs" is a floppo number but all in all it's going to be produced for many many years to come.

I sort of agree about "Miss Baltimore Crabs," and I guess about the sweetening, but how would you say the musical "dumbed down" the original movie?

[Quote] You people should really stop with all this over-analyzing bullshit

....

"possibly racist 20 years from now"

Possibly? The NAACP should have gathered en masse and stormed the theatre 17 years ago.

RAGTIME does nothing but tell, tell and tell. That libretto (or the score, for that matter) did the show no favors.

Speaking of BOOK OF MORMON, how is it and other long running shows like HAMILTON and DEAR EVAN HANSEN holding up?

Any interesting stories on producers/directors fine tuning things recently? I forgot which old musical did this, but a producer almost fired everyone so he could re-audtion them due to his

R312 Les Mis just before the Broadway tenth anniversary. I believe I read on here it was led to Cameron Mackintosh firing Richard Jay-Alexander, as he was overseeing the Broadway production at the time. Suggestions that RJA's casting techniques for roles like Marius leading to guys totally unsuitable being cast

A poster not too far upthread said that Phantom of the Opera is running on automatic now, like robots.

[quote]Suggestions that RJA's casting techniques for roles like Marius leading to guys totally unsuitable being cast

I am *shocked* that that would ever happen.

R288, I returned to Phantom a number of years ago. The tempos for some reason were much slower than I remembered.

Plus, the theatre is so fucking dusty, with a thick layer over every ledge, because it hasn’t been cleaned since Phantom opened

I started Googling about the Les Mis thing, and came across this to do with RJA - back in 1995 he flew out to the 3 national tour and screamed at them about their unprofessionalism and threatening to fire them - and the rant was recorded and sent to Equity. Some seem to suggest it was this that led to him getting the boot - it would've all come at around the same time as the tenth anniversary as well. Sooo...does anyone have the recording?

RJA is a prince among men.

Any recommendations on good books that give you a nice mix of theatre history and the juicy backstage gossip from those who were there? I enjoyed Michael Ridel's Razzle Dazzle, though he's not the strongest writer (obviously.) Are Ethan Mordden's books worth seeking out? I've enjoyed his interviews on Theatre Talk over the years.

Phantom has been tinkered with quite a bit over the years. Everything is now smaller and tighter. There aren't as many people on the stairs (more dummies), for example. Even the ending is slightly different. (I have seen it several times over the past 25 years when I have visitors who want to see it). I swear that one bit was added (but I could be wrong) that was in the movie and hadn't previously been in the show.

Weren't there quite a few dummies on the stairs when the show opened? I thought it looked tacky even then.

Didn't they also try to have all the performers in Chicago audition for the roles they currently had, which led to that one actor committing suicide? Or was he the only one singled out in the cast?

Yes to dummies in Phantom from the beginning. Have they added dummies? Don't know. Don't care. Anyone who goes to see the goddamn thing is a dummy.

R321 Yes, there were some dummies in the early days, but there were enough moving bodies to cover. Now it's more like you need to figure out who is actually moving, because so many are obviously stationary.

You couldn't pay me to see Phantom again, but haven't they maintained their large orchestra over the years? I have to say, on that count, hats off to Cameron Mackintosh and ALW. Even if audiences don't articulate it, they can feel the difference between a full orchestra and a small band.

The orchestra in PHANTOM sounds great. Probably best thing about the show. I actually think the tempos have been sped up. I love that original recording from when I was a kid and can tell some of my favorite instrumental parts like the Act 2 Overture have definitely been sped up. And the part right after "ALL I ASK OF YOU" and it really bothers me. I've seen it once a year for the past five years (because of friends & family) and its definitely on autopilot. Let's just get it over with it feels like. haha. I still love the opening though. The overture as the chandelier goes up and the stage is set for Hannibal. But it is a snoozefest.

What's the caretaking situation like with Chicago and The Lion King?

Don't most shows go on autopilot after a couple of years? My parents saw South Pacific towards the end of its original run and said it looked very tired. And though a long run in its day it would be a fairly short run today.

Those young girls in the chorus weren't going to molest and/or harrass themselves, R303!

My sister and her adult daughters walked out of Chicago at intermission a few months ago, said it was so dreary

I was dragged to Chicago last year. It was dusty -- literally -- that theatre needs a DEEP cleaning. It literally smelled musty in there. And, damn, some of those long-termers are eating a lot of carbs. Fosse would be horrified. But, speaking of orchestras, one thing that was red hot was the band. They were on fire and it was a pleasure to hear them play that K&E score with such commitment. I have to imagine some of them have been on that bandstand for YEARS.

I'd quite like to see some fat Fosse dancers. They could all be no longer cute red headed chorines.

Weren't there some zaftig dancers and chorines in Cabaret...?

[quote] My sister and her adult daughters walked out of Chicago at intermission a few months ago, said it was so dreary

Hell, I did this 12 or 13 years ago when Bebe came back and played Velma, which was actually a reason to go. I felt like I was in a strip club at 9am on a Tuesday. The show has been a disaster for far longer than it's been good.

Any discussion of the Best Play Tony has to consider the imminent arrival of Tracy Letts' new play, THE MINUTES.

For the poster who inquired about theater books, I would recommend the Mordden books, especially the decade-by-decade musical theater series. He can be VERY eccentric, and seems to have time-traveled to shows he talks about in intimate detail from many decades ago. But he is almost always fun in his opinions.

If you want something more meaty, Arnold Wesker's THE BIRTH OF SHYLOCK AND THE DEATH OF ZERO MOSTEL is one of the very best theater books I've ever read. It chronicles the attempts of Wesker to mount a play based on MERCHANT OF VENICE, and the chaos that ensued when his leading man suddenly died.

I think there's a behind the scenes book on that Hal Prince - Michael Bennett musical.

While Prince was alive and active, he visited Phantom quite often and kept it in good shape. It’s anyone’s guess how it’ll fare now. Hopefully Mackintosh won’t shut it down and replace it with the cheapie tour version like he did with Les Miz in London.

I totally understand why that old Les Miz cast was fired and forced to re-audition.

I saw the show just before the firings, and it was so lacking in energy that I fell asleep.

Every long-running show should go through something like that.

I saw WSS over the weekend. It's ridiculous -- unmoving, uninteresting and just average. You spend the whole night watching the HUGE videos (They might as well have handed out VR headsets) and the cast is amateurish on all levels. It reminded me of the original MERRILY -- I'm paying for a bunch of kids learning their craft? All of the live video makes it worse. I hope the critics call "the emperors new clothes" on this thing. The audience was respectful but unmoved.

[quote]It reminded me of the original MERRILY

Holy shit, DUCK!

RJA stories in the business are legendary. It's why no one will hire him to direct a musical anymore. His taste is also awful. Cheno's last b'way concert gig was an embarrassment.

[quote]I'd quite like to see some fat Fosse dancers. They could all be no longer cute red headed chorines.

Jim Borstelmann comes to mind. You first see him in this clip over Mamie Duncan-Gibbs' right shoulder.

R331 I've seen talk on other sites that the Ambassador is in terrible condition (as in not just dirty, but actually dilapidated and dangerous), and so Shubert are giving the producers of Chicago a great deal on rent to keep it going, because when it does close they're going to have to spend a fortune bringing it up to code.

CHICAGO is never going to close. It has the cheapest operating costs of any show on Broadway. And years ago, The Weisslers (smartly) put the authors/creatives on a very tight royalty pool so it could run forever.

Speaking of Chenoweth's last gig, does she have bad management? Any time she has announced UK concert dates or other projects (Candide ENO, heavily rumoured for Soapdish being developed at The Other Palace) they fall through. Her dates were on sale last time before being cancelled, whereas Idina has done several successful European tours.

I'd imagine it doesn't take much to keep Chicago running. The set is non-existent, none of the cast members are "stars" in the traditional sense, and even the stars they get to join them for a month are from things like the Real Housewives or other D-listers, so they're probably just grateful for the exposure. The concept for the revival in that way is pretty genius. That show could run for the next 100 years. It's much harder to keep a show like Wicked running with all the special effects and stuff.

Really, R347? Fuck you

The Book Of Mormon is fading fast. Discount emails are coming in like spam these days. It might last another year.

You couldn't pay me to sit through WSS. Friends have gone and have warned me away. It's shit for teens with no sense of history.

Saw Chicago this last week - wanted to see if Erika Jayne has any talent (she doesn't) and how Paulo Szot was (think Ricky Ricardo as Billy Flynn). The remainder of the company (with the exception of one male dancer and the woman playing Hunyak) were walking through it...and Velma was calling it in from a payphone somewhere in Ohio. I couldn't believe that this is allowed and still running!!! Really horrible....and I have seen it with some really wonderful casts over the years

Some really wonderful casts? Yeah. Like Gwen and Chita. Or Lenora Nemetz. Lenora was terrific.

And there were sets. And costumes. And Bob Fosse's actual choreography, not Ann Reinking's reinterpretation of it.

The Weisslerized version was threadbare from the day it started previews. Feh.

[quote]RAGTIME does nothing but tell, tell and tell.

This is simply not true. Yes, there is a lot of narration throughout the show, but the huge majority of the action is played out. Here we have yet another case of someone trying to sound intelligent and perceptive and analytical when they actually have no idea what they're talking about.

Ragtime has too many power ballads.

Didn’t RJA get that job by servicing Cameron? I thought he was none as the guy who gave the million dollar blowjob.

I did see it with the originals and all the replacements (Lenora was amazing as both Roxie and Velma) - but also saw Ruthie Henshel, Bonnie Langford and Sandy Duncan is the revival - all amazing

R354 is on the money. Ragtime has far too many ballads.

R349 GOOD. R351 "and Velma was calling it in from a payphone somewhere in Ohio." HILARIOUS. And I agree with everything you said. Of ALL the shows to still be running. And that version too. It's abominable.

I remember somebody once describing Ragtime as a musical made up of audition songs.

Which is a perfect description.

The idea of Ricky Ricardo playing Billy Flynn is honestly sort of awesome. It sounds like a different interpretation, but a fun one.

There is no such thing as a show with too many power ballads. They should ALL be power ballads.

If Desi Arnaz was capable enough to do Broadway in the '70s, I'll bet he *would* have done Chicago

FOLLIES should have used Spic 'N' Spanish instead of Bolero d'Amour.

[quote]The Book Of Mormon is fading fast. Discount emails are coming in like spam these days. It might last another year.

Interesting. It was playing in NYC the last three times I went there (most recently was 2018), and I was NEVER able to find it on TKTS.

[quote]I remember somebody once describing Ragtime as a musical made up of audition songs.

That is a PERFECT description.

Say what you will about Ragtime but it has a lot of gorgeous melodies Flaherty outdid himself. “New Music” is stunning.

Lypsinka & Miss Gray

Has Mormon ever been on TKTS?

r363: That was terrific, thanks! Has Encores ever done TOO MANY GIRLS?

"Slave Play" playwright blasts Louis C.K. for attending Broadway show:

1) I don't always agree with him, but Ethan Mordden's theater books are very entertaining and informative.

2) Hairspray the Musical is dumbed down. Don't get me wrong, it's a fun show but it just doesn't have the bite of the original Waters' film. The characters seem like G rated copies of themselves. And, yes, Baltimore Crabs IS a floppo number. But, I also don't like the annoying "I Know Where I've Been" power anthem Motormouth sings...it's cloying and false.

3) Peter Rothstein from Theatre Latte Da in Minneapolis staged a brilliant stripped down Ragtime 4 years ago which he duplicated in Seattle at the 5th Avenue. It only had a cast of 16 and it was just great.

The Serenbe Ragtime was also interestingly staged as an interactive circus

Ethan Mordden books a very entertaining. So well researched he makes you believe he was there at all those old shows way before the sixties. Opinionated of course but backed up by his knowledge and love of the art form. The Goldman book is as good as they say but if you can't get past the homophobia it is not for you. Though not specifically about musicals but an entire Broadway season his Washing Garbage chapter is a classic of how a musical can fall apart on its way to opening night. Also great his takedown of Clive Barnes. The fact that he lasted so long at the Times when EVERYBODY knew he was a disaster makes you wonder how the Times owed somebody such a huge favor.

The season : a candid look at Broadway / William Goldman ; introduction by Frank Rich

I just requested it from my library system

Saw Ruthie Henshall opposite Sandy Duncan in CHICAGO. Sandy was great but Ruthie seemed to be trying to play Velma like Edward G Robinson. Unbelievably awful.

Ginge was the best Roxie.

I saw Ruthie in her return engagement as Roxie. She was much better than her stint as a young woman. Very touching, no shmacting.

R362-If Desi Arnaz had been asked to do CHICAGO, he would have told the Weisslers to go fuck themselves.

Jeremy Harris seems to be a true up and coming asshole. He doesn't want Louis C.K. in the audience? Playwrights don't get to make that decision. Especially a playwright as bad as Harris.

[quote]Jeremy Harris seems to be a true up and coming asshole. He doesn't want Louis C.K. in the audience? Playwrights don't get to make that decision. Especially a playwright as bad as Harris.

Yeah, he's feeling his oats, even if some people feel he doesn't have any. This on top of that ridiculous, contrasting case where he was thrilled that Beyonce (???) was in the audience even though they had to HOLD THE START OF THE SHOW for her and then she was texting during the play. Also, I'll bet anything that JOH himself has a lot to do with the fact that his damned play is performed without an intermission even though the running time is about 2 hour and 15 minutes. Very high-handed and pretentious that his art can't be spoiled by a needed bathroom break for the audience.

He held the curtain for Rihanna. Slave Play is popular only amongst white people who feel guilt.

Sorry, Rihanna, not Beyonce :-(

At least I put question marks because I couldn't remember for sure who it was.

[quote]Also great his takedown of Clive Barnes. The fact that he lasted so long at the Times when EVERYBODY knew he was a disaster makes you wonder how the Times owed somebody such a huge favor.

I can't even imagine something like this occurring nowadays, can you?

Jane Alexander is fantastic in Grand Horizons. She would be so much better than Lois Smith in The Inheritance.

I didn't see SLAVE PLAY and have my own reservations about Jeremy Harris.

But I have no problem with anyone calling sexual assailants like Louis CK and Harvey Weinstein out on their shit when they appear in public.

I think public shaming is hugely underrated in contemporary culture.

*

Public shaming does wonders for the shamer, but nothing for anyone else. The legal system and entertainment economy can punish Louis CK, but calling him out for appearing in public is creepy.

Of course Jeremy Harris is an asshole. That's what this generation is all about.

I'm astonished at how clueless and arrogant Harris is. He might be able to get away with his behavior now because he is the "it" writer, but he won't be for long, and his attitude won't do him any favors then. I admit that I have never read nor seen anything he has written, but, after reading about his attitude, I have absolutely no desire to. He sounds like an asshat.

R379 Not just [italic]the[/italic] audience - his tweet said "my audience", which is an entirely new level of pretension.

[quote] ...which is an entirely new level of pretension.

No, dear. Not on Broadway. That level of pretension was reached years and years and years ago.

R389 AGREED. R390 True. R391 haha. Also true.

I worked at the Winter Garden during the end of the CATS run. We called it the litter box. It was disgusting.

Which Mordden book do you recommend?

Ginger Rogers was a really delightful Roxie Hart, and I was surprised at how closely the musical followed the film, which I guess followed the original play.

[quote]But I have no problem with anyone calling sexual assailants like Louis CK and Harvey Weinstein out on their shit when they appear in public.

Louis CK never touched anyone and equating him with Harvey Weinstein an alleged violent rapist is very disingenuous. .

Curious how Jeremy never tweeted about the number of audience members who walked out of his "play", DADDY, during intermission.

I would love to see a stage version of a revamped LOST HORIZON. Sure, the script is awful but the songs are fun

R398, there was talk of a stage version shortly after Xanadu opened. It was going to be 70s camp. I don't know if Douglas Carter Beane was involved.

Oh yeah, R398. Great songs.

I smell hit?

I LOVE the melodies in Lost Horizon! I first saw the movie as a kid on TV after school. I loved it!

“Lost Horizon” was one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen, let alone musicals. Ill-conceived and produced, the whole thing looked like some turgid high school pageant. And I keep getting distracted by those rehashed sets from “Camelot,” not to mention the occasional views of what looks like Burbank in the distance.

In retrospect, decades later, the score isn’t that bad, but it never belonged with that story, but only made it worse. (I’ve always wanted to hear the complete score to the 1956 “Shangri-La;” at least that had songs more appropriate to the subject, some of them quite lovely. The 1960 TV version was as much of it as we’re ever going to see, but even that was truncated.)

I had no idea that song was from Lost Horizon. I love Burt Bacharach's melodies, but that doesn't fit in to the mountainous Tibetan milieu at all.

It would have been more interesting if, after they raised the baby up, they threw it into the pond as a human sacrifice.

Just a bit of Shangri-La...I don't think it has any songs in this clip.

Sally and Olivia....a truly dynamic song and dance duo!

"I think public shaming is hugely underrated in contemporary culture."

What do you advise, r385? Wearing a scarlet letter? Locked into stocks in the village square? Public floggings? Even better, what about the Hate Rallies, like in 1984 (we know how well that turned out)?

Be careful what you wish for and take heed of A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS (this is after all a theatre thread): MARGARET MORE: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ALICE: While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he were the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So! Now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: Yes! I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast — man's laws, not God's — and if you cut them down — and you're just the man to do it — do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

[quote]In retrospect, decades later, the score isn’t that bad, but it never belonged with that story, but only made it worse.

No, almost all of the songs are lousy in and of themselves. The only one that's rather pretty and doesn't have anything wrong with it musically or lyrically is "Share the Joy." At first hearing, "The World is a Circle" may sound sweet and clever, but the lyric doesn't actually make any sense -- the fact that there are always people faster or slower, taller or shorter than you is a LINEAR concept, not a circular one. All of the rest of the songs are mediocre at best and crap at worst, musically and/or lyrically, but it is true that the lyrics overall are far worse than the music. (Hal David was basically a hack who sometimes could come up with a decent lyric when writing within his limitations.)

Burt Bacharach is the only certifiable genius of pop/non-musical theatre songwriting of the last sixty years. It's a real shame his experience on PROMISES, PROMISES was so anathema to him.

But it is a fun guilty pleasure of a soundtrack, r408....

[quote]Burt Bacharach is the only certifiable genius of pop/non-musical theatre songwriting of the last sixty years. It's a real shame his experience on PROMISES, PROMISES was so anathema to him.

Why? Was Dionne Warwick in the show?

Question: Do the DL theatre queens wear knickers under their caftans? If so, this will certainly get them in a twist.

Let's not forget the Broadway SHANGR-LA, the 1956 musical with music by Harry Warren. Jack Cassidy, Alice Ghostley, Carol Lawrence, Harold Lang starred. 21 performances. Must have been a doozy.

R406, that's actually a really catchy song. A shame it's stuck in a dud of a movie and choreographed with all the enthusiasm of a children's Christmas pageant.

R513. Wow--two of Broadway's best voices of the day (Cassidy and Larence), an adept actress, good at comedy and serious drama ((Ghostley--she won a Tony for Hansberry's Sign in Sidney Brustein's Window) and one of the great dancers (Lang). How bad must the score, book, and staging have been to defeat that talented set of performers?

I’d like to Question you an Answer, r408!

Louis CK is now not even allowed to go in public? This mediocre playwright has had so much smoke blown up his ass by the wokeratti. He's become insufferable

And y'all are giving him attention, which was the purpose of the tweet. Well done.

I know, right? Theater used to be a place where all types of people would come together for a shared experience. The theater was the great leveler.

Interesting number on Dutch TV tonight from the current Amsterdam production of Lazarus.

I'm not a huge Bowie fan, but enough of one to wish I had seen Lazarus. That is, until I saw that deadly dull clip above. I thought it was staged as a play, but that would lead me to believe it was staged as a concert performance. Maybe the European version is different than the off Broadway version? But why would they pick that song, which is not one his more interesting ones.

"Theater used to be a place where all types of people would come together for a shared experience. The theater was the great leveler."

Exactly right. You checked your ego at the door to participate in a communal experience where your attention was focused on the reenactment of a sacred ritual. Today it's a degradation of narcissism, with people gratifying every indulgence with sippy-cups and selfies and texting while half-watching some infantile piece of claptrap to stave off their boredom. The culture we get....

The musical, “Shangri-La,” had at least two ballads that were quite good: the title song, and another, “Lost Horizon,” which has been recorded, by Judy Kaye, among others, on various anthologies of “lost” Broadway songs.

Ben Bagley recorded the “Father Perrault” ballet for his album, “Ballet on Broadway.” This had not been included in the 1960 TV adaptation, which reduced a Broadway show to a 90-minute special. Which I actually saw when it was first televised. (To my knowledge, it has never been repeated.)

Why the prestigious “Hallmark Hall of Fame,” which presented a number of TV adaptations of prominent Broadway plays, would choose to show a flop musical may be a question for the ages.

The addition of song-and-dance hoofers to the plot would seem as anachronistic as the Bachrach tunes did 13 years later. Other than that, the plot was based on the original novel, and not on the Robert Riskin screenplay for Frank Capra’s 1937 classic.

I have heard a few archival recordings of some of the other songs, which aren’t particularly memorable. Though it would be interesting to hear the whole score, I expect it wouldn’t be as impressive as what I have imagined it to be. And the existing, grainy kinescopes of the Hallmark presentation don’t add much luster, despite the sincerity of the well cast Richard Basehart and, especially, Claude Rains. (That voice!)

I’m afraid this is not an underrated masterpiece. “Candide,” from the same year, this ain’t.

All this blame on "Lost Horizon" on Burt and David? Nothing on screenwriter, the illustrious Tony, Emmy winning, Oscar and Pulitzer nominee and gay icon Larry Kramer?

A;ice Ghostley sings "April in Fairbanks"

Alice Ghostley sings "The Boston Beguine"

Perhaps Alice Ghostley could shut up for just a bit?

Alice Ghostley was wonderful in the Eileen Herlie role in TAKE ME ALONG.

Wow! Did that happen during the Broadway run, r428? Did Herlie take an early powder?

No. I saw Eileen Herlie on Broadway. Alice Ghostley played the role in a summer stock tour with Dan Dailey, Jerry Dodge, and Joey Heatherton (I think).

Joey break!

Back to THE BAND'S VISIT. I saw a dress rehearsal of the tour, which played one of those huge former movie palaces. I fell in love with it immediately. So much so that I went to see it three more times during the week it played. One of my absolute favorites, I found it very moving. It deserved its Best Musical award.

I’m a huge Burt Bacharach fan—but—he had absolutely no idea how to write for the theater or for character. A pop genius, however.

R421, the Dutch production of Lazarus is not different at all from the off-Broadway (and London) versions-all were directed by Ivo van Hove. I didn’t care for the Dutch leading man but the Dutch leading lady-Noortje Herlaar-was fantastic.

Is LAZARUS set in the 1980s? Cause the number at R420 looks like a late episode of DYNASTY.

R435, it’s not identified as the time period and I think someone uses a cell phone onstage so it’s a mixture of time periods.

virginia woolf and gypsy are each listed on the crappy but useful IBDB as having 5 productions. Guys and dolls has 6. Are those the most? WAOVW has three in the last 15 years. who the fuck cares again

Wow, r430, that was the definition of a B-list summer stock cast.

Dan Dailey? You fool. He would certainly be an A-list cast member in summer stock. With Dan Dailey as the star, Alice Ghostley is a first-rate supporting player.

Everyone goes on and on about how revived Gypsy is, but besides the Bernadette/Patti revivals which happened way too close together, they usually give it a good amount of time in between productions. Virginia Woolf's 3 productions in 20 years is a bit insane. What about The Glass Menagerie coming back to Broadway with Sally Field after what seemed like a month after the Cherry Jones production closed? It didn't help that the production itself was awful.

I have a feeling no one is craving this new VIRGINIA WOOLF, no matter how good this production is.

I know I don't need to see another one on stage for a good long while.

Virginia Woolf is a wonderful show, but it needs a nice long break. I feel like this one is only happening because Laurie Metcalf has become a Broadway darling over the past decade and could probably tell someone that she wants to remount Seesaw and play the lead and someone would put up the money.

I love her, but do Metcalf's shows make a lot of money? It seems odd that they'd chose her to star in this since she's a little too old for the role and she's not a huge name.

She's become a TV name, of sorts. That's something.

Are you daft, R443?

6 tony nominations, and two back to back wins

1 oscar nomination

11 Emmy nominations and 3 wins

what the hell does one have to do to be a "big name" on broadway, star is some disney shit or a jukebox musical?

Patricia Wilson (the original Marie from "Fiorello") did a stock tour of "Take Me Along" in Eileen Herlie's role, opposite Gene Kelly as Sid. Early 1970s, Kenley Circuit & several other stops. It was a huge hit, and there was a push to bring it to Broadway, but Kelly had been clear from the start that he had no desire to play NYC. He did entertain the idea of playing the LA/SF Civic Light Opera, but it fell through at the last minute.

Lucky Pat got to ride Gene's big Kelly throughout the whole tour, and had a fine time doing it. But when it was all over, it was over for Kelly. That didn't go over so well with Pat, and it led to a breakdown.

Gene's Take Me Along

Oh please. Gene Kelly was a star; Dan Dailey a second banana.

What does one thing have to do with the other, r448? I don't understand your post.

About a year ago my friend and I took an Uber to the Ahman son (auto correct is in overdrive) to see the national tour of Come From Away..... OUR UBER DRIVER was a nice looking 60 something man who was super chatty - it turns out that he played the young boy in the "Take Me Along Tour" with Gene Kelly. I felt guilty because I couldn't pull the show to the front of my brain to ask as many questions as I think the Uber guy was hoping I would ask - plus my friend was wound up about something at work so we didn't get as much Gene Kelly scoop as we could have .... Sorry typing on this new fire tablet for the first time and I am apparently an idiot!

Such a lost opportunity, r450!

R448 Well, not that this proves anything, but Gene Kelly and Dan Dailey had the same number of nominations for competitive Oscars: one each. And at least Dailey got to play drunk.

R442 Only if she agreed to play the Tommy Tune role.

So r450, how do you find out something like that? When you got in the car, did he say, "Recognize me? I was the little boy in Take Me Along."

I would have said, "Eyes front, bub."

That would seem like a very Delilah-Judith kind of thing for him to do, r454.

A Delilah-Judith thing for him to do would be to have the cast album playing when they got in the car and be singing along in a boyish falsetto.

Oh Jesus, a NEIL DIAMOND bio musical is headed to Broadway? Enough already..

Maybe the Neil Diamond musical will play next door to The Karate Kid musical that's been announced.

[quote]Oh Jesus, a NEIL DIAMOND bio musical is headed to Broadway? Enough already..

Thank Christ it's not a Neil SEDAKA bio musical.

Adds shaping...

She's come a long way, baby!

Who's the actress who "has the solution" to Bernie's bra problem in that commercial?

[quote]Thank Christ it's not a Neil SEDAKA bio musical.

I'm writing this down ...

I am the one with the Take Me Along UBER DRIVER - the friend I was with was hyper and as we waited for the Uber we spotted the full moon - being fairly pretentious he started singing Old Devil Moon and kept singing when we got in - then the Uber driver started to harmonize my friend wasn't into it - plus he is dead in one ear - so I felt the need to be an annoying "pleaser" and lean forward and hear this guy's story - I was confused because I kn we that Jackie Gleason and Eileen Herlie did the show in the late 50s and this guy wasn't old enough - then he filled me in that he toured the show with Gene Kelly in the 70s - by that time my friend finished singing and couldn't figure out what we were talking about "What? What am I missing? What about Gene Kelly? Hello Dolly was awful Yada yada yada" The poor Uber guy just couldn't hold his audience! You wonder how often that poor guy whips that story out?

Deaf in one ear - not dead!!

Pretty much the same thing, r465.

Bernadette has the same voice in that ancient clip that we know today. Very charming. Did she say that her parents would spend her taxicab money on candy? I didn't quite get that.

I do think the little boy who had the $100 line had been supplied it by the staff. Isn't that how all these shows work? And wasn't Jack Barry caught up in the quiz-show scandals? I could be confusing him with someone else.

[quote]Did she say that her parents would spend her taxicab money on candy?

Yes, she said her parents would spend the money on candy.

For absolutely no reason....

[quote]Jane Alexander is fantastic in Grand Horizons. She would be so much better than Lois Smith in The Inheritance.

If both are nominated for Tonys, they would likely be in different categories -- Jane in leading actress in a play and Lois in featured, so both (theoretically anyway) could win.

[quote]Did she say that her parents would spend her taxicab money on candy? I didn't quite get that.

I thought she said they would spend her taxicab money on a smile of grapefruit and half of a Kind bar.

No one in GRAND HORIZONS is going to get nominated for anything.

Grand Horizons is a POS. I saw it last week and except for the coup de theatre at the end of the first act, it was completely unwatchable.

Is GH what Atkins and Pryce did quite well a couple of months ago?

R469, I am looking at my Metropolis Bottle right now. I felt so glamorous buying it. It still smells fabulous.

R469, I am looking at my Metropolis Bottle right now. I felt so glamorous buying it. It still smells fabulous.

Does Michael Feinstein still have Liza locked up?

Let's watch Liza AGE right before our eyes! IMHO, she was never more attractive than her 30s to about 45.

I always find these videos weirdly absorbing.

[quote]she was never more attractive than her 30s to about 45.

Just about the time that she started hanging out with Andy at Studio 54 and really felt free to enjoy the nose candy.

R464 your friend sounds awful

Movie musicals are a-comin'!

West Side Story redux!

Mean Girls the Musical!

Fun Home, with Jakey G!

The Prom, with Meryl!

It's like MGM in the Freed era. Let's put on a show, kids!

Mame with Glenn

[quote]It's like MGM in the Freed era. Let's put on a show, kids!

It's more like Republic in the Vera Hruba Ralston era.

Also, don't forget FOLLIES: THE MOTION PICTURE!!!!

Honestly, I still have my doubts about Follies actually happening. I won't believe it until I see the first picture from the set. It might go the way of the Streisand Gypsy.

Speaking of Gypsy, what's going on with that? Streisand finally surrendered it seemed and then Amy Sherman Palladino stepped in to direct and then we heard nothing.

Maureen Stapleton was fascinated by Vera's somnambulistic acting style, r483. Her friend, Judy Holliday, would call her late at night if one of her movies was on the late show.

She said "Mommy says Daddy spends all his money on cocaine and cheap, drug-addled whores."

R157 It wasn't enthusiastically received by whon? And how was it ill-advised? What was offensive about it?

Wish Encores would do Over Here with Alice and Emily.

Forget about MAME.... Glennie is keeping busy doing JAZZ at Lincoln Center!

[quote] [R157] It wasn't enthusiastically received by whon?

By the couple hundred bitchy, negative comments that were posted underneath it on Twitter.

[quote] And how was it ill-advised? What was offensive about it?

Ill-advised doesn't have to mean offensive. Ill-advised in that if that's the best they can do, then they aren't going to sell many tickets.

I wish Maureen Stapleton or Judy Holliday would have called me to discuss old movies.

Wasn't Dan Dailey a secret cross dresser?

As mentioned upthread, if COMPANY wants to selll tickets to millennial hipsters, they probably shouldn't compare it on social media to two TV shows that are 26 and 22 years old.

That's ill advised. And offensively DUMB of them.

Lypsinka's muse......

[quote]Forget about MAME.... Glennie is keeping busy doing JAZZ at Lincoln Center!

Well, isn't she the sly one. Trying to sneak up from behind and get an Oscar by going EGOT. She figures if she gets a Grammy, then the Oscar people will be pressured into giving her the big O. She can further milk her plea by being the oldest EGOT winner if they would just give her that precious little gold man.

[quote]Excerpts from works by Ted Hughes, Conrad Aiken, Edward O. Wilson, Louise Glück, Tony Kushner, Judith Clark, and others will be read by Glenn Close, with surprise guests to be announced. Joining the performance will be Wayne Brady, Justin Vivian Bond, Amy Irving, Adriane Lenox, John Cameron Mitchell, and Eli Nash.

Justin Vivian Bond?? Is that old queen still alive? And is it his/her day to be a man or a woman?

Holy moley, SHORTBUS, R497. I'd forgotten that regrettable thing even existed.

Bond is still active, but are any of those other young actors still even working?

[quote] Bond is still active, but are any of those other young actors still even working?

I think the Asian woman was a news broadcaster and she got fired for doing the movie. One or two of the gay sex scenes are hot, but overall the movie is just too weird. It took a long time for John Cameron Mitchell to get it made. I remember they kept advertising for sextras in the Village Voice. Then six months would go by and you'd see the ad again. A friend said, "Well, JCM just got another thousand for his movie."

The sad part is that there are moments of true brilliance in the movie. The Ed Koch monologue is quite touching, when he's talking to the young man about NYC and the AIDS crisis.

And the song I linked above has some deep truth, "You find your demon's your best friend" really has some punch when you think about it. But overall the song loses its effectiveness because of the stupid double entendre "we all get it in the end" in a sex club.

Dolores Gray triggers me.

Love that Vera Hruba Ralston film clip. I didn’t realize Shostakovich wrote music for Republic pictures.

[quote]Wasn't Dan Dailey a secret cross dresser?

I'm sure that was just a silly rumor.

Justin Vivian Bond is alive and well, and recently appeared in a new adaptation of Orlando at the Vienna State Opera.

I can’t stand Justin Vivian Bond. What a nut, and not remotely as talented as he thinks he is.

[quote]Wish Encores would do Over Here with Alice and Emily.

No Paper Mill should do it, they don't scrimp on sets and orchestras. They should get Alice Ripley & Emily Skinner and if it's terrific, they can pack their trunks and can go to the Great White Way.

Who's going to see Tituss Burgess warble Sondheim at Carnegie Hall on 1 Feb. with Jane Krakowski, Michael McElroy, Orfeh and Lillias White?

Is Emily Skinner still a two ton Tessie? When her career took a nosedive, she fell into a vat of Ho-Hos and triple chocolate ice cream.

[quote]Speaking of Gypsy, what's going on with that? Streisand finally surrendered it seemed and then Amy Sherman Palladino stepped in to direct and then we heard nothing.

Do we really NEED to see Lauren Graham's Rose?

[quote] Movie musicals are a-comin'!

West Side Story redux!

Mean Girls the Musical!

Fun Home, with Jakey G!

The Prom, with Meryl!

And a TV version of "Young Frankenstein." Will they get Cheno to play the role she was supposed to originate?

"It's like MGM in the Freed era"

...except there's not one decent, memorable new song in the bunch.

[quote]Is Emily Skinner still a two ton Tessie? When her career took a nosedive, she fell into a vat of Ho-Hos and triple chocolate ice cream.

Aren't you charming, r507? Where the fuck have you been? She spent a year in The Cher Show bomb on Broadway, so I can't say much about her career, but she dropped the weight and looks just fine. You, on the other hand, are still a cunt.

Speaking of The Cher Show, I believe that was Michael Berresse's most recent appearance on Broadway (as Bob Mackie). I heard he is directing an new off-Broadway musical, Darling Grenadine. Has anyone seen it?

It’s not just “The Cher Show.” Emily Skinner dropped the weight about seven years ago, and has done a number of shows since then. She looked very sleek as Phyllis in the Follies part of Prince of Broadway.

R481/R509, you forgot about Tick...Tick...Boom which starts shooting in early March.

Uberhack Rob Ashford is all set to direct Glennie in SUNSET BOULEVARD, Dead chimps will keep appearing from under the furniture.

A clip of Cameron Dallas - let's be extremely charitable and call it singing - in Mean Girls. I don't think even the Weisslers have stooped this low when it comes to stunt casting.

Also, he's been reposting videos of his performance (again, very charitable) that his fans have been recording - so encouraging them to record more. If the producers really want to make money, they should invite Patti to a performance and then broadcast the aftermath on pay per view.

I want to see a musical adaptation of Clueless or Cruel Intentions (and I mean something on Broadway, not dinner theatre starring ex-disney channel stars). With the right talent behind it as far as the book, scoring and lyrics go, both films would serve as great basis for a musical. Come to think of it the 90's were full of great witty teen films that would work great as stage shows. Why does Broadway only focus on 80's films like Beetlejuice and Groundhog Day?

I saw Skinner play Phyllis in FOLLIES and she was fanfuckingtastic.

[quote]I want to see a musical adaptation of Clueless or Cruel Intentions

I remember when WICKED first came out, I thought that the songs "Popular" and "I'm Not That Girl" could easily fit in a CLUELESS musical. "Popular" when Cher and Dee makeover Tai and "I'm Not That Girl" when Tai realizes that Elton is more into Cher than her.

So, R518, are you trying to say the score of Wicked is generic?

[Quote] I want to see a musical adaptation of Clueless

There is a musical adaptation of Clueless. Disney Star Dove Cameron starred in it off Bway a few years ago.

It was awful.

In fact Cameron kept missing performances, likely because she knew was an POS it was.

Why do theater fans like to pretend that “the understudy was just great” really matters?

People go to see the stars, whether they are billed on the marquee as such. It doesn’t matter how good the understudy is, by definition he/she will never be whom the audience wants to see.

Mean Girls needs to close. Clueless the musical was trash.

Business Insider:

Trump is threatening a damaging new trade war with the United Kingdom after Brexit

^ oops

I never miss a Thelma Ritter musical....

[quote] Why do theater fans like to pretend that “the understudy was just great” really matters? People go to see the stars, whether they are billed on the marquee as such. It doesn’t matter how good the understudy is, by definition he/she will never be whom the audience wants to see.

They like to claim they knew so and so before they too became stars, like they discovered them.

R525 Thelma won a Tony for that role.

It was a tie, r527!

R520 I mean a real Broadway musical with a suitable budget, talent behind its inception, and put on in a real theatre. That dinner theatre bullshit doesn't count.

I wouldn't call the Signature Center a "dinner theatre," R529. (I'm not R520.) It's a pretty respectable venue for new work.

The weirdest thing about the CLUELESS musical (that I have no memory of) is that there doesn't appear to be a creative team, ie, writers associated with it. Both Playbill articles list "Amy Heckerling's CLUELESS" and the choreographer. DId they interpolate pop songs from the movie? Sing karaoke? Did the cast improvise new songs on the spot each night? Weird.

It all sounds pretty ghastly. I don't really think most theatregoers want more shows about teens. I think there's a need to see complex, interesting adult lives onstage. That's part of why we're seeing COMPANY.... again.

Uggh. Thank you, Wikipedia:

[quote]Clueless is a 2018 jukebox musical based on the 1995 film of the same name written by Amy Heckerling. It is loosely based on Jane Austen's 1815 novel Emma, updating the setting to modern-day Beverly Hills.[1][2] The musical premiered Off-Broadway on November 20, 2018, with an official opening on December 11, in The Alice Griffin Jewel Box Theatre at The Pershing Square Signature Center. Performances ran through January 12, 2019. As a non-traditional jukebox musical, the show uses '80s and '90s songs as the entire score, with lyric changes to fit the scene. It features classics such as "Torn" by Natalie Imbruglia, "Say My Name" by Destiny's Child, "Kids in America" by Kim Wilde, and "Beautiful Life" by Ace of Base.

No wonder it ran 7 weeks.... and most of us have no memory of this ever occurring. And why set it in modern day Beverly Hills, using songs from the 80s and 90s? Terrible ideas abounding.

[quote]Uberhack Rob Ashford is all set to direct Glennie in SUNSET BOULEVARD, Dead chimps will keep appearing from under the furniture.

At least this will provide gainful employment for the Gummer spawn.

Why do we need to see teen musicals at all? How about something adult for a change?

R515 That was painful. I guess to be in a Broadway show you don’t have to have talent anymore? Just have a bunch of followers on social media and you get your name in lights. Why are all these young kids wasting their time going to college to get a degree in musical theater when they should be cultivating their Instagram/YouTube following and save all that money they would have spent on college? It frightens me to think what the future “stars” of Broadway will be like.

Anyone see Thelma Ritter in NEW GIRL? Must have been some performance to tie with Gwen dancing her ass off.

What's also odd about having Cameron Dallas in MEAN GIRLS is that there are many, many more organic opportunities for stunt-casting:. Almost any living female former SNL castmember, Lacey Chabert, hell, even Lindsay if she's kept on a short leash.

Dolores Gray looks and sounds sensational in that clip. Thanks for posting!

I saw New Girl in Town, and Ritter was fine, but just the usual Ritter, pitch-perfect in a role she was born to play but not someone you were desperate to see in a musical.

Verdon, however, was really something, because besides her dancing she was a terrific actress. I still remember the incredibly glowing smile on her face at the end of Act One, in the center of a line of dancers all doing a can-can-like thing as the curtain came down. The idea was that troubled Anna Christie was now going to rise above her awful past and feel not desired by thugs but loved.

Lacey Chabert would be a great choice, considering she actually has a background in singing.

Unless Cameron is getting his ass out during his performances I doubt folks will be flocking to his Mean Girls shows.

R536 In fairness, this all only arose because Kyle Selig had to take some time off, so they booked Dallas to fill the gap. Still amuses me that "I was starring in Mean Girls with Cameron Dallas" sounds like a Jenna Maroney line.

R540 He's certainly showing his ass during this run, though not quite in that way

ANYONE CAN WHISTLE needs a brand new revival with a director who can bring a fresh look to it.It would also need three top names to bring in the bucks after the musical theatre fanatics were done seeing it.

Irish Rep's New Girl...

Kyle Dean Massey, Claybourne Elder and Bobby Conte Thornton performing You Could Drive a Person Crazy at BroadwayCon (god, they're still doing that?)

The book for "Anyone Can Whistle," to put it kindly, sucks and needs to be left in the '60s where it belongs. Nothing dates faster than a 1960s notion of avant garde and "edgy."

Laurents did kinda lampshade that.

"(to an African American man) Occupation?" "Going to schools, riding on buses, eating in restaurants." "Isn't that line of work getting pretty easy these days?" "Not for me. I'm Jewish."

I have no fucking idea who Cameron Dallas is, but with that voice, he sounds like when the school football jock got a role in the spring musical to boost ticket sales. Just painful. Then again, Chicago has been doing this kind of awful stunt casting for 20 years now. At least at the start of the run, they'd grab someone like Brooke Shields who wasn't known for being a musical theatre performer, but who did actually have a little bit of a knack for it. This kind of stunt casting is what's killing musical theatre and, to be honest, at the prices they charge, this is truly unacceptable.

The only way Anyone Can Whistle can work is by keeping the score and tossing out most of the book. It always amazes me that Arthur Laurents could write something like Gypsy which is considered to be the best book of any musical of all time and then turn out clunker after clunker. I even think his West Side Story book is pretty lousy.

I think it's interesting that Thelma Ritter could actually sing a bit. She doesn't do the "talk sing" thing, she actually sings the notes, and she holds her pitch well. Her trio number, "Flings," is a highlight of the show.

R538 You're old enough to have seen NEW GIRL IN TOWN in the late '50s? I'm not ridiculing or being sarcastic; I'm genuinely impressed and wish I could pick your brain about that era. I've always had a fascination with how much the sixties changed. The decade started out an extension of the '50s with photography/Television/newsreels still being predominantly in black-and-white. Then everything turned to color around 1966, which was around the time that the hippie movement was starting.

I also have an equal fascination with how much the teens (1910-1919) changed. For example, hemlines rose higher, women bobbed their hair and ditched the corset, and automobiles were more common by decade's end.

Jeremy Harris seems insufferable. Most playwrights I know would kill to have anyone attend their show.

Anyone know what exactly is going on with the Jerry Herman invite only memorial that ATC is baffled by?

New Girl in Town, 46th St. Theatre, May 14, 1957 to May 24, 1958

R538: girl, you old...!

We did Anyone Can Whistle at UCLA in the late 1970s. My understanding was that it was Sondheim who sent us everything that had ever been written for the show including all of Laurents' scripts (I honestly cannot see Laurents doing that, but who knows?) It was a huge mess. Everyone must have been on some fabulous drugs. That is the only explanation.

Dear God, enough is enough, Ben Brantley. Retire already. You have nothing new to say.

"Nothing dates faster than a 1960s notion of avant garde and "edgy." ="

It was part of the whole counterculture/"the inmates are running the asylum" movement of the 60s: ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST, KING OF HEARTS (movie), MARAT/SADE, MAN OF LA MANCHA...there are many others I'm sure...

IMO, Man of La Mancha has to be one of the most uninspired titles. The Impossible Dream would've made a far better title, if they were going for a title song. Every time I see or say Man of La Mancha, I cringe.

R550: I don't remember that era so well because, first I was a little kid (I started seeing Broadway shows when I was three), and, second, I wasn't paying attention to anything but the theatre, because I knew it would make me smart and help me to get closer to the destiny I Was Chosen For: To Be Gay and Carefree and Artistic and Dangerous!

[quote]As mentioned upthread, if COMPANY wants to selll tickets to millennial hipsters, they probably shouldn't compare it on social media to two TV shows that are 26 and 22 years old. That's ill advised. And offensively DUMB of them.

I'm very skeptical about this revival -- not so much the gender role reversal -- but the fact that it's SO of its time. The score just SOUNDS so early 70s that no matter what you do in terms of updating a few lyrics, it still sounds like something from 50 years ago. That wonderful Neil Patrick Harris production worked so well, because they kept it in the era while adding some subtle, knowing winks to the present.

But, as for that marketing tactic, you may be surprised to know that Friends is the second most watched show on Netflix, after The Office. I never understood Friends' appeal, but it remains enormously popular and, unfortunately, because of the streaming era, culturally relevant.

[quote] I never understood Friends' appeal, but it remains enormously popular and, unfortunately, because of the streaming era, culturally relevant.

I live in the West Village and every single day there are still people taking pictures of the apartment building they used for the scene changes and intro after commercials. Even the Sex & The City apartment doesn't get as many tourists.

R558, how old were you when you saw New Girl in Town? You have a pretty sophisticated opinion for a kid! And what was that first show you saw at three?

I was eight at New Girl in Town. My first show was The King and I. My favorite was Candide.

I even saw The Vamp, though I don't remember it the way I do the others.

My rarest of all was Holly Golightly (Breakfast At Tiffany's, in Philadelphia), but I was in college then and quite the jaded bon vivant.

Is the new Doubtfire musical any good?

R562 -- I love hearing these recollections. I was born in 1981, but I have eldergay taste in the theatre. With musicals, I'm almost always disappointed by new work from the past 20 or so years. The only musical productions I look forward to on Broadway are revivals. What's been some of your favorite revivals? The one that still sticks with me from recent years is that gorgeous On the Town revival.

Well, I saw Phantom of the opera on Thursday, the first time in about 25 years, and I was pleasantly surprised that the production seemed fresh and moved along at a nice clip.

I had remembered it dragging, but it didn't seem to drag on Thursday. I can see why it has run for over 30 years .

Idina is very good in "Uncut Gems".

Got a great review in Vanity Fair for my role in a new Michael Keaton film, bitches.

R564: I liked the Hal Prince Show Boat. I saw it numerous times throughout its run, and I noticed that after a while the ensemble began to shrink and the staging had to change to accommodate this. So a troop of marching soldiers (to denote World War I) eventually turned into just a few soldiers and an Uncle Same on a wagon pointing here and there in an "I Want You!" manner. It had an eerie quality. And the big line of dancers in the last number became just a few people, making the stage look terribly empty.

The On the Town that I enjoyed was long ago, with Bernadette Peters as the cab driver in a little motorized kiddy car. This was so far back that it seemed as if gay life had only just been invented, and we were doing everything for the first time. So at the curtain calls, the audience (of mostly gay men) went wild for Bernadette but there was less applause for Phyllis Newman, and my friend was irritated. He thought the audience was rewarding Peters because she was such a camp, and I had to tell him, "You aren't gay enough yet."

Fast forward two or three hundred years, if we may -- Is the new Little Shop as charmless as the recording would suggest? Orchestrations, performances, comedy, vocals all sound forced and heavy-handed. I'm not one of those who feels the original is a bible to be worshipped, but the new arrangements, especially, sound busy and full of stuff but devoid of fun. Only Ms. Blanchard seems to be giving an earnest, honest performance. But I haven't seen the show.

I wasn’t overwhelmed by a Little Shop, but it was pleasant and funny and well performed. If anything, Blanchard was the weakest link. She had an interesting harder edge, but seemed visibly insecure in the singing. Her singing on the recording is not really what I heard in the theater.

r570 do you recall if the orchestrations sounded as electronic and humorless as they do on the recording? I understand (although probably disagree with) their choice to walk away from the original doo wop pastiche, but couldn't they have found musical humor and wit some other way? This sounds like generic pop.

That should have been "Uncle Sam."

[quote] Is the new Little Shop as charmless as the recording would suggest? Orchestrations, performances, comedy, vocals all sound forced and heavy-handed. I'm not one of those who feels the original is a bible to be worshipped, but the new arrangements, especially, sound busy and full of stuff but devoid of fun.

Little Shop was never intended to be performed in a Broadway house with a full orchestra. The original, I think, had a piano and a drum. The show was written to be bare bones, performed in a small off-Broadway house. It's like "You're A Good Man Charlie Brown" "Dames At Sea" "Nunsense" and a few other musicals and plays. They just weren't meant for a big, splashy production.

I think FOLLIES at the NT was as definitive as we can ever get. It was filmed. Just make it available.

I agree, R574. Why hasn't PBS shown this yet? Or another streaming service?

I saw the recording in a movie theatre (absurdly expensive tickets, for a taped performance) after almost declining, but I'm so glad I got to see it at all.

Happy 32nd anniversary, POTO.

How much did you pay, r575. My ticket was $20.00 which I thought was quite fair.

I think I paid $25.00 at Symphony Space on the UWS. At the time I balked: it's the screening a movie, ultimately, and I think that's overpriced. (I complain about most live theatre prices too, FWIW.)

Regardless, I'm very glad I saw it.

[quote]Why hasn't PBS shown this yet? Or another streaming service?

It's from National Theatre Live (UK) and has nothing to do with PBS (US).

NTL broadcasts are only shown in theaters -- even in the UK. None have ever been made available for streaming, DVD, Blu-ray, network television, etc. They will occasionally do "encore screenings" if they feel the need warrants it.

For example, the Danny Boyle-directed "Frankenstein", starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller, has been shown repeatedly over the past 9 years. If NTL were ever to license their programs to other providers or services, I think that would be a prime candidate -- with "Follies" being way, way down the list.

r573 the current revival is off Broadway, not on

Although I doubt this is of much use to anybody here, the NT recently made some NT Live recordings available to be streamed in UK schools. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this could be extended internationally and/or to other educational establishments.

Blanchard sounds auto tuned to hell and back on the Little Shop recording. I like her a lot, but I don't understand hiring someone who can't sing the role. It's not like she's a big box office name.

[quote]I think FOLLIES at the NT was as definitive as we can ever get

Ugh. I hope not. I would hate for Imelda's Sally and Tracie Bennett's "I'm still here" to be regarded as "definitive."

July 2005....

Aren't NT productions broadcast on tv? How is it that they show up on torrent sites? Do theater owners copy them down?

Is "Jamaica" revivable or should Encores do it? I've been know to get "Push De Button" stuck in my head for days.

R585 It's someone who somehow has access to the satellite feed being broadcast to the cinemas and theatres. They also upload other similar broadcasts like those from the Met, RSC, Royal Opera House, etc.

Thanks, r587! Makes sense.

Bajour!

So if that's 2005, Angie is either 80 or on the verge of 80. Amazing.

Don't jump the gun, r589.

There has been a JAMAICA running off and on over the past year and a half at a theatre on the UES, but I've not made my way up there to see it. It's on sale through June of this year I think. Harlem Repertory Theatre.

I liked Sing Street, but it has major book problems. The kids in the band get very little to no story for themselves because they waste so much time on the dull parents and the even worse priest who runs the school. All of the adults are completely useless and uninteresting and that time would be better spent on the kids, all of whom are marvelous.

Also, the older brother does nothing but mope around in bed the entire show, yet he's given the 11:00 number and it's totally unearned. And the handling of their money song, "Drive it Like You Stole It" is totally anticlimactic. It should be a showstopper, but the way it's sandwiched into the show takes half the wind out of its sails.

There's gold here, definitely, but they need to completely restructure the show (and a scenic redesign would also do wonders) and play it to its strengths, which are the kids. They are really talented. But I doubt they'll do anything.

Has Ben Platt had work done?

Nope. He's still hideous.

You mean on his face?

It re-opens on Broadway with previews starting on 3/26, R593. Not a lot of time to restructure anything. It's possible, but far more likely it'll be just minor tweaks.

Once there, it will disappoint more people at higher prices and then probably close at a loss.

Sigh.

[quote]Has Ben Platt had work done?

Looks like he signed up for the Perez Hilton package.

THIRD MIDNIGHT!

R595 I didn't say it was successful

One Midnight Gone!

Last!

Bonjour!

HAZEL FLAGG!