Profile for EricMontreal22

Dancingthrulife2 said: "https://youtu.be/nR6A59xARy8?si=Pn3-Nghv6um69Tf3

Found a recording of the opening number of the Donmar production. Truly fascinating. I guess Sondheim deep down believed the original version, or at least the idea of it, should've worked, and this wasa chance for him to prove that. And maybe the revised version worked enough sohe wasn't in a position toopenly reject it or reverse it, so he limited the experiment to the Donmar production. It's also quite interesting that in the Roundabout/Fiasco revival, he allowed the production to add in texts from the original play the musical was adapted from."

Right!  I have no idea how that played, but at least the idea of adding in a scene showing Beth's parents and their concern over Frank's career, would make sense to add to the musical.

Thanks for this clip!  I guess I haven't looked for clips in a while--  That production was so well received (well over a decade before Friedman did her first production) I only imagine Sondheim and Furth realized it wouldn't do any good to shut it down.

Jordan Catalano said: "I hope Jackie gives a defiant curtain call speech at the final performance about how we need to allow for stories of the wealthy since they tell the tale of the “real” America and how Broadway has failed her."

From the little I know of Jackie, only from the documentaries, I get the feeling she'll still chalk this up to a success?

Glad to hear this has been well received. Man, I want to hear this newly included material. Auggie nailed it for me describing the score as sounding like Coleman at his jazziest with Loesser. I hope plans to license this version come to fruition (though I can’t imagine it being done often, I think it still could work with a smaller chorus as I know a university production did.)

Ever since I’ve been a teen in the 90s I’ve heard of this collection of audience film footage that author/collector Miles Kreuger had if silent film a theatre fan had shot over forty years ago—hundreds of hours. Some has leaked to collectors before but it looks like the intention is to finally make all of it available (I want them to jump to that A Littke Night Music footage I’ve heard about). 

“

The Ray Knight Broadway Theatre Films is a unique collection of 16mm silent film shot by theatergoer Ray Knight of Jacksonville, Florida, on visits to New York City during a period of over 40 years.  From the Ziegfeld Follies of 1931 to A Little Night Music (1973), Knight captured on film excerpts of actual performances of approximately 140 Broadway musicals, creatively edited into narrative sequences along with local scenes of New York City and homemade shots of theatre memorabilia.  What was originally intended as a personal souvenir has now become a masterpiece of primitive film art, an unparalleled historical resource, and a national treasure--the single largest collection of moving images of the Broadway musical during its golden years. 

The Institute of the American Musical is making these unique documents available to the public incrementally as they are completed because we recognize their great interest and unparalleled educational value for musical theatre producers, performers, scholars, students, and aficionados alike. As we undertake the work of identifying the musical numbers and performers and preparing the film for publication, we ask for your patience in waiting for the videos of so many important and beloved musicals to come on line. At the same time, we deeply appreciate any funding assistance you may be able to provide to this project, which will allow us to continue this work to research and edit the films with greater speed. Please join our community if your are interested in these films by submitting your contact information so that we may keep you informed as new videos of musicals are posted.   ”

https://www.institute-american-musical.org/theatrefilms

joevitus said: "I agree with much of that, but I'd say the biggest problem with the original Rich and Happynumber (although infinetly preferable to That Frank) is that it's so campy and silly we don't really think of any of these people as a threat or as Frank in some sort of horrible place in his life. If the worst that he's come to is that he's very rich and likes to entertain a bunch of Hollywood phonies, one could think of a lot worse lives to lead. "

I suppose the original 1981 book will never be licensed, but I wish that could happen.  The problems with the show were never with the book, and in fact, comparing the book (via the printer's proof that has leaked with Sondheim's corrections from a planned 1982 printing) with the current version, I think the original book is superior in almost every regard.  I guess that Sondheim and Furth took the criticisms to heart and felt they had to start from the ground up--at least in terms of re-writing the book, but they should have realized the problems were entirely with the production itself--they threw the baby out with the bathwater.  And it's not just losing the graduation framework.  As Erick Neher said in his Hudson Review piece about the revival:

" I need to preface any analysis of Merrily We Roll Along with the declaration that I am in the sizable camp that believes that Sondheim and Furth’s revised version is maddeningly inferior to the original text. The major change is the elimination of the framing graduation scenes. Originally, the contemporary Frank, speaking to the young students, is forced by them to examine his past, delving ever deeper into the sources of his anomie. The title song, which recurs throughout the show as transitional music from year to (previous) year, is a deliberate provocation, a goad by the contemporary students to keep digging: “How did you get there from here?” they ask. “Which is the moment and where?” “How did you get to be you?” At the end of the original production, we finally arrive at young Frank’s high school graduation, and suddenly the moment is juxtaposed with the older Frank, still at his 25th anniversary, edified but devastated by the excavation of the past and forced to confront his younger, optimistic self. The layering of past and present is emotionally overwhelming and, not incidentally, central to the meaning of the show. All of this is eliminated in the revised version of the show. The title song is now not a motivating driver of the show’s backward trajectory, but rather a vaguely abstract expression of its theme by an unidentified chorus of random commentators. And the interstitial reprises have lost their pointed intensity and just feel like gauzy scene change music. The elimination of the framing device was not the only bad decision in the revised version. The role of Gussie, Frank’s second wife, was significantly expanded, turning a small, broadly portrayed character into a large, campy caricature. And in an attempt to make Frank more sympathetic, Sondheim provided him with a dreary song called “Growing Up,” which only makes the character seem more solipsistic than ever."

[. . .]

" The first scenes of Merrily have always been its most problematic, thanks to the backward chronology. Seeing disillusioned, jaded people at the beginning of a show is challenging: who are these unhappy characters, and why should we care about them? In the original version, the graduation scene depicts Frank at a moment of existential crisis, desperate to understand what went wrong. That feels relatable. In the revised version, we meet him at a party at his Los Angeles mansion, a moment of cynical, empty triumph, a parody of Faustian success. The original production cut these early, cynical scenes to the bone, in a hurry to get to the moments in the past where the characters were happy and connected. The revised version significantly expands what is now the first scene, the hideously awful party after the opening of Frank’s new film. The scene plays like a child’s vision of what mean, jaded grownups are like. Furth’s dialogue is so arch and Sondheim’s song “That Frank” so superficial, that the show is hard pressed to recover. In fact, it does not find its groove again until the second act."

(It always seemed curious to me that in the revised version, Furth and Sondheim have made the characters much more repellent--in the original, Mary is at least shown to try to act nice and sober at first, in the revision she comes on as an awful drunk.  And while it's never good to push someone into a swimming pool, that always seemed more understandable than trying to blind someone by throwing iodine in their eyes...)

Here's the full review (it starts with a review of Here We Are, which I agree with as well.)  https://hudsonreview.com/2024/02/the-ubiquity-of-sondheim/

I haven't watched the CBS interview but from Auggie's report they certainly have changed their tune from what was said in the October podcast with Variety that Chenoweth and Schwartz were interviewed on.  It's interesting that it seems their public POV on this has changed (could this have anything to do with the cut that's been discussed?)  https://variety.com/2025/legit/podcasts/business-of-broadway-breakfast-2025-keanu-reeves-1236558634/

Thanks for that.  I haven't seen Hedda yet, but that seemed really odd to me because even in the trailers it seemed apparent this wasn't just an example of colourblind casting where we weren't meant to see that Hedda was played by a black actor. 

Kad said: "Kind of a pretty thin piece, to be honest. Considering the topic- and the fact that it’s centered on two controversies that have mostly blown over- I was expecting something more than rehashing."

I've had this problem with a number of Jesse's "essays" lately (like the recent one about how composer bio pics in the 1940s used to not be very factual.  Really?)

everythingtaboo said: "Surprisingly, the Chess revivalwas a question on tonight's Jeopardy. Considering how early they film these episodes vs the timing of the question, hard not to believe there wasn't some clever tie-in planned."

They mentioned it was currently revived on Broadway.  Did you think there'd be more?

Bentwood Chair said: "They said they’re getting the highest ratings they ever had. Is it that there’s nothing else on cable anymore? and DWTS is what everybody is watching on there?"

I think they're getting the most viewer votes--are they getting the best ratings numbers too?  They are on Disney + now too, which is the only way people who aren't watching live on the East Coast can vote (since it's taped for other timezones)

I've been defending Queen of Versailles' score (mostly because I think it's stronger and more interesting than it's gotten credit for--not that it's top Schwartz) but... compared to Baker's Wife?

Ummm...