Profile for sparklingtonic2

sparklingtonic2 said: "…Thanks for the information. I've bought tickets to a Sunday matinee and will hope for the best. :)"

To follow up, I’ve just come from today’s matinee, where Miki Abraham was in for Alex. Although we were disappointed when we first saw the cast list, Miki was phenomenal!

Plexsis said: "CD coming 11/24

Vinyl coming 3/1/24"

That's awesome!! Thanks!!!

My apologies if this has already been asked and answered, but I'm about to buy tickets and had a question about views. As a general rule, I like to be in the orchestra section up close to the stage, unless there's something particular about the show that makes that a bad idea (e.g., a lot of action taking place on a second level, lots of projections, etc.).

I purposely haven't been reading about this show because I don't want any spoilers. But can anyone comment on whether there's any reason to be farther back?

FWIW, I looked at the photos on A View from My Seat and Seat Plan. For Peter Pan Goes Wrong, I think that a close seat looked fine. However, another show appears to have had a more elevated set. That's why I'm wondering if anyone can comment on how it is for Harmony.

Thank you!

JSquared2 said: "Alex was out this past Weds for both shows. The understudy, while competent, unfortunately didn't even come close to projecting the humor and vocal power that Alex brings to the show."

Thanks for the information. I've bought tickets to a Sunday matinee and will hope for the best. :)

 

TaffyDavenport said: "Considering that most of the action takes place on the second step up, I think the front row looks very far from ideal, and certainly not worth the premium prices they're charging for it..."

Thank you, yyys and Taffy! I see what you mean about the step. I booked the tickets for Orchestra Row E. Can't wait for the show!

 

jr88 said: "I saw the show last week from Center Front Mezz Row 1, seats 104-105 and loved the seats. Mezz comes very close to stage in this theatre so I felt close to the action. The railings are sufficiently high, but didn't interfere with my view of the stage. I'd say go for it!"

I did it! We snagged Front Mezz A109 and A110. I can't wait to see this incredible show again from these seats!

Thanks for the advice!

Can anyone comment on the views from the Orchestra first row? The photos from A View from my Seat seem different for each show. (For A Doll's House, the front row view looks fine; for Head Over Heels, the stage looks too high.) If you've sat there, especially to see Merrily We Roll Along, it would be great to hear what you thought.

dramamama611 said: "All three leads are scheduled for all performances. Groff and Radcliffe have always had excellent attendance. (I don't know about Mendez... But I don't remember hearing anything negative about hers )"

Thank you so much!

Another quick question: Can anyone comment on the stage height at this theater? After poring over the photos on A View from My Seat, I think it looks high. I often sit in the front row, but for this theatre, I wonder if it's better to aim for a few rows back. Can anyone who's been comment?

BCfitasafiddle said: "...That being said, I have a good feeling about Sutton. She makes roles entirely her own and it'll be good to see her get down and dirty. I'm looking forward to her performance."

Totally agree. In fact, lol, I had a dream about it last night!

 

Does anyone know whether Ghee, Borle, or Hicks have days/nights they take off or any announced absences for December? I didn't see anything on the show website, but I wanted to check here too.

Thank you!

Similar to the OP, I'm wondering if anyone knows whether Alex Newell has any planned absences in December.

I understand that the show will be fantastic either way, but we really love Alex Newell and are hoping to catch them.

Thanks in advance.

Does anyone know whether Groban, Ashford, or Matarazzo are out on any particular days/nights? I'm planning a Christmas-week visit and am hoping to see all three of them.

Thanks in advance!

hak5 said: "Anyone know how long Corbin Bleu is going to be in Little Shop?"

I have the same question about Constance Wu. I didn't see anything in the announcement.

Thanks in advance!

My apologies if this has already been discussed (I'm trying not to read this thread in detail to avoid spoilers), but does anyone know if there are nights when any of the leads are off?

I saw her in Chicago a few months ago, and she was fantastic. I saw the show on two different nights with mostly different casts, and Charlotte was my favorite of all the leads. I also love her in the Carrie bootlegs; she seems to understand the gleeful awfulness of Chris more than other a lot of actresses. I'd make the trip to NY to see in her in something new. Hoping it happens!

I've just binged all 10 episodes of the podcast and am waiting for the book to arrive. What an awesome achievement! Congrats to all who were involved. I really enjoyed all the interviews and the history that the podcast unearthed – I definitely learned a lot.

One thing that I found a little sad is the degree to which folks seemed to dump on the original and praise the “revisal” (although I was so glad to hear some, including Linzi Hateley, stick up for the original vision). I didn’t see the original show live; I’ve only watched the bootlegs. But based on that, I think the original is far superior, for many reasons.

Here is just one: At its core, "Carrie" is a horror story. For a horror story to work, it has to feel alive, tense, and perhaps a bit out of control. From what I can tell, the folks involved with the original production understood that. In contrast, the "revisal" bleeds a lot of the energy from the story. The framing device – the interview with Sue Snell – is plodding, overly cerebral, and uninteresting. Especially unhelpful is Sue's whining comment, "What you need to understand is that we were just kids." No. For this story to work, you have to believe that Chris is nasty, perhaps bordering on evil, and (at least initially) powerful. I think that Charlotte d'Amboise and the original production completely understood that. The revisal doesn’t seem to.

Also….

missthemountains said: "I cringed into the ethos when Stafford said they wanted Margaret to be someone you could run into at Whole Foods. Such a disappointing, fundamentally incorrect, and boring read of the character.”

1000% agree. I think another comment made is that Margaret is "all about love." Um, no. She's also about judgment, fear, sexual repression, and violence.

In my eyes, these character misreadings are more evidence that the folks behind the revisal didn’t understand the story and wanted to turn it into an anti-bullying public service announcement. (I think they were afraid of "bullying" Margaret by portraying her unkindly.) I don’t like bullying anymore than anyone else. However, as is the case with many of Stephen King's works, the story is implicitly anti-bullying. It doesn’t need to be gutted of its villains and embellished with a choir of people singing about kindness.

Lastly, folks really seem to love beating up on Terry Hands about his “Greece” ideas. I agree that most of the costumes didn’t work. However, in my eyes, the stark, expressionistic sets and staging did. When you combine those visuals with the sung-through style of the show, it gives the story a dreamy feeling – another quality that meshes well with horror. And the staircase at the end was perfection.

While I understand that the show might have been hard to follow for folks who hadn’t read the book, I think it could have been improved with added music and lyrics. In the revisal, they obviously opted to explain things by using spoken-dialog scenes. Unfortunately, some of those scenes are overly derivative of the movie, and they contain unnecessary detail. (Do we really need to know that Tommy went to Carrie's house to ask her to the Prom? No. The original handling of this scene, embedded within "Do me a favor," was superior.) If I want to see the movie, I’ll watch the movie.

I agree with whichever podcast guest said that the show could have been fixed with minimal changes, such as improving the costumes and special effects. While I understand that the original reviews must have been traumatizing, it’s a shame that the copyright owners seemed too fearful to stay faithful to the original. Hopefully, someday we'll get to see a true revival of it.

As an aside, it's not mentioned in the podcast, but Stephen King himself praised the original show. I couldn't find anything about his reaction to the revisal.