Profile for Stiletto

How do you know, exactly?

Wow...skimming over this thread, I don't think I've ever seen a more stupid collection of speculation. First off, who cares. If the woman is an actor, and she's hot, and she's getting work, then great. Second off...no one knows anything, because the amount of contact pretty much anyone on this thread has had with Michael Cerveris probably amounts to less than five minutes. I'm fairly sure none of you have worked with him or know him personally, it's amazingly crass to sit around making judgem...

One MORE thing. The 'you don't know anything about film' was directed at someone who suggested Donna Lynne Champlin as Pirelli- the comments of someone who clearly knows nothing about film, and I don't know why the post ended up so far down the thread. It wasn't intended to insult you. However, my reaction to you was precipitated by your stupid, irritating comments (get a life, learn to read..how juvenile) so don't whine to me about how I'M acting superior. If you're coming at me with middle ...

Also, I could give less of a **** about my image. This isn't a popularity contest, baby.

Obviously there needs to be song, but having a violin does not somehow justify singing, lovey. My point is that you can act and sing and express yourself without the addition of the instrument. And also, you're not acting any less 'superior', dearest. Actually, you're trying harder to insult me than you are to prove your point. You're still trying to say, how do we justify Toby singing- EVERYONE is singing, so by your logic, EVERYONE needs an instrument, if instrument somehow makes the singin...

Uhm, or he could express himself by..WOW, ACTING. Additionally, this show isn't about Toby. That's Doyle's interpretation, and that, as they've clearly shown by casting JOHNNY DEPP of all people, is not how they're going to go with the movie. People are equally incredulous at singing and playing instruments on screen. Chicago worked because there was MASSIVE editing to the stage show, same with Caberet, and because there was context- jazz in jazz eras. They also used abstractions that were co...

I was replying to a post higher up the thread, I think. Also, incidentally, I can read, and slinging around the Doyle interpretation is still a ridiculous idea on all counts. It's as stupid as filming the Empire State Building for five hours. Anyone who has any concept of the way a movie works (or the difference between how a film audience percieves a movie versus a theatre audience percieving a stage show) could easily see that Doyle's version just wouldn't work for film. It would be stage s...

Wow, do you know ANYTHING about film? It's not going to be a rehash of the revival, it's going to be a period piece, not an abstract interpretation.

Wow, qualify yourself before coming onto a thread and opening your mouth. Stephen Sondheim wrote Sweeney Todd, and also participated in the development of the revival. Ie: if you insult the musical, you are insulting its creators.

Hear hear! Of course, as Michael says, it's something too intelligent to have ever started on Broadway, so naturally there are going to be some people who are really going to have trouble interpreting it.

Too many wordy lyrics for you, huh?

The Paramount tends to run corporate shows, charges more money for worse seats, and frankly, it's just never measured up. They aren't really a producing theatre, they're just a venue for touring shows. It lacks creative atmosphere.

Ooh, it was definitely excellent. Try for the matinee with the post-show discussion, which is held in the rotunda as opposed to on the stage. I got a chance to meet and talk to Allen Fitzpatrick, and it was excellent.

Favourite: Sweeney Least Favourite: Rent