The NEW Night Music at The Kerr Thread- Page 8

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 3:35pm

Here's the deal about the ages. They're too young. Especially for modern theatre audiences who, if anything, are growing in the opposite direction today.

Back in the 1930s in movies and even up to the 1970s, women who were "about to be 40" were considered middle-aged in our culture and past their primes. Most parents had children when they were in their early 20s. They weren't getting married and just starting families in their late 30s as they are now. It was a different world back then.

So to think modern audiences, especially modern American audiences, are going to watch some 35-year-old who played a teenager last year somewhere, lament and reflect about how old they are, and how they're trying to find love at "this stage of their life," is only inviting audiences to have a very BAD reaction. They're not going to relate to it at all, which will trivialize the characters and their desires ... which is the entire play, actually.

If anything, Desiree should be pushing 50, not 38. Fredrik as well. Charlotte and Carl-Magnus should be in their early 40s, and he should be a manly dragoon, not a boyish soldier. They need to be "seasoned." It helps the material resonate.

I stand by my opinion that this is an ill-conceived concept from the start. And it stands to piss of a lot of audiences, who may not even understand why they're feeling so uncomfortable about watching actors 15 years younger than they are, going through their midlife crises on stage.

They can go next door and see an actress of the exact same age, playing a green witch, just starting college.

Updated On: 7/30/09 at 03:35 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 3:39pm

Its not really a question of agreeing or disagreeing, its a question of agreeing with Nunn's direction of the characters. There actually is no specific age given for Charlotte in the script so any sopposition about a rivalry based on age is personal interpretation of the role. If I were directing NIGHT MUSIC, would the age difference be something that I would explore - yes. But from a textual standpoint a rivalry based on age difference is not definitive.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 3:40pm

Are any of you actually reading my comments before jumping on them? I'm criticizing the concept and the choice of (a bad) director.

I'm not criticizing the actual production or its performances.

READ, people. Read. And comprehend first. You're not, so far.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 3:42pm

^ I think Michael Bennett's last comment was directed at me...

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 3:43pm

Best - yes I agree but you do on some level have to take into account who an actor reads on stage. Len Cariou was 32 when he played the role on Broadway; obviously he read (or was able to read) much older.

If the actors playing Charlotte and Malcom read as early thirties (as they did on Broadway originally) and Desiree reads as 40; which I think Waddingham does - the age seperation still exists - and I think it does exist for this production.

As I said before - the way the actors appear on stage in terms of age isn't the problem with the production nor is it very different than the norm.

Updated On: 7/30/09 at 03:43 PM

[Scripps2]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 3:53pm

"READ, people. Read. And comprehend first. You're not, so far."

Don't be so conceited.

The first reasonable (in the truest sense of the word) post you've made is the 03:35 one.

By your own admission much of the others are rants.

Please post a similarly reasonable explanation of "Pouts of a Summer Night? Frowns of a Summer Night? Tears of a Summer Night?".

[theatreguy]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 3:59pm

best12bars, if Charlotte is in her early 40's that would make her 20+ years older than her younger sister (who is Anne's age, 1. While I agree that Desiree, Frederik and possibly Carl-Magnus could be in their 40's or 50's, unless the script is changed Charlotte can't really be much older than mid-20's.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 4:05pm

best12bars, if Charlotte is in her early 40's that would make her 20+ years older than her younger sister (who is Anne's age, 1. While I agree that Desiree, Frederik and possibly Carl-Magnus could be in their 40's or 50's, unless the script is changed Charlotte can't really be much older than mid-20's.

she could be a half sister. I agree that Charlotte probably isn't in her early 40s, but it's not impossible.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 4:06pm

There is no reason that Charlotte couldn't be ten years older than her youngest sister. Particularly as it wasn't at all common 100 years ago for a woman to have 8-9 children. I think the character is late twenties personally, though again, the script doesn't say specifically.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 4:16pm

Charlotte's sister has "renounced men, and is now teaching gymnastics at a school for a retarded girls in Bedelheim."

Something like that. I doubt she's 18, like Anne. Even if they did go to school together.

Hey, at least they have pretty trees in that photo.


And "Scripps" I don't owe you anything. So just turn it off. State your own opinion on the subject at hand, if you even have one. But quit policing mine.

Updated On: 7/30/09 at 04:16 PM

[Scripps2]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 4:25pm

"And "Scripps" I don't owe you anything."

You're quite right - you don't. I was making a point - that's why I didn't bother putting a question mark at the end of my sentence. Subtle, eh?

But I shan't be intimidated by your threats, your conceit or your hypocrisy.

My opinion can be found on this thread:

https://www.broadwayworld.com/board/readmessage.cfm?boardid=3&boardname=bway&thread=984692


Updated On: 7/30/09 at 04:25 PM

[mscarlyon]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 5:06pm

There are numerous indications within the book that support the choice of a 40 year old Desiree. Anne describes her as "ravishingly beautiful", a comment that could only have occurred to a girl of 18 as recognition of a true sexual rival. You could argue that a woman of 50, however beautiful, could never seem a rival to a teenager.

Desiree has the supreme confidence of a woman still in her physical prime to reveal her naked body to Fredrik, the love of her life, within minutes of their first meeting in 14 years. I may be wrong, but I think most women in their late 40s or older would have very mixed feelings about doing such a thing (unless they are Madonna!).

Fredrik and Desiree's affair therefore took place when she was in her early twenties, which seems very believable to me, and obviously Fredrika can logistically be no older than 13.

Desiree and Fredrika have an very open, intimate relationship which suggests they are relatively close in age. Fredrika is certainly a precocious 13 year old, but I can believe a mother of 40 could talk as she does, not 50.

My main point is that lost love, regret and missed opportunities are as familiar to those at 40 as they are at 50. 40 is a very difficult age for both woman and men, where the perception of sexual appeal starts on a downward trajectory, the urgency to make everything right is greater than ever, and before it's too late and the hormones have called time on a woman's sexual and fertile viability.

I do feel that in the hurry to cast someone older that there are few WOMEN who can speak for the veracity of Desiree as a woman of 40. I speak as a woman in her 40s with some authority!

best12bars, I understand your point about age, and how you feel the modern audience won't relate to a 'younger' Desiree. I don't think that matters. If she finally lets her guard fall in that final scene with Fredrik, and in "Send In the Clowns", believably, it makes no difference whether she is 40 or 50. We relate to the fact she has lost her chance to retrieve her true love, and to live a "coherent" life with him and her - their - daughter.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 5:30pm

All points well-taken, mscarlyon. I don't discredit the feelings you described (quite well in your post). I do think they resonate deeper with a slightly older cast, as I have said. And I do think it will cause many in the audience to feel unintentionally and even subliminally uncomfortable with their own "lost youth" at such a perceptively "young age" in today's world. As they celebrate their own three-year marriage, and their 18-month-old child, while they watch Desiree and Frederik, same ages as they are, talking about recapturing their lost youth.

I also have a couple of minor issues with your ages and script facts, unless they have modified them from the original.

Desiree was already an established leading lady when she and Fredrik had their affair 15 years ago. He went on tour with her back then, which they discuss in Act 2 and "remember" together in Act 1. I suppose she could have been "established" as a leading lady of the stage in her early 20s, but I would guess, more likely, late 20s.

EDIT: And presumably, Fredrik was already out of law school, or he couldn't have gone on tour with her. Also, he has a son, Henrik, who is 19 or 20. Even if he were 35 now, he would have been 15 (!) when his son was born. Doubtful.

I still think when the older actors aren't much older than Anne and Henrik, the "smile for the fools" is going to seem overindulged and trivial.

Although, if this were being made as a film now, I think the ages you described could work. The camera is less forgiving and more revealing. And the perception of age on film is different than it is on stage. It's different in real life, too.

Updated On: 7/30/09 at 05:30 PM

[mscarlyon]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 6:08pm

I think it's a little naive to suggest that a modern audience can't *relate* to an early 20th century European drama (read Scandinavian, and thus Ibsen etc), and to accommodate to a woman of 40 at the time of "A Little Night Music". Many will easily sympathise with Desiree's situation and certainly not all of today's 40 year olds have recently-created families.

As far as I am aware, all Fredrik says in Act 2 is that he failed to sit through most of her performances during their time together. No-one is suggesting that he is the same age as Desiree. Fredrik I believe should be mid to late 40s, even 50, allowing that he was married before his affair with Desiree began. This would mean that his son was born, quite reasonably, in his late 20s.

The only line that Trevor Nunn changed to adapt Desiree to the age constraints was that she played "Hedda", not "Phaedra". In which case it is perfectly possible that she had an extremely successful stage career in her late 20s.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 6:19pm

Just to be clear, I have a problem with Desiree being/looking thirty-five. Early 40s is better. Late 40s, in my opinion, is best and ideal.

"I think it's a little naive to suggest that a modern audience can't *relate* to an early 20th century European drama."

They won't have any problem with the drama or the Ibsen/Scandanavian setting. Where did you see that I said they would? They will have a problem with her being 35 and saying the things she does in this play. And I think it's a little naive to think otherwise in today's world.

[BroadwayBound062]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 6:28pm

I wish Erin was playing Anne

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 6:31pm

While Erin may seem more appropriate as Anne, Charlotte is a MUCH better role. It's a Tony winning role.

[mscarlyon]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 6:42pm

Age 40 is where Trevor Nunn's places his Desiree in London. Unless you have seen Hannah Waddingham's performance and feel it is not so (and I believe it is a performance that is very believably 40), there is no reason to place it at "35". But it is very clearly not "late 40s" or "50" and I cover this in my earlier post.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 6:54pm

mscarlyon--Several others in this thread who have seen the same production say she looks 35. Check the previous pages. It's all there.

I was basing my earlier remarks on those observations of her looking 35 to "late 30s." I stand by my opinion that this is just too young for Desiree to be facing midlife crisis.

You think she looks early 40s? Great. That's a approximately a seven-year difference and definitely adds a lot of credibility to her situation. Mid to late 40s is still ideal for a modern production catering to today's theatre audiences. Cheating it ahead a few years (to late 40s) will only add to the audiences' sympathy and empathy for her.

I'm not saying they'll be "upset" if she's 35. But they will likely think, "she's too young to be having these feelings." Which instantly trivializes her situation and dismisses the leading character of the play. Not a great idea. Why chance it?

EDIT: And based on that photo of her on the previous page, she doesn't even read 40. Not close.

Updated On: 7/30/09 at 06:54 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 6:58pm

You know what? Just cast a 65 year old Desiree, and let's call it a day.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 7:00pm

Works for me! Actually, no.

But neither does this ...



Trying to recapture her "lost youth?" Oh, please.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 7:07pm

Lol, Besty, she's clearly losing her time very late in her career
People are really missing the point of Besty's posts. I wholeheartedly agree with him.
I'm with those who are wishing this somehow ends up being scrapped altogether, especially if Nunn is insisting so much on Waddingham whom I have zero interest in seeing tackle this role.

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 7:21pm

Those who are having such issues with Hannah should just not see the revival. That's the most simple solution. If it's getting you so agitated, just skip the production. It's that easy.
Updated On: 7/30/09 at 07:21 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 7:22pm

So is getting back into your cop car and stopping the thread "police woman" routine.

It's that easy.

[mscarlyon]

Posted: 7/30/09 at 7:26pm

I think judging it on a photograph is quite simply not acceptable or appropriate! If anyone has *seen* her play this role and still thinks she is playing "35", speak now. I think she is believably 40, hence my previous posts.