CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF coming back to Broadway with all-black cast- Page 8

[pab]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:24am

"The "all black" thing is a cute gimmick, but let's be honest: that's all it is."

I don't disagree with you on that point because you are correct.

A bunch of teenagers pulling hand held microphones from their jackets to sing with when they already have working head mics is also a gimmick but not many people will complain about that.

Gimmicks seem to be what producers and directors are looking for to sell theatre. How many shows on Broadway today do not have some kind of gimmick?

[StageManager2]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:31am

Pss. Don't call John Doyle's shtick a gimmick lest you suffer the wrath of iluvtheEmcee.

Updated On: 1/7/07 at 02:31 AM

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:35am

>> How many shows on Broadway today do not have some kind of gimmick?

Good point, and to it I reply: when the gimmick works, it seems to work well. AIDA, for example, was a fun rewrite of a 19th century operatic warhorse, but part of the fun of it was all the anachronisms, which truly were the gimmick of the evening. But the director knew how to *work* with them *as a gimmick*.

But how many times has this whole "all black" gimmick been trotted out *successfully*? The only one that comes to mind is HELLO DOLLY, and y'know, that was really a minstrel show more than a Jerry Herman musical. But any straight plays come to mind that were successful in selling this kind of production "concept"?

The idea of an all-black cast in a play by a writer as thoroughly Southern as Williams seems a natural, but CAT? You'd have far better luck with STREETCAR or GLASS MENAGERIE, because the social situations described in the play are far more universal.

[D2]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:43am

I haven't read or seen "The Glass Menagerie" in a while, but the thought of that play with a cast of powerhouse actors who happen to be black has me spinning with the possibilities. What a fabulous thought, SeanMartin.

[EDIT] Just don't let David Leveaux near it.

Updated On: 1/7/07 at 02:43 AM

[LostLeander]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:44am

"As such, to be blunt, it's an insult to black actors: it's rebuilding the barriers we've spent twenty or thirty years trying to pull down. "

Unless they'd be doing the show in minstrel like caricature, how is it an insult to them? If anything, I feel it show great versatility, and show that black actors can do more than August Wilson, and The Color Purple, and the Wiz, and so on.

I'm assuming they're not going to make the production ABOUT Brick and Maggie etc, being BLACK and overcoming the white man, or something Wilson-ish like that; but rather a production where the characters HAPPEN to be black.

What did the Ashley Judd revival add to the material? Because the play is not being performed in its traditional format, does that mean it MUST provide a POINT, other than the ones Williams has already provided? Are his writing the problems of ONLY Caucasians?

I'm not implying that you think this, but I'm just saying that I think it doesn't matter the race, and would view this as another revival of a classic.

Updated On: 1/7/07 at 02:44 AM

[StageManager2]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:44am

Re STREETCAR: Can a black woman be a Southern belle, though?

[gustof777]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 2:57am

if I remember right wasn't Ruby Dee, Amanda in an all black Glass?

[pab]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 3:00am

I had the great fortune to be attending the Eugene O'Neill Theater Center when Geraldine Fitzgerald and her all-black cast of "Long Day's Journey Into Night" came up to visit Eugene O'Neill's house, where the play is set.

It was interesting to talk to Earle Hyman, Gloria Foster and Al Freeman Jr. about their approach to this work and to speak with Ms. Fitzgerald about it as well. Some time later it was equally interesting to watch this piece performed.

I don't recall thinking about the black issue while watching this work, I just thought about how brilliant the characters were being played. Good acting is good acting and good direction is good direction and if they can both tell the story one should not have to focus on the color of the performer. I don't think that any actor (white or black) should be barred or discouraged from playing any role because of the color of their skin if they are competent performers. If that were the case, a lot of classical roles would be off limits.

The general reaction to that production of "Long Day's Journey Into Night" was quite positive as can be read in the following New York Times review:

THEATER: 'BLACK CAST STAGES O'NEILL

Updated On: 1/7/07 at 03:00 AM

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:45am

>> Unless they'd be doing the show in minstrel like caricature, how is it an insult to them?

Good lord. I would have thought it to be obvious, but okay, if I have to spell it out...

How will it marketed? As an all-black production. Sure, it'll have big names -- but what's the marketing hook? It's "all black", and it's being marketed to an audience that will be, as we've seen with similar productions in the past, almost all white. And after the names finish their contracts and move on, then the replacements will trickle in, and the only thing they'll have to market it will be that it's "all black all the time".

And you dont see that as an insult? Amazing.

---------------

I can see LONG DAY working, actually. Again, we're looking at comparable social situations that give the play a certain universality. And sure, Blanche the Southern Belle could be black. Go to New Orleans or Mobile or any other large Southern city, and you'll see for yourself how very possible it would be.

[BroadwayBaby6]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 10:43am

I have it from a reliable source that Audra has already been approached to play Maggie (as the first choice!). The production has yet to be funded and while Audra is open to playing the part, scheduling will be key.

Since this production is far from a done deal (funding, theatre are not quite yet secure), I wouldn't get excited yet.

[dramaqueen2]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 12:25pm

i would love to see this performed, i love the movie version with elizabeth taylor and have read the play many times over.. this is exciting news! thank you!

[Fenchurch]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 1:12pm

I think an all black cast for the sake of having an all black cast smacks of separate but equal.

How about a mixed cast? I don't understand what the problem would be with that.
The actors don't have to play their own ethnicity, that's why it's called acting.

[Carl Magnum]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 1:18pm

This thread makes me love/hate the internet.



And yes a different race take on Streetcar or Glass would be far more fitting.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 1:41pm

(Will I be feeding the troll by responding? Probably.)

Honey, get off your historically accurate high horse. By your logic, only French people should perform CYRANO. Only *real* apes should perform TARZAN. Only dead, ancient Greeks should perform Sophocles-- and remember, those women were originally played by men, so I guess we should go back to that as well, right?

While I can see issues with the internal logic of CAT, they simply don't apply to STREETCAR or GLASS -- and if you bother actually reading the plays in question, you'll understand. So turn off your internet and go to the library for a few hours, then come back and tell us -- in specific -- why STREETCAR and GLASS wouldnt work.

[Calvin]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 1:51pm

Speaking of, pab, Earle Hyman would be superb in this, but he's probably too old at this point.

[BroadwayBaby6]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 2:26pm

We need to have all-black shows because we can't do complete color-blind casting in many shows due to the historical times involved. A black Tevye or a black Julie Jordan would be historically inaccurate. Even shows that have black characters such as Hairspray or Showboat make the black characters secondary and not primary. Making a show or a play an all-black production gives black actors and actresses the chance to play the lead for a change...

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 2:31pm

>. A black Tevye or a black Julie Jordan would be historically inaccurate

So?

Look, I'm coming to see the *actor* perform the role. The skin colour is beside the point if the actor can make me *believe*.

I mean, please, Sarah Bernhardt was one of the premier Hamlets of her time. That's not exactly historically accurate, but she made it work. Frankly, I dont care if the actor is black, white, ecru, or mother-of-pearl as long as I *believe* in the *performance*.

[LostLeander]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 3:41pm

Why can't Julie Jordan be black? If Audra was Carrie, why couldn't she be Julie?

And SeanMartin, I, as an African American, do not see the problem with your marketing explanation. First of all, the producers aren't going to market it as "SO and so Presents: An ALL BLACK Cat On A Hot Tin Roof". I would certainly hope it won't even be advertised as that. I'm sure there will be a poster with the actors on it that will, obviously, be an indication of the race of the cast. And even if they do advertise it like that, that's a marketing problem, not an issue of whether African Americans should be able to perform in it.

And we'll just have to disagree that Cat on a Hot Tin Roof is less fitting for an all black cast than Streetcar or Menagerie.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 4:39pm

SeanMartin keep in mind that this will be a limited engagement much like Raisin. Kenny says something like 20 weeks. No replacements necssary. I could care less about gimmick because honestly we can ignore the gimmick when a black actor will get cast in these things. But come on. Would a black actor really get cast in a mixed cast? No probably not. That's why the all-black productions started. That's why there's a Wiz. Frankly none of this matters. Whatever is done there will always be people who are oppose and people who support it. There's always someone unhappy so I say do it and we'll see. People are so connected to historical accuracy that it's ruining theatricality a bit. Who cares?! You're watch a play, it's not real life. If it's not about race what's the freakin deal? I'm not thinking about how a very thin tanned white person looks playing an aristocratic role set in 1725 France. I'm enjoying the work.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 5:49pm

>> I, as an African American, do not see the problem with your marketing explanation. First of all, the producers aren't going to market it as "SO and so Presents: An ALL BLACK Cat On A Hot Tin Roof". I would certainly hope it won't even be advertised as that.

Well, if you cant see the problem with all-black-just-for-the-sake-of-its-being-all-black-for-a-mostly-white-audience, then that's your problem and not mine. It may not be advertised like that, but that's how it will be seen. And if you're comfortable with that, hey, go for it. Myself, I find it incomprehensibly a throw-back that says the colour of the actor's skin is more important than the part s/he plays, but hey, I guess that's just me.

>> If it's not about race what's the freakin deal?

A production like this is very much about race, thank you.

>> Would a black actor really get cast in a mixed cast? No probably not

Then you dont go to much theatre, do you? Yes, Broadway is still very much a white guy's territory, but I dont think that's something I'd cheer about too loudly, given what's there these days.

But both you and LostLeander simply miss the point: this is stunt casting on a global level (global in the sense of every part of the play, straight across the board). And if you cant see that, seriously there's no hope.

[BroadwayBaby6]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 5:50pm

LostLeander,

Unfortunately we are not yet a fully integrated racial society where Broadway producers will cast a black Julie Jordan in a mixed race production. The casting of Adrian Lester, a Brit of African descent in Company as Bobby, would never happen here. Subconscious racism is still quite prevalent in show business.

Yes, these all-black productions could be consctrued as "separate but equal" but until Broadway casting is truly color-blind, it is better than nothing.

[aspiringactress]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 6:05pm

It is widely accepted that Shakespeare, and most classical text for that matter, can be cast "anything goes", solely because they are classical texts, and in SHakespeare's case at least, originally performed with men. So if we can have an african-american as the king of Scotland, and no one complains, then why is it suck a big deal to try people of different, less expected races in roles and see if they can make it work. They will oftentimes have to work harder if the play they are in seems to rule out their race in the role because of historical circumstances, or for any other reason, but if they're good enough to make me believe, I won't care. Why not try and all black cast of Cat? Who knows how it'll turn out.

[NYC4Life]

Posted: 4/22/07 at 4:25am

WOW! I just read all of this and I am shocked how uneducated a lot of these people are. Rich black people have been in america for years. Land owners pre, during and post civil war. YES, even in the south. do some research and maybe you will learn something. This is an awesome book to read, it will inform you on a lot that is really not talked about.

http://www.amazon.com/Our-Kind-People-Inside-Americas/dp/0060984384/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-9122238-3618519?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1177230327&sr=1-1
Updated On: 4/22/07 at 04:25 AM