FOLLIES - The Intermission is Back- Page 3

[bk]

Posted: 8/28/11 at 3:19pm

"I didn't get that he meant they were "superior," just that they survived without having to hydrate every five minutes."

Well, I'm glad someone got my rather simple point :)

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/28/11 at 8:17pm

I have been reading the book Everything Was Possible, and I just got to the first preview part. It is interesting how Steven Sondheim was convinced they could cut 25 minutes, when Hal Prince was dead set on having an intermission.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 8/28/11 at 8:17pm

yes and many a show from the "olden days" had TWO intermissions b4 2nd act and after. Course THEN it was so folks could grab a smoke!

In the immortal words of Stephen Sondheim Elaine) I have to go to the bathroom!

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 8/28/11 at 11:19pm

seeing the show next week - and not familiar with the it - but think anything over 100 minutes can get rough when you gots to take a leak.

[TheHappyPhantom]

Posted: 8/29/11 at 3:36am

Seriously folks, how is this even being debated??? Think of how long you go without peeing throughout the day! Like seriously, the pee talk is just getting ridiculous (and a little gross to be honest). This should be a discussion of artistic merit.

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/29/11 at 6:41am

HappyPhantom--THANK YOU! Honestly, the only reason this is a discussion is because it's the theatre. For some reason, sitting in the dark for two hours really seems to make people think about their bladders, for some reason. But most people sit at their desk at work all day and maybe get up to pee once or twice. Ridiculous.

Seriously: if you can't go 2 hours without peeing you need to see a urologist.

[chewy5000]

Posted: 8/29/11 at 8:14am

Also, to those suggesting that people can watch a three hour film with no intermission, remember that it's much easier to leave a cinema to go to the bathroom than it is to leave a theatre.

Like modern audiences are actually considerate at all.......

[dreaming]

Posted: 8/29/11 at 11:07am

I am so bummed I didn't get to see it without the intermission. I was so looking forward to watching it straight through.

I've seen A Chorus Line without the intermission, and frankly, didn't notice anyone get up to use the restroom. I think audiences tend to be less disruptive when there is no intermission, because when you let them get up, they're always inevitably late getting back from the restroom or concessions/bar area. (And they bring those stupid souvenir cups back with their ice that they proceed to shake and rattle for act 2.)

Maybe a deal could be struck where it's only for the matinee performances or something? I didn't get up for the intermission the last time I saw it. (In fact, my companion and I didn't want to talk very much-we wanted to see what came next.)

[figaroindy]

Posted: 8/29/11 at 11:51am

Really, I just don't see it as a big deal, either way. If the original staff was dead set against an intermission, I'm sure it could be written into the contract for the show (see "Porgy and Bess" and only black performers)...they didn't, so they don't care. Meanwhile, I'm sure they're happy to have the money coming in...period. I saw it in August with an intermission...didn't bother me at all...I didn't get up during intermission, just read my program and looked around..but it didn't ruin the whole evening for me. I can't imagine ever caring enough about whether there was or wasn't an intermission to make that my judging factor in whether to see a show or not, or whether I'd enjoyed it....let's move on.

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/30/11 at 10:51pm

Apparently there was an intermission tonight.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/30/11 at 10:56pm

Fail

[TheHappyPhantom]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:28am

I think it's fan petition time, folks. Let's tell the creative team to stick to their guns. They should at least release a statement about it.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:31am

Stick to what guns? The intermission was there first.

[TheHappyPhantom]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:36am

...wow....

As in their creative instinct to keep the show focused on it's original intent and not succumb to blue-hair complaints.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:40am

Release a statement? Seriously? They're in previews, trying new things. At least they gave it a try. I think we should be appreciative that this production is actually using its preview period to full advantage.

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:41am

I think we should be appreciative that this production is actually using its preview period to full advantage.

I totally agree. They really seem set on improving the production since DC, and I think it shows.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:51am

They tried it without an intermission, and for whatever reason decided to just keep the intermission. There is not "statement" to be made. They used the preview period to try out a new idea for the production, but decided not to go through with it. That's what previews are for - trying new things to see what works and what doesn't. I wish more shows would use their preview periods more wisely and try new things.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:51am

For cripes sake, I sat through NICHOLAS NICKELBY and that was something like 8 hours long. There were some intermissions, but I was prepared was able to make it through the whole show without changing my Depends.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 12:54am

I've never seen the show live so I can't fully understand or comment on the loss of momentum, but the second act seems to pick up exactly where the first left off. The show probably works better without it, but if you can't take a fifteen minute break and then pick up again right where you left off then there are issues in place far beyond the intermission.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 1:19am

I was prepared was able to make it through the whole show without changing my Depends.

Yes PollyDop but were the people around you prepared to sit with the fumes?

[bwayfan7000]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 1:27am

Cats, there are certainly lots of posters on this board who could explain this in a far more detailed and better way than I ever could, but, to me, the intermission really gives the audience a break at a time when they should still be invested in the way the story is building to the upcoming Loveland sequence. I couldn't fully appreciate the negative impact of the intermission until I'd seen it both of the different ways. Sure, it does pick up right where it left off, but the break felt like dead time in something that should simply be continuous, and I would be willing to guess that even the original production suffered from this when it had an intermission. But, again, other posters would be able to confirm this, where I can't.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 1:29am

A little bit of a Follies tie-in with my comment on this topic. Jane Houdyshell, who's in the cast, played Lisa Kron's mother in the play "Well." Lisa is frustrated at her mother's inability to make herself feel physically better from the chronic ailments that plague her. Lisa somehow overcame a chronic physical malady that she had in her adolescence, and so has little patience that her mom seems unable, (or is it unwilling?) to do the same. Her mother finally says to her, "LISA! Not everybody has the same resources as you."

So I think it's great that people who are prepared to skip the breaks in Nicholas Nickelby had the physical resources to do so -- or at least thought they did -- but everybody does not have the same body.

I think comparing a long movie to a lengthy intermission-less musical is somewhat foolish. For one thing, people get up and go to the rest room during movies fairly often once they go over the two hour mark. Also, movies are not the special occasion for most people going to a show is. Often, they kick off the special occasion with dinner and/or drinks before the show. Beer is, famously, the drink you don't buy, but rent. A large dinner out often gets things moving for people about 45 minutes after consumption. Secondly, getting up and slipping out to the restroom at a movie theater is in no way as disruptive as having to climb over cramped rows in a Broadway house, and it's rendered even more of a challenge when the seasons change and outerwear becomes bigger and bulkier.

Some people have inflammatory bowel disease. Some are cursed with small bladders. In other words, not everybody has the same resources as the camels who think if they can stay put for two and a half hours then EVERYBODY can. Everybody's different and it's not just complaints of the so-called "blue-hairs," who have just as much right to see a show about the distant past as anybody.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 1:41am

People with "inflammatory bowel disease" might want to skip FOLLIES.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 2:01am

"So I think it's great that people who are prepared to skip the breaks in Nicholas Nickelby had the physical resources to do so -- or at least thought they did -- but everybody does not have the same body."

I spit Diet 7-UP on the screen reading this. Thanks for the last laugh of my day, Namo.

[TheHappyPhantom]

Posted: 8/31/11 at 5:38am

Seriously people, it's just a little over two hours. As I said before, how many of you work that long without a bathroom break, or sit at home??? The bathroom argument is not even close to a legitimate issue.