Scandalous Preview Thread - Page 4

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 10/15/12 at 3:39pm

CPD- No, Kathie Lee never could or would play the mother. I don't know Kathie Lee at all, but I would hazard a guess that at sometime in the early development of this musical that she considered writing this role for herself. If Carolee ever gets the chance to take a vacation you can bet your bottom dollar that she would step in for a week or two.

Honestly it's so wise of her not to open the show though. Even if she was brilliant no one would be able to get past the fact that it was Kathie Lee and it would certainly add a level of camp to the proceedings which would sink it immediately.

Like I mentioned above, I believe Kathie Lee wrote this in extreme earnestness. In fact it's SO earnest, and that's where the downfall of it turning boring and pedestrian began.

[broadwaybabe1234]

Posted: 10/15/12 at 6:05pm

Heres my two cents: (i'm not a big poster on here thus no credibility but i thought i would throw it in nonetheless)

I very much enjoyed the show! I thought Carolee Carmello gave the best performance of her career. It was truthful and humorous and not to mention her voice is brilliant as always. The score suit her voice fantastically especially the songs "Why can't i" and "For such a time as this." I think the story is incredibly engaging and so interesting to hear of a woman that has really been forgotten by history. There were some contrived melody lines and a few lyrics that made me tilt my head but they were very soon forgotten by the stunning performance of Carmello. Which i think is a reason to see the show. i felt like it was a master class in acting watching Carmello effortlessly transform from a 50 year old to a 17 year old and then through out the rest of the story age accordingly. For the first time writing a musical, i think Kathie Lee Gifford does a stand up job even though i have never been a fan of her before. I also thought the set (as unattractive as it my be) matched the story very well and represented Angelus Temple through out Aimee's journey. What can i say, i loved the show! and i will be going back more times still!

There are definite changes they need to make but i am sure it will happen before opening night. Remember 1992 Guys and Dolls? How horrendous the first preview was? But now it is recalled as one of the best revivals ever. We can't judge a show based on its first preview, especially a new musical. They have a lot of work to do but i have faith it will get done.

[LimelightMike]

Posted: 10/15/12 at 6:39pm

How was ... everyone else? LOL

[broadwaybabe1234]

Posted: 10/15/12 at 7:04pm

LimelightMike-- both Hearn and Ryan are very good though under used. Because it is Aimee Semple McPherson's story i tired to focus my review on Carmello. Both of the two supporting characters make the most of their roles but because the story is so focused on McPherson, they are not as big as one may like them to be. Ryan's big song (the whore house one, i can't remember the name at the moment) is a lot of fun and i gives Mcpherson a foil in a different way from Hearn who is also a foil. Hearn was also great in his songs though i did feel they were the weakest songs in the score. Still i felt the very nicely completed the piece of theater and were stand outs vocally.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 10/15/12 at 7:24pm

I don't remember that GUYS AND DOLLS ever being in bad shape,
I saw it early and it was glorious.

Sounds like SCANDALOUS could find it's audience, Lee seems to be working very hard at selling it. She should figure out how to use her ex-co-star Hearn, he's certainly a treasure (Ryan, too).

[Nick Murphy]

Posted: 10/15/12 at 9:17pm

Guys and Dolls wasn't working when they started previews. There was no chemistry
between Sky and Sarah. She was replaced and things improved.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 10/15/12 at 11:12pm

Ah, that, is quite different.

[broadwaybabe1234]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 1:45am

Also the whole opening sequence was in awful shape when they started previews but they used the span of previews to get everything worked out. I just wish people wouldn't be too harsh to the first couple previews because it does seem to effect the length of the run (i.e. Women on the Verge).

[dramamama611]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 6:31am

I'm not sure how much our site really affects the length of a run. AND if the internet age DOES have the extreme effect, then the medium needs to keep abreast and realize that there isn't as much forgiveness. Maybe that's why the out of town tryout seems to be on the rebound.

[leefowler]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 10:46am

There seems to be a notion that in the bright, happy days before internet chat boards, Broadaway shows ran happily without any negative criticism. Musicals in previews were allowed to attend to their work in undisturbed bliss, making cuts and improvements to their heart's delight, without fear of comment.

Having worked on Broadway before and after the internet, I don't see much difference. There's always been plenty of gossip about any show on Broadway, and if a show was in trouble out of town, it's all anyone could talk about. You could argue that gossip might spread a bit faster now, but that's about it.

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 1:21pm

Lee, that's my experience too. I think the big difference is that, in the old days, you had to find a payphone that worked or wait until you got home to call your cohorts. Now you can let everyone know what you think the moment you think it. It took longer back then, but the word still traveled.

[ljay889]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 1:27pm

^ Word may have traveled, but it must have remained more private than on today's message boards. All a producer or director has to do is check this message board an hour after a first preview to see what people are saying, good or bad. They can have instant access to our opinions. And in several cases, I bet our opinions have helped made changes. ANNIE overture? The message boards can be a double-edged sword, in my opinion.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 2:15pm

Is this still running at 3 hours?

[somethingwicked]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 2:19pm

Whizzer, Kathie Lee is adamant about saying she's never even considered playing Aimee. Christine Ebersole did the very first reading of the show, and then Carolee was always involved from that point onward.

From a Playbill interview:

"Was there ever a point in the writing process that you considered playing Aimee yourself?

KLG: Oh, please. Half of finding out what you are in life is finding out what you're not, and I, sir, am no Carolee Carmello. Maybe her mother.

But when you first started working on the show, you were younger than Carolee is now. Playing the part never crossed your mind?

KLG: Not for one moment. First of all, the score is so demanding; I have four notes and Carolee has four octaves. She's so good in this. I've been in this business forever, and I've been lucky to work with so many talented people, but I've never met anyone like her. Carolee's a thoroughbred. I know War Horse is already on Broadway, but it's going to be in two theatres this fall! [Laughs.] But maybe if we run a long time, I could start making cameos as Louella Parsons."

http://www.playbill.com/features/article/170866

Updated On: 10/16/12 at 02:19 PM

[MissAnneThrop]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 2:21pm

can anyone post a song list and the character list w/ understudies?

[After Eight]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 10:02pm

^

All that information is listed on the IBDB website.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/16/12 at 11:04pm

I just saw the show and (God help me) I kinda liked it. I expected a ridiculously preachy 3 hours that was going to constantly slap religion in my face and there was none of that. For a musical about the church, it held this Atheist's attention. Sure it's a tad long and some of the music is extremely poorly written to a point that it's laughable, but it's far from the whole thing being like that. All in all I'm glad I saw it and the $29 I spent I felt was worth it.

[dave1606]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 12:47am

Can we talk about this show. I mean really talk?

I don't want to have people telling me that I reviewed this show in previews, and that it will be totally changed by the time it opens because I can tell you that the basic elements of this show will be the same when it opens.

I will go back and see, but for now, this is the flop to beat this season. It kept me more awake than Chaplin, if only because it was louder.

Two technical aspects that will be tightened up by the time it opens; sound design and lighting. Both were atrocious tonight. Sometimes the orchestra was completely overpowering the singers and other times lighting cues were totally missed. I only mentioned because they seems particularly bad tonight. Again, not an issue because this will be fixed quickly.

The biggest issue really is the set. It results in some of the most inept staging since well, Leap of Faith. The comparisons are not only apt due to the faith element of both shows, but because both of them ran into the same issues.

If Leap's giant tent got in the way of the storytelling and made us watch it lumber across the stage, these stairs trap the creative team from every really effectively telling their story. (It's hard to take a trip across the Atlantic when the stairs are STILL onstage). At one point they literally tacked a car onto the stairs.(As in wheeled a segment of the stairs out with the cutout of a car onto them). Yes, I just said that. Audience members around me laughed out load when this was wheeled out.

Spoiler? Finally late in the first act two stagehands come out and help set up a curtain/tent piece that is then ripped down. Incredible distracting and just sloppy.

Another problem that both Leap of Faith and Scandalous have in common is music. Both have far too much of it. There are a ton of songs that could be cut from both shows. In the first act of both, there are moments of almost uninterrupted music. This really makes the show a chore to get through, because instead of any story it is song after song. What makes this worse in Scandalous is that most of these are simply not good.


Carolee is by far the reason to see this. She is giving an incredible performance, even when the material let's her down, and it does constantly.

Just looking at the book, one of the biggest faults is the introduction of unnecessary side characters. Spoiler: We spend twenty minutes on her first husband, only to have him die and never to mentioned again.


Meanwhile, Kathy Lee seems over interested in letting us know how relevant this story is. She goes out of her way to mention celebrities of the day, from mentioning that John Wayne was in Aimee's show to an encounter with Charlie Chaplin. (played by an actor who looks NOTHING like Charlie Chaplin).

There were a few great moments of camp for me though.

Just an example:

At one point Carolee (playing her teenager Aimee) says: He Showed me a whole new world.

Cut to boy wheeled out on a carpet.

The audience completely ignored it, but I thought it was hilarious.


Overall Scandalous seems to have plenty of great musical material, but with just a ton of poor execution. For me the most blame goes to the score and the direction. I really did love Carolee, and would love for her to get a tony nomination, but I am not sure if the material is going to get her there. Still, if you just want to hear her belt for three hours, this is your show.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 12:50am

I would say Roz Ryan is the "reason" to see this. And I noticed no distracting stagehands setting anything up.

Again, this is FAR from the best musical you'll ever see but I also think it's just as far from the worst you'll ever see.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 1:05am

dave- I agree that there are way too many songs/melodies going on here. It's funny: Chaplin suffers from repeating the same three melodies over and over again (Just Another Day In Hollywood/Whatcha gonna do?/Look At All the People) and Scandalous throws a different tune at you every two seconds without any of them sticking.

Both scores though are the definition of mediocre.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 1:11am

Very true. This show could really do with cutting a third of the music in it. There were points where I thought "Seriously? You need to sing about this?"

[jbm2]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 1:13am

How full has the theater been?

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 1:16am

The mezz tonight was maybe 20% filled.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 1:18am

A friend and I were saying Scandalous reminded us of seeing a show at NYMF that had interesting subject material and lots of promise, but was way too long and had too many songs. You say afterward, "This really could be good if they focus the piece, cut a character here, rewrite one there, cut or replace 1/3 of the score and hire a new choreographer."

The thing is after three out of town try-outs and years of time to work on this, if it hasn't been fixed by now it probably won't be. Maybe they even know what needs to be fixed, but don't know how. The Broadway preview period really isn't the best time to be addressing these issues, in the modern era or pre-internet. Dolly was rough out of town, but by New York it was pretty much ready to go. You address big issues out of town. Save the smaller ones for New York, and then open.

[MissAnneThrop]

Posted: 10/17/12 at 8:30am

thank you. i didn't see that up there the last time i checked.