Patti and ANTHYING GOES at '88 Tony Awards

[zamedy]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 10:10am

1. Why does her face look gray?

2. Did this production have a separate troupe of singers and dancers (as it appears here), whereas the recent revival had a single troupe of dancers/singers? In her autobiography, LuPone was quite critical of this company, basically saying many (but not all) were ungrateful and didn't seem to respect Broadway.

3. Pretty amusing to hear Patti say "Oh God!" twice after her dance break. Who cares if she didn't know her mic was still on.

3. Patti is fierce and I enjoy the cast recording from this production over Sutton's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=qW_sd4GYsR4&feature=endscreen

Updated On: 6/24/13 at 10:10 AM

[all that jazz]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 10:23am

I ADORE Patti, but this number pales in comparison to the 2011 revival's.

[lovebwy]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 11:10am

Having see it live at the Vivian Beaumont, I can tell you this number was far superior to the recent revival.

It doesn't quite translate here though.

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 11:14am

What exactly made this cast disrespectful and ungrateful?

[lovebwy]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 11:25am

I believe Patti complained about the number of people that would miss performances on a regular basis.

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 11:29am

Ah yes, that's right.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 11:39am

I think once the chorus comes in, the choreography is far superior to the recent revival, which looked like an advanced tap class. A series of disjointed steps.

This looks like choreography.

Updated On: 6/24/13 at 11:39 AM

[Littleshopofcarrie]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 12:43pm

I like the ending to the title song in the 2011 revival better than Patti's version though. Patti's seems too forced to have a big end note whereas in the 2011 version the ending sort of fit in with Sutton belting it.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 12:45pm

I think once the chorus comes in, the choreography is far superior to the recent revival, which looked like an advanced tap class. A series of disjointed steps.

This looks like choreography.

Agreed.

[Replacement Cast]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 1:40pm

The 1988 chorus choreography is great. Patti's choreography is very simple moves, nothing extraordinary. Just about anyone could pull off Patti's choreography. Go back and look at how simple her steps were.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 1:47pm

Replacement Cast, unless you're alluding to the [tired] argument that Sutton Foster was a better Reno Sweeney than LuPone simply because she is a stronger dancer, I don't see what the simplicity of LuPone's choreography has to do with people's opinion that the ensemble's choreography is better in the 1987 revival than the 2011 revival.

[ABitOnTheSide]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 1:54pm

"The 1988 chorus choreography is great. Patti's choreography is very simple moves, nothing extraordinary. Just about anyone could pull off Patti's choreography. Go back and look at how simple her steps were."

Reno Sweeney isn't a dancing role.

[all that jazz]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:24pm

Yes it is! It's a dancing and singing role!

While Patti's performance was vocally stunning and her Blow Gabriel Blow unbeatable, she just doesn't convey the same excitement that Sutton does in this number. And while it could be argued that the chorus choreography for the 1988 revival was technically superior, I still think the recent one is much more vibrant and overall more thrilling.

[somethingbypuccini 2]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:31pm

Kathleen Marshall's choreography, like that of many of the current "big" musical theatre choreographers, is really lackluster. All about spectacle, and absolutely no story. They are just dancing to fill the music. It doesn't convey anything, there isn't any story. I hate when people lament that musical theatre is dying, but recently, choreography really has been on a downward spiral.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:35pm

It's all a matter of personal taste, of course, but for me Sutton's title number just fell flat. It seemed as though I kept getting more and more dancing shoved at me to make up for the fact that her performance just wasn't that exciting.

And vocally, there's just no contest (to my mind anyway).

[Huss417]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:39pm

Having seen both productions I personally enjoyed the 1987 production a lot more. I never gave thought that the lead was a great dancing role as someone here stated. Is there any footage of Merman dancing?

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:40pm

^ I don't have a lot of objectivity when it comes to the Roundabout revival...it was the first piece of theater I saw after I experienced a really awful loss that made me feel like life was going to be ok. I just remember feeling like the stage was completely populated vertically and horizontally by people tapping their feet off. And it lifted me off the ground.

But that clip from the '88 Tonys is just magnificent. And Lupone was probably never better vocally in a show. Just perfect.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:47pm

I'd say that Reno is a "dancing and singing role" in the same way that Evita is: Which is to say, it's not really, but each revival's leading lady was a dancer and that was made use of.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:52pm

I saw this revival of ANYTHING GOES at the Beaumont. I loved every damned thing about it. The recent revival cannot hold a candle to this one and I saw both!

Patti LuPone led a cast that was nothing short of sensational...my crush on Howard McGillin continues to this day, Bill McCutcheon as Moonface was the ultimate scene stealer and let me not forget about Anne Francine and the lovely Kathleen Mahony-Bennett as Evangeline and Hope Harcourt respectively.

The 1987 revival was THE TOP!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 2:54pm

Yes it is! It's a dancing and singing role!

It depends on the talents of the performer and how they're utilized. Reno could be staged as a singer/dancer or just a singer. There is nothing in the script that dictates how much she dances in the show. A good director and a good choreographer will make Reno shine in any number, regardless. Patti's Reno wasn't a "dancer" and didn't need to be which is really how I always imagined Reno. Sort of like a Bette Midler. You can cast and stage a triple-threat Reno, but by no means is it necessary to the part.

Updated On: 6/24/13 at 02:54 PM

[lovebwy]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 3:41pm

YES!!! Anne "Flora Simpson Reilly" Francine was AMAZING!!

One thing that showed how great the 1987 was compared to the newer version was when Moonface put the dog in his pants. I was on the floor SCREAMING laughing. In the revival that moment was quite lame.

[Amalia Balash]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 3:48pm

I saw both the 1987 Lincoln Center revival and the most recent revival (with Stephanie J. Block). I enjoyed them both, but the 1987 show was one of my favorite evenings of theater ever. Loved the energy, the voices, the songs, and the dancing. It all came together wonderfully.

[a-mad]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 4:15pm

I hadn't seen this in years... she is sensational.

I forget... was it considered an upset when Joanna Gleason won the Tony for Into the Woods - or was she favored? I love Joanna Gleason, and I love Into the Woods... but I would have expected Patti to take home the Tony that year for such a showy part. Perhaps they wanted to award Into the Woods as much as possible with Phantom being so huge, I dunno... anyone know more?

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 4:30pm

"but I would have expected Patti to take home the Tony that year for such a showy part"

It just goes to prove that "showy" does not always equal "best." Though I do love the footage I've seen of Patti in the show I don't the sense that Joanna Gleason's win came out of nowhere (both are pretty spectacular based on the footage that exists). My question would be does anybody remember if Judy Kuhn or Alison Fraser were really given much of a chance at winning that year from the public perception, or did it seem as if the real race was between Patti and Joanna?

[Musicaldudepeter]

Posted: 6/24/13 at 7:05pm

@a-mad... Patti won the Drama Desk for Leading Actress and Joanna Gleason took home the Drama Desk for Featured Actress (They put Gleason in featured as Bernadette Peters was nominated for the Leading Actress DD as the Witch)... When Peters was not eligible for the Lead Actress Tony, they put Gleason in there and she won it... I guess that year it was Drama vs Comedy, Baker's Wife vs Reno, in the same way that Corden and Hoffman battled it out for the lead actor Tony in 2012 for their respective plays... Gleason was a different kind of tour de force in Into the Woods and I think nabbed the Tony because her role enabled her to show many different palettes than Patti's did...Arguably, every role in ITW is a featured role because it has an ensemble feel to it so Gleason would easily have won the featured actress trophy that year which would've allowed LuPone 100% to take the leading actress Tony.