I wish they would hurry up and mount STORMY WEATHER on Broadway.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
Uggams may be 71, but she's in incredible shape, both physically and vocally. I don't think she looks much older than Patti did when she played Rose a few years ago.
And as others have said, it's a two week run in summer stock. I for one can't wait to see it.
Tonya Pinkins: Then we had a "Lot's Wife" last June that was my personal favorite. I'm still trying to get them to let me sing it at some performance where we get to sing an excerpt that's gone.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.
This is speculation. She may be brilliant; she may be awful. The age doesn't bother me. She is a wonderful dynamic singer who does not look her age. At all. She certainly looks a lot better than Lucy when she played Mam..
I am more afraid of the acting. Leslie is not the best actress in the world. She was awful as Sally Bowles in Cabaret a few years back. I don't think she has the actor chops. I hope I'm proven wrong.
I don't know what your gauge of "a few years back" is, goldenboy, but Uggams played Sally in CABARET in summer stock almost 45 years ago. Considering her body of work, to use that as a benchmark to judge her abilities is bizarre to say the least.
Tonya Pinkins: Then we had a "Lot's Wife" last June that was my personal favorite. I'm still trying to get them to let me sing it at some performance where we get to sing an excerpt that's gone.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.
1 - Leslie Uggams looks amazing and I'd agree she looks 10 even 15 years younger than her age.
2 - Even though this is just a 2-week run at a theatre in CT, I have to imagine there are African American actresses who have grown up dreaming about playing Louise, but knowing they'd never get the chance. I imagine auditions would (have?) been very competitive.
3 - Yes, to Tonya Pinkins. That would have been amazing.
4 - Wait. Wait. Wait. Hold the phone. Uggams played Sally Bowles? [i]EDIT: Looks like the prior poster and I were posting around the same time. Ridiculous that we'd be talking about a summer stock perf from the 70s. Ha.[/i]
I'm sorry, Rose is in her mid 30s when the play starts. Having a 70 year old woman play her is the very height of absurdity.
In my observation, actors can do a lot of stuff. They can play people of different backgrounds and experiences. But when it comes to age, a gap of 30 freaking years is impossible to pull off. Very distracting and bizarre to an audience.
lovebwy, did you think it was "the very height of absurdity" when Patti LuPone played the role at almost 60?
Tonya Pinkins: Then we had a "Lot's Wife" last June that was my personal favorite. I'm still trying to get them to let me sing it at some performance where we get to sing an excerpt that's gone.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.
At the risk of being labeled the "R" word- which I am not, by the way, the bigger issue I have is that it's historically inaccurate. I'm all for color blind casting, but not when it's documented otherwise. I think that is ignorant of the theatre company. It looks like a ploy to make money drawing people in with a name, but disregarding facts. Could make a theatre buff not take the production seriously. can someone please produce this show with Tony Award Winner, Beth Leavel already!
Along with what PalJoey states about 'suspension of disbelief' -- I believe there also comes with a certain passage of time the theatrical right of 'exercise' surrounding classic, iconic plays and roles that begins to nullify qualifiers like age/race from the equation.
The most obvious example of this is in Shakespeare's works - in particular Hamlet, where the title role (a teenage boy) has been professionally successfully played by actors of all ages, races and genders, despite their suitability for the character as defined in the text. In these instances, it becomes one of witnessing the individual experience each actor brings to the part and how that illuminates the play anew. -This 'exercise' of performer is indeed one of the underlying reasons that the Bard's works continue to be validated again and again as timeless and essential.
I understand that GYPSY isn't Shakespeare, and a sixty year old play isn't the same thing as a 400 year old play, but I do think the role/play have proven themselves essential and classic enough to support interpretations and casting choices that continue to explore the piece in new directions. Certainly a performance by a 70 year old African American woman isn't going to diminish the status of GYPSY as one of the most brilliant pieces and roles in the musical theater canon. All it can possibly do is allow us to approach the show with new eyes, and that can only be a good thing.
Phillytheatreguy- echoing your fear of the "R" word. And understanding this is a small theatre in CT so I don't really care...but
We can say that someone is too old or too your for a role and that is OK. So age-blind casting is something we can make fun of.
But when it comes to colorblind casting-you are slammed if you don't agree. I am all for colorblind casting as long as (1) the character isn't real - Rose was a real person. She was not african american. A diverse Mary Todd Lincoln would not work for me. Sorry. It is reality. (2) there isn't complete disbelief - a white young Eponine growns into an african american adult Eponine. Or a diverse Rose has a white Rose for her daughter. Be consistant. We wouldn't have white people portray the Africans in Mormon-would we?
At least in the case of GYPSY, I think you have to acknowledge that the play is a total fiction- so much so that it is subtitled "a musical fable"-- to go back to the historical accuracy of the actual events and people that inspired it is essentially futile.
And while the piece may take place in a specific historical time period- it is not a play about race- taking the historical inspiration out of the equation, you can absolutely make a case for the "story" to still be relevant with black actors- and could even carry that into the historical context that there were black performers on the vaudeville circuit.
In other words, the real "Rose Hovick" may not have been black but there is no real reason why "Rose Havoc" as the character is called in the play couldn't be.
Dame Judith Anderson on playing the role of Hamlet, at age 72.
Dame Judith toured the United States, and I was lucky enough to see her.
Everyone in this thread making fun of Leslie Uggams playing Rose, go ahead. You're just missing a great performer attempt a great role. It's YOUR loss, no one else's.
And the same goes for those who have the temerity to make up silly, insignificant rules about when it is and is not permissible for performers to play roles with different complexions.
I suppose you people in this thread will think a 59-year-old woman has no right to play the mother of Jason's young children. Well, don't worry. She kills them in the end.
Kind of funny that the reaction was entirely negative when Streisand wanted to play it in a film adaption at 70. Although I understand that a film and summer stock are completely different.
Apples and oranges. A film has nothing to do with a stage production. There are close ups in films, and it's a medium that tends to play less with casting (all ROMEO & JULIETS on film are cast with age appropriate actors). I also think no one thought Streisand was a particularly interesting casting choice, especially considering her brand of lazy acting in the later part of her career. Good for Uggams and good for the theatre that got her to play the role, what a coup! Also, don't really get the comments about her race. I love that no one has issues with how fictional GYPSY as a whole is...until someone goes and casts a black actress, then the makeshift historians of the board start throwing the phrase "historically inaccurate" as if that makes them sound smarter and less racist. I treasure the chance to see Tonya Pinkins play Momma Rose, and though she must be tired of playing girls, Anika Noni Rose would be a fabulous Louise.
"Some people can thrive and bloom living life in a living room, that's perfect for some people of one hundred and five. But I at least gotta try, when I think of all the sights that I gotta see, all the places I gotta play, all the things that I gotta be at"
Totally unrelated to Gypsy, but in 1977 Ms. Uggams played the mother of Olivia Cole's character in Roots, even though Cole is one year older than she. Two years later, Cole played Uggams's mother in another TV miniseries, Backstairs at the White House.
"It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Going back to the notion that this won't work because Rose is "a historical figure": Go up to 50 random people on the street and ask them to describe Rose Hovick.
^^Last time I checked this wasn't a random people on the street board. Next, with the fictional nature of the piece, I'm not discussing the script, which I also believe has a subtitle "based on the memoirs of Gypsy Rose Lee", I'm talking about pure fact, I agree with the poster suggesting a diverse Mary Todd Lincoln wouldn't work for them. I just think it is asking for any critic or other serious theatre-goer to discount a lot going into the experience, why set yourself up for that? Yes would other women of color be great at this role, probably, I'm not debating her talents, I'm debating appropriateness. Let's just get Annika Noni Rose to play Evita then and see if it's not an issue, or is that work completely factual as well- no debate she could do it though. I actually have tickets to see Norm Lewis in Phantom, I think he will be thrilling in a role that doesn't specify race. I dont't see the need for all black versions of this and that, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Next to Normal in NY a few years back, why is it news? Society tells us it is, average people tell us it is, but I doubt anyone would see a Porgy and Bess with an all white cast. Reverse racism is an issue bigger than these message boards, it was my goal to state fact, not otherwise.
So if being a good actor/singer is all you need (race, age or anything else should't apply) - I can't wait for:
"Porgy and Bess" starring Sutton Foster and Ramin Karmiloo "1776" with Brian Stokes Mitchess and Billy Porter "Ballroom" with Lila Crawford Barbra Streisand in "Spring Awakening" Elain Stritch as "Pippin"
I don't really get the "historical" accuracy angle on things like EVITA or GYPSY when the history is obviously being presented in such a theatrical non-historically true way.
Anyone looking for a history lesson about the real Eva Peron would be a fool to think they are going to get it from an Andrew Lloyd Webber rock opera...
To that end, I don't have a problem with a black actress playing Eva Peron because I feel what Webber and Rice were interested in exploring was the metaphor of a woman's rise and fall from power through the mythological legend of Eva Peron- not necessarily anything supported by factual evidence. The musical also utilizes a number of completely surrealistic story telling devices. How could historical accuracy even be entered into the equation?
Obviously the situation is a little different when the piece is PORGY which is largely about racial struggle. But that's not the case in GYPSY. Beyond the historical reality of the inspiration behind it, the "true" age and race of the characters isn't relevant to the story