It is really a homogenized show and back than it was the same way. It was like Ozzie & Harriet if you get my drift. It is on retro tv station now and I do not even bother watching it. It was boring and doubt a musical could change that. It would be like taking a Hugo and one morning you wake up and it is a Cadillac
The actors all look great. And physically everything appears first rate. But comparing it to "Annie" would take a giant leap of faith. Leaving aside Annie's fantastic score it had a fully developed story FDR, Daddy Warbucks, Miss Hannigan, orphanage, depression, cute little girl, dog, golden locket. it was just packed with goodies. Plus it was squarely aimed for children. Who is this aimed for? I hope at least the story is strong.
tazber said: "I'm pulling for this show. I don't really know why since all I know about is from this thread, but it looks colorful and fun. The show will live or die on Blackhurst, and by all accounts so far she's doing a great job."
Oh, Honey... I sooooo love your optimism, but (even as a former Chicago actor, knowing not one, but two reallytalented Chicago actors I've worked with in the past who are in this production) despite all good intentions, the current Chicago reviewers make good sense.
There are a lot of strikes against the show that have not been addressed in the writing. Additionally, the score (with minimal exception) is pretty run-of-the-mill. Some plot/character elements are just plain "wrong" (and I use quotation marks purposefully).
Optimistically, anything can happen, but like the premiere of "Beaches" at Drury Lane Oakbrook, the hype of presenting a world premiere, pre-Broadway production doesn't always match up with the reality of a quality show that will absolutely play on Broadway.
Not a negative... just how things play out.
EDIT: And for the record, Drury Lane Oakbrook produces many, many excellent productions. It's my understanding that the recent premiers of Beaches and Hazel are primarily due to the hiring of one, particular associate (who's name has been published in the past, but unfortunately escapes me, now).
Kudos to her (DANG IT... I'll update if I can find her name again...) for takin' a chance!
One of the virtues of that original production of Annie (still never equaled) is that it was never squarely aimed at children. It eventually did attract family audiences, but it was a success with adults first before ever becoming a "family show".
Begin at the beginning and go on till you come to the end: then stop.
It's my understanding that the recent premiers of Beaches and Hazel are primarily due to the hiring of one, particular associate (who's name has been published in the past, but unfortunately escapes me, now)"
Beaches premiered at Signature Theatre in Arlington last year.
I haven't seen this production, and can only speak about last year's workshop. The book is a bore, except when it's idiotic. It feels as though several writers took turns on alternating scenes without actually reading each others' work, so the story and characters are mindlessly inconsistent. Bonkers Johnson and his story make absolutely no sense. Nor does the manipulated "problem" with Mrs. B wanting to pursue a career. The score is nothing more than serviceable, with several power ballads that don't jibe with the semi-camp/frivolous tone of the book. Klea Blackhurst did a gargantuan lifting job with the leaden material, but it would take a star with the power of Angela Lansbury, Carol Channing, and Ethel Merman rolled into one to make it work, and Blackhurst just isn't a star.
The workshop gave the feeling that then-director Lucie Arnaz was attempting to make the story/book work, so I find it odd that these producers would jettison her in favor of promoting Joshua "Lots Of Random Movement But I Have No Idea What's Happening" Bergasse to the helm.