Roman Holiday Previews- Page 4

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 6/7/17 at 3:12pm

Broadwaysfguy: Thanks for your opening-night report. That's so cool that you're interested in the process. I understand the fascination. I often would go to an early preview of a new show (but never post about it) and then revisit it closer to opening. And my experience, from sitting through years of Broadway previews, is: I find it's rare that anything substantially changes. The show is what it is.

By the way, did you revise your original posting? I thought you predicted ''Roman Holiday'' would get some pretty good reviews.

The producers you talked to, might want to reconsider their Broadway plans. Based on the pans from Variety, San Jose Mercury and the San Francisco Chronicle, to borrow a Cole Porter lyric, most critics don't like this show; ''they just like to kick it around.''
 

Updated On: 6/7/17 at 03:12 PM

[Ado Annie D'Ysquith]

Posted: 6/7/17 at 4:17pm

I'm still baffled as to why no one thought to give this an original score, especially since (as far as I know) Porter's music has no connection to the source material.

*starving lyricist waves arms frantically*

[BeNice]

Posted: 6/7/17 at 7:02pm

I got a chance to see opening night last night. I think these reviews are fair and Jarrod Spector and Sara Chase really shine in their comicedic skills and singing especially Chase singing "Beguine the Beguine".  

I think this show would do well regionally and for schools to do.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 6/7/17 at 7:51pm

broadwaysfguy said: "I liked it enough that I would pay to see it on Broadway. Any recommendations to others to go see it would be conditional and pre-framed so expectations are not too high.  

The shows that keep screaming for comparison with Roman Holiday are An American in Paris (AAP) and Nice Work if You Can Get It (NW) both of which I saw about a month after they opened in New York.  Even though this was created by the same team as Beautiful, i don't think its fair to compare these due to the era and impact of Carole King on popular music from 1960 to now, and the Jessie Mueller factor.
I saw Beautiful on opening night during its prebroadway sf run, and there is no comparison between the two shows on the caliber of the show and the audience reaction-Beautiful is simply a much better show.

Assuming continued progress here for two weeks and a typical month  long preview in NYC, I think Roman Holiday by then has a chance to compare somewhat favorably relative to AAP and NW and be an  enjoyable show and evening of entertainment.(less the superb dancing in AAP). If you liked AAP and Nice Work, or like Cole Porter and or Roman Holiday, there's a pretty good chance you will like Roman Holiday. If you revered Roman Holiday the movie and Audrey and hoping for something magic onstage, you could be disappointed, I did think AAP was overrated relative to the hype and reviews and NW underrated.

One of the challenges for me is how can they make the show significantly better, other than star casting. it is a jukebox show, and the songs fit somewhat well given its a jukebox. Its probably impossible to recreate the heat and magic of Audrey Hepburn as I mentioned earlier, so its big shoes for any actress to fill.

Several other season subscribers i spoke with on opening night who watch the tours but are not hard core annual Broadway visitors described it as "delightful", "charming" and "a lot of fun"

Can Roman Holiday be a Broadway hit? I'm still very skeptical. Both AAP and NW had high profile spring launches, massive hype for AAP and big stars for NW.  

It has been fun to watch the show and cast evolve, and I'll probably check it one more time before it heads east.

Thank you for your thoroughness and honesty. Since I loved the movie version of Roman Holiday and don't really see the point in An American in Paris without the dancing, I'm inclined to skip this one. 

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 6/7/17 at 9:11pm

''I'm still baffled as to why no one thought to give this an original score.''

If you scroll through the earlier posts in this thread, you'll find:

1. The Sherman brothers (of ''Mary Poppins'' fame) did start work on an original score in the late '60s, but that project died.

2. Paul Blake, ''Roman Holiday'' producer and co-bookwriter, says contemporary writers ''can't write songs like they used to.''

3. Moreover, Cole Porter's name was a selling point, and they hoped recycling his nostalgic hits, coupled with a recognizable movie title, would be a slam-dunk for a Broadway smash.

Updated On: 6/7/17 at 09:11 PM

[bk]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 12:00am

Yes, and as mentioned early in the thread, the three songs the Sherman Brothers wrote for Roman Holiday are on the Unsung Sherman Brothers CD - the person who posted that wasn't interested enough in Roman Holiday to actually hear the songs.  The three songs are quite charming and do have an Italian "feel" to them.  It broke the brothers' hearts to have the film be cancelled.  Resurrecting these three songs for Richard Sherman was very gratifying - they didn't even have demos on them - all they had was orchestra tracks with no vocals, as the film was cancelled before they could put singers on.  The orchestrations were by Irwin Kostal and they snuck in the recording during the Chitty movie scoring sessions.  I hired singers to do the songs and we recorded the vocals and it turned out great.  For anyone who loves the Sherman Brothers, the whole CD is worth checking out, with two other scores for projects that didn't happen.

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 12:21am

The three Sherman brothers songs are:

The Bells of Roma

So Simpatico

We'll Still Have Rome

One thing a critic said that is very true is that none of the songs has any bit of "italian feel" to them, which surely would have happened if original songs like these above had been composed for the musica;

BK are these songs posted or hosted anywhere so we can hear them?

 

 

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 12:45am

More Reviews

from Patrick Thomas, who posted earlier-the only strong positive review so far

http://twoontheaisle.tumblr.com/post/161072720789/roman-holiday-at-shn-golden-gate-theatre

Theatre Arts Daily-poor review

https://theatreartsdaily.com/2017/06/07/review-roman-holiday-a-new-musical-at-the-golden-gate-theatre/

So, four pretty strongly negative reviews and one positive review

Can't be a great day foday or the producers, director and cast today and I feel for them after putting so much work in.

I don't know for certain, but from the earlier video interviews, I get the sense this is a long term passion project for the primary producer (and book co-author) Paul Blake, who ran the Muni in St Louis for many years and first staged Roman Holiday at the Muni in 2001. They may have all made enough money (and continue to) from Beautiful the Carole King musical to bring this out soon, regardless of reviews or likely length of run in New York. Sometimes and for some folks the goal is just making it to Broadway, like Allegience, or one of my favorite smaller musicals [Title of Show]

 

 

 

 

[Sho-Tunes-R-Us]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 12:48am

broadwaysfguy said: 
"Beautiful" director Marc Bruni has made daily changes to the show since the first preview I saw May 23rd (I saw it may 24 and 26 as well, and each night was better), focusing mainly on some dialogue changes designed to get more laughs from the lines, situational and physical comedy, and also to add some plot  linkages or tighteners (Joe is now a pencil and school supplies salesman so imagine the comedy hijinks attempted here relative to Anya claiming to be a student) 

Shouldn't this read "Joe claims be a pencil and school supplies salesman..."?  He is still very much a reporter.

Anyhoo, I apologize to the board because very early in the thread I promised to review the preview performance on 5/25 and the opening night performance last night, 6/6.  I changed my mind because I felt it unfair to the production to discuss what was on stage so early on in the preview process.

I'm pretty much in agreement with the media critics on this one.  Although the musical was tightened between my first and second viewings Roman Holiday still remains a pallid representation of the film.  The money is up there on stage and some of the talent, but the production should still be considered very much a work-in-progress.  Broadway should not be considered at this stage, but I believe it would do very well touring cities with concentrated boomer populations.  The nostalgia factor for the film combined with the Cole Porter tunes would sell well to the folks just out to have a pleasant evening of musical-comedy. 





 

 

"

 

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 1:17am

Broadwaysfguy: It's ironic, but I think you missed out on posting a pretty positive, albeit mixed, review of  ''Roman Holiday,'' and it's by Linda Hodges on this very site: BroadwayWorld.com. 

Hodges calls it ''a sweet confection of a show for sure, though in its present form, it lacks the meaty bite needed to make it a Broadway special - though not for lack of talent.''

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/BWW-Review-Broadway-Bound-ROMAN-HOLIDAY-is-A-Sweet-Confection-20170607

''Can't be a great day today or the producers, director and cast today and I feel for them after putting so much work in.''

Maybe it's because you wanted this show to succeed so much, or it's because you've gotten to chat with the producers and the director, but you seem really invested in it, and good for you. But it's my experience that all producers, directors and actors put a lot of work into EVERY show they do, at least anyone with any professional pride. Obviously, everyone wants a hit show and rave reviews. And unless you're Max Bialystock from ''The Producers,'' no one sets out to put on a flop or misfire. But sometimes, some shows just don't gel. If there were a surefire formula for a smash, everyone would be using it. It's incredibly hard to make a hit musical. So many things need to go right, and so many things can go wrong. But when everything is in sync, this is nothing more exciting.
 

Updated On: 6/8/17 at 01:17 AM

[JBroadway]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 2:24am

I saw this tonight. I don't think that this is the worst musical I've ever seen. Not by a long-shot. But I do think this is the worst KIND of musical. A stale adaptation of an old film that does nothing to shed new light on it, with a jukebox score of songs that feel so shoehorned in that they stop the show dead in its tracks. Even I, who regretfully have never seen the film, could tell that this was a pale imitation of it. The story also felt very cliché and outdated. Obviously, that's because it was based on a 1950s film, so it's nobody's FAULT that it feels cliché. But it does make me wonder why the creative team felt that this story needed to be re-told now. The songs added literally nothing of value to the show. The ONLY number I actually enjoyed was "Experiment," but only because it used ballet to tell the story of the scene. I actually enjoyed the plot well enough, especially since I was unfamiliar with it, but that made it all the more frustrating to have it stopped cold for the unnecessary Porter numbers. 

Also, would it be so very blasphemous of me to say that Cole Porter's music (along with that of many of his contemporaries) has not held up over time, at least in the context of musical theatre? Can't we appreciate the talent and historical significance of these old songwriters without pretending that their music actually works for the kind of integrated storytelling that modern musicals demand? I respect and admire the genius of the Wright brothers too, but I'm not going to get in one of their planes. 

Having said all that, I was invested in the plot enough to maintain my attention during the book scenes, if not the numbers. I enjoyed the performances too, particularly Drew Gehling's. He and Stephanie Styles have nice chemistry, and Georgia Engel is hilarious and charming as always. I also LOVED the design. The gorgeous set is a feast for the eyes, and the lighting and costumes are also beautiful. If this goes to Broadway, I wouldn't be surprised if they took home a couple of design Tonys. 

Updated On: 6/8/17 at 02:24 AM

[Big Apple2]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 2:51am

Thoughts from tonight's viewing. This is a very short show. From beginning to end, it clocked in at exactly 2 hours including a 20-minute intermission and an extended overture. 

 

The book really isn't that strong and at that length, it went quick. If I had paid full price for the ticket, I would be more critical of the show. But at $40 rush prices, that's a fair price.

 

Staging is good and set pieces evoke the feeling of being in Rome. Stephanie Styles, Drew Gehling, Georgia Engel and Jarrod Spector are all good. But Sara Chase's musical numbers as Francesca felt cabaret like and might be due to her character. Some of the jokes were funny but others were recycled and dated, especially those from the Countess. 

 

Comparisons to An American In Paris is also fair up to a certain extent since that one is a much better production overall. I don't see RH getting the same Tony nominations as AIP did. 

 

This show will find an audience on Broadway. But it shouldn't expect to get top dollar for ticket prices. Otherwise, it would be expecting too much in an environment that is just too competitive.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 3:43am

''This show will find an audience on Broadway. But it shouldn't expect to get top dollar for ticket prices.''

If a show doesn't ''expect to get top dollar for ticket prices,'' it shouldn't go to Broadway. You can't make any money (let alone recoup) if a lotta audiences don't pay full-price (or a sizable portion of that); no show subsists off $40 rush seats. ... Someone else suggested that ''Roman Holiday'' ''would do well regionally.'' There's no evidence for that. It played St. Louis in 2001, and Minneapolis in 2012, and that didn't exactly lead to any other regional productions (or inspire any producers to take it to NYC back then).

More to the point, the larger goal of ''Roman Holiday'' isn't local productions; it's about making a mint on Broadway and beyond.

Updated On: 6/8/17 at 03:43 AM

[bk]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 4:21am

broadwaysfguy said: "The three Sherman brothers songs are:

The Bells of Roma

So Simpatico

We'll Still Have Rome

One thing a critic said that is very true is that none of the songs has any bit of "italian feel" to them, which surely would have happened if original songs like these above had been composed for the musica;

BK are these songs posted or hosted anywhere so we can hear them?

 

 

 

"

We haven't posted the full songs yet - but you can hear samples at kritzerland.com.  I may put it up on iTunes at some point, but we like to maximize the CD sales before we do.

[Fan123]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 7:20am

In other 'musical adaptations of Roman Holiday' news, there was also a Takarazuka version it seems. Here's a clip from that show and a PR panel (all in Japanese).

http://www.bilibili.com/video/av4178512/

[lite2shine]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 11:18am

In addition to Takarazuka version in Japan, there was another full scale original version as well as three person version (Princess, Joe, and Irving) of Roman Holiday in Japan. I bet this Cole Porter version will do great in Japan as it seems they love Roman Holiday. Here is a link to three persons version. https://www.youtube.com/embed//tWZbapA4p9o

Updated On: 6/8/17 at 11:18 AM

[Big Apple2]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 10:13pm

Wayman_Wong said: "''If a show doesn't ''expect to get top dollar for ticket prices,'' it shouldn't go to Broadway."

Well then, good luck to the show and everyone else involved in it. This is the second film to stage adaptation I've seen in the past six months with tryout runs out West and questioning its viability on Broadway. The other one being Amelie, recently closed. I'm hoping to be proven wrong on this one. 

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 10:49pm

a few additional thoughts...

the show has been selling very well on the run and there are almost no orch seats available for the last two weeks.  they have been survey monkeying every ticket buyer and it would be interestong to see the customer feedback

i like to watch the crowd coming out after the show and calibrate their reactions. having been at 4 performances i can say that the buzz has been very positive coming out, especially the two more recent viewings. 

this may be a show the critics hate and the average theatre goer enjoys, like my wife did

roman holidays plusses include great songs, abeloved movie story, two romances, a 2 hr visit to rome, a few great dances, a decent number of laughs, a pretty princess, some cool costumes, a bar fight, and a beloved tv star cracking jokes.

no painful suicides, no terrorist attacks, no duels to the death, no moral lectures, no infidelity, no achingly depressing songs, so certainly no tony chances

have our board members and critics found a lot that could be better? you bet

it's a pleasant show, as an early poster said

is there room for two hours of pleasant on broadway, at least long enough to get a cast recording out?

i think we will find out this fall!

ps im not sure i agree every show goes to bway to make a ton of money-i cant imagine many folks thought allegience title of show that dreary recent chita rivera show or other niche shows would have huge financial success

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 10:57pm

Okay I'm going to call a spade a spade...Roman Holiday is a good film...a classic rom-com...but it's not groundbreaking just because you tack on some of Cole Porter's much used and abused catalogue of songs. 

[JBroadway]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 11:07pm

broadwaysfguy said: "it's a pleasant show, as an early poster said. is there room for two hours of pleasant on broadway, at least long enough to get a cast recording out?"

 

I can't speak for the average Broadway-attending tourist (the most likely audience for this show), but the way I see it is that we need to stop giving shows a pass just because they are merely pleasant. People often defend flat, mediocre shows by saying, "it's entertaining" or "it's not meant to be high art" or other similar statements. But then you look shows like "Hello, Dolly!" "The Play That Goes Wrong" "She Loves Me" etc. - shows that have no real substance, but still manage to achieve excellence through the comedy and the profound sense of joy they provide. You don't have to be mediocre to be light, fluffy entertainment. 

 

[Big Apple2]

Posted: 6/8/17 at 11:44pm

And now, a word about the Golden Gate Theatre.  For me, the venue is much a part of the experience as the show itself.  The main auditorium is nice.  There is plenty of leg room in Orchestra and the sound system is great.

But the carpeted stairs leading down to the men's restroom is old and heavily stained.  There's a piece of masking tape tacked on all the way across to warn patrons of the first and last steps.  The mirrors in the restroom have big dark spots and one of the wash basin faucets was not working.  The entire men's restroom needs some serious updating.

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 6/9/17 at 12:06am

and the worst part of the golden is taylor street

one of the saddest areas of the edge of tenderloin 

ive seen on the way to or from the theatre: people shooting up, people performing sex acts, people urinating and defecating, and people acting in crazy or threatening manor.

my best advice for anyone attending this theatre is to come and go via lyft/uber or cab

the steep narrow steps down to the mens room are actually dangerous and ive seen people trip on them

the sound in the theatre is good typically and theatre itself is mostly very charming

[broadwaysfguy]

Posted: 6/9/17 at 12:06am

and the worst part of the golden is taylor street

one of the saddest areas of the edge of tenderloin 

ive seen on the way to or from the theatre: people shooting up, people performing sex acts, people urinating and defecating, and people acting in crazy or threatening manor.

my best advice for anyone attending this theatre is to come and go via lyft/uber or cab

the steep narrow steps down to the mens room are actually dangerous and ive seen people trip on them

the sound in the theatre is good typically and theatre itself is mostly very charming

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 6/9/17 at 12:09am

''Is there room for two hours of pleasant on Broadway?''

Unless there is major recasting and/or rewriting of ''Roman Holiday,'' I would speculate and say no. In San Francisco, its only real Broadway-level competition is ''Hamilton'' at the Orpheum (which is soldout). But in New York, it'll be competing with 3 dozen other shows, a number of which have stars or much better-known titles. In S.F., an orchestra seat for ''Roman Holiday'' is about $100. In NYC, that same seat will be $175 and up. Big difference. For those prices, Broadway audiences want and expect more than ''pleasant.''

Plus, ''Roman Holiday'' is playing only a limited, 4-week visit in S.F., where it benefits from being part of the SHN  subscription season. In NYC, would it have a large enough fan base, name recognition and want-to-see factor to keep it running for an open-ended run?

Look, ''Amelie'' went to the Big Apple (& bombed) with much better reviews from the Bay Area. The S.F. Chronicle raved and called it ''a dream of a musical,'' and gave it the Little Man jumping out of his chair. On the other hand, the Chronicle says ''there's not a standout singer among the cast'' of ''Roman Holiday,'' and gave it the Little Man falling asleep in his chair. Granted, reviews are not the end-all and be-all, but it's probably not a very good sign when your show gets panned by the major hometown papers AND Variety.

''I'm not sure i agree every show goes to bway to make a ton of money''

That'll be a great surprise to the 17 producers listed above its title.

 

Updated On: 6/9/17 at 12:09 AM

[Big Apple2]

Posted: 6/9/17 at 12:22am

Oh, and one more thing. There were two women ushers sniping at each other - an older lady and a younger one.  This was before they opened the doors for seating. At first I thought they were just kidding around - calling each other unprofessional and making remarks about the other person's work ethic. But no. They were both serious. They were doing this in front of other patrons. That's when I decided I did not need to see this drama and went to the men's room. But that experience turned out not to be so great either.

Oh boy. 

Updated On: 6/9/17 at 12:22 AM