Audra in Applause- Page 2

[Jarethan]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 12:43pm

Cat Guy said: "If Miss McDonald appears in any version of "Applause," I'm confident it will be a popular success.  She has the talent and charisma to make it work.  In 2013, I saw her in San Diego in concert, and she was simply wonderful.  The woman exudes warmth and dignity and humanity.  And that voice!

In January, she begins a concert tour that takes her into July.  I will make my way to Los Angeles in May to see her perform with the LA Opera.  Then, four days later, I will see her again here in San Diego with the San Diego Symphony Orchestra.  That's how much I like her.

 

Why would she?  I think she has demonstrated that she has higher standards than Applause, unless it is drastically re-written, including most of her songs.  If she wants to take on revival, she can do Mame, she can replace Bette (it is not like she needs a Tony for which she will be ineligible, she can try Sweeney Todd, and the list goes on.

 

[Blue_Lotus]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 1:09pm

I can't see Audra McDonald wasting her talents on a show like Applause. It is a horribly dated show - - - a true relic of it's time period. It hasn't one iota of the wit of it's source material and that's only because 20th Century-Fox (at first) refused to grant Strouse and Adams the rights to Joseph L. Mankiewicz' Oscar winning screenplay from All About Eve, so they simply purchased the stage rights to Mary Orr's original story The Wisdom of Eve on which the film is also based on. Because of this Strouse and Adams were forbidden to use situations and/or characters created specifically for the film forcing them to create ones of their own. It wasn't until much later that Fox acquiesced on the screenplay rights but by that time it was too late to incorporate anything from it save for Strouse and Adams penning a new song for the show: "Fasten Your Seatbelts".

I tried sitting through the cringe worthy 1973 television version starring Bacall, Penny Fuller and Robert Mandan recreating their Broadway roles but I cannot.

Maybe the show came across differently on the stage but I fail to see why Bacall's performance was Tony worthy. I tend to believe they just gave it to her because at that point in her career she was a legend.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 9:00pm

GavestonPS said: "Oh, for God's sake, WHY? (And WHY, my darling henrik, do you know so much about so many versions of the Margo/Eve story?)"

WHY INDEED, sweet Gaveston?

Nothing in my background or breeding should have brought me closer to the stage than Row E, Center. 

However, during my senior year at Radcliffe, Lloyd Richards lectured on the drama. The following year I became Mrs. Lloyd Richards. 
 

Updated On: 7/22/17 at 09:00 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 11:03pm

^^^^^ I should have guessed, henrik. It really is the only explanation.

I assume the divorce commenced immediately when you came home from the matinee praising APPLAUSE...

Look, kids, Bacall had charisma in spades. It was thrilling to see her, even from my seat in the very top row of the Palace balcony. (From that angle, she was basically just a tiny halo of platinum hair far below.) What's more, I had seen FOLLIES at the matinee, so Betty on stage was a little like seeing FOLLIES come to life.

But APPLAUSE pretty much stretched her skill set to its limit.

There are other charismatic ladies with bigger skill sets today. Why saddle them with APPLAUSE?

It's hard today to imagine a 49-year-old woman having to give up her career to become a wife. It's even harder to imagine rooting for her to do so. Sadly, that is the plot of the musical.

[carnzee]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 11:19pm

GavestonPS said: "
It's hard today to imagine a 49-year-old woman having to give up her career to become a wife. It's even harder to imagine rooting for her to do so. Sadly, that is the plot of the musical.

 

I only know the movie, so if the book of the musical deviates too much my comment may not be relevant, but it seems to me that Margo giving up her career isn't intregal to the plot and could easily be altered.

The central conflict is between Eve and Margo. It could be resolved by getting rid of Eve (as it is currently) and then Margo continues her career as an actress or an equally fulfilling one. She and Bill live happily ever after.

 

[ComingUpRoses2]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 11:26pm

If you're going to revive a Laurel Bacall musical, revive Woman of the Year. It's a far better score. 

[Jarethan]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 11:52pm

Blue_Lotus said: "I can't see Audra McDonald wasting her talents on a show like Applause. It is a horribly dated show - - - a true relic of it's time period. It hasn't one iota of the wit of it's source material and that's only because 20th Century-Fox (at first) refused to grant Strouse and Adams the rights to Joseph L. Mankiewicz' Oscar winning screenplay from All About Eve, so they simply purchased the stage rights to Mary Orr's original story The Wisdom of Eve on which the film is also based on. Because of this Strouse and Adams were forbidden to use situations and/or characters created specifically for the film forcing them to create ones of their own. It wasn't until much later that Fox acquiesced on the screenplay rights but by that time it was too late to incorporate anything from it save for Strouse and Adams penning a new song for the show: "Fasten Your Seatbelts".

I tried sitting through the cringe worthy 1973 television version starring Bacall, Penny Fuller and Robert Mandan recreating their Broadway roles but I cannot.

Maybe the show came across differently on the stage but I fail to see why Bacall's performance was Tony worthy. I tend to believe they just gave it to her because at that point in her career she was a legend.

 

IMO Katherine Hepburn should have won.  She was magnificent, and had a more substantial role.  Even though she didn't have a singing voice, she did a great job with the songs (and I am sure that the score was written to accommodate that voice, as was also the case with Applause).  

I think they didn't give it to Hepburn for three reasons:

1.  They knew she didn't care, and would not attend to receive the award if she did win.  

2.  Honoring Bacall was an opportunity to recognize a long-time movie star, who was in her second big Broadway hit and not normally associated with winning awards.  

3.  Applause was a bigger hit.  It opened later in the season and was the show to see.  Coco opened earlier and Hepburn was scheduled to leave the show within months of the Tonys.

 

[Jarethan]

Posted: 7/22/17 at 11:58pm

ComingUpRoses2 said: "If you're going to revive a Laurel Bacall musical, revive Woman of the Year. It's a far better score. 

 

Talk about lousy shows.  If there was a good score, I sure as hell could't tell.  Bacall  -- who indeed was a very charismatic performer -- won two undeserved Tony awards, neither of which should ever be revived on Broadway.  IMO, compared to Woman of the Year, Applause is a masterpiece.

 

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 1:42am

Sometimes Tony Awards are given for sheer star quality, not acting, singing or dancing ability per se. See Mary Martin (for PETER PAN and SOUND OF MUSIC), Ethel Merman (CALL ME MADAM), Viviel Leigh (TOVARICH), Robert Preston (I DO! I DO!) and Jack Cassidy (SHE LOVES ME).

Bacall's sour notes in APPLAUSE only showed what a good sport she was being about the whole endeavor. Audiences loved her for it.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 1:48am

carnzee said: "...I only know the movie, so if the book of the musical deviates too much my comment may not be relevant, but it seems to me that Margo giving up her career isn't intregal to the plot and could easily be altered....

"

No, as with FUNNY GIRL, the romance and giving up her career is the HEART of the show, not some epilogue that can be easily lopped off. The eleven o'clock number is "There's Something Greater (And Finally That's for Me)". "That" in context is marriage. The 60s were a time of much gender confusion and Broadway audiences enjoyed being reassured that women really wanted to stay home and keep house.

Now, Margo doesn't shut herself up in a farmhouse. We see her giving the following year's Tony Award to Eve at the annual ceremony. But it's clear that Margo has given up fighting for the best roles, in order to happy with her director husband. Yes, more so than in the film.

[gypsy101]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 2:43am

i really would just like Audra to appear in new musicals. She deserves them! similar to Kelli O'Hara and Kristin Chenoweth, they all get revivals and not enough original material.

[nsguy45]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 9:21am

Woman of the Year was a terrible show, and I saw several variations of it in Boston prior to Broadway that were cringeworthy. One variation had Tess thinking she might be pregnant. However, I thought Bacall as Margo in Applause was perfect casting. Why her performance/delivery was altered so for the CBS broadcast remains a mystery. Applause producers wanted very much for Rita Hayworth to be Bacall's replacement and even auditioned her, but it was obvious that Rita would not be able to handle the role by that point.

[The Other One]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 9:30am

henrikegerman said: ""Audra is 47 years old.  Unless she pulls a Judi Dench and things change for her in films, that cinematic pedigree is a far-fetched reality for her as it stands now."

Certainly that train may have left the station.  While it's true Audra may never join the ranks of those few women who achieved movie fame in their 40s or beyond - Dench, Viola Davis, Kathy Bates, Melissa McCarthy, Ruth Gordon, Jessica Tandy, Tilda Swinton (for Tilda, her movie fame only became mainstream in her 40s), we can still hope, can't we?   Consider that Helen Mirren (though well known in other media) didn't achieve bigtime mainstream movie fame until well into her 50s."

Audra doesn't come through on screen the way she does on stage.  Not everyone is at home in all media.  Nothing wrong with that.  And I agree that Applause just isn't a good enough show for her.

 

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 9:50am

It doesn't matter to me what the show is, I just want Audra back on Broadway in this upcoming season.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 10:02am

GavestonPS said: "^^^^^ I should have guessed, henrik. It really is the only explanation.

I assume the divorce commenced immediately when you came home from the matinee praising APPLAUSE... "

Gaveston, I'll tell you about LLoyd s and my amicable estrangement some other time ("some quiet evening by the fire," for now suffice it to say that I kept our "little place just two hours from New York.".

But what makes you think I would have done that?  I have no love for APPLAUSE.  As my posts on this thread should have made abundantly clear, I think the book is a complete mess and a botched opportunity to turn one of the great screenplays into a great - or even a decent - musical.

Carnzee said:  "I only know the movie, so if the book of the musical deviates too much my comment may not be relevant, but it seems to me that Margo giving up her career isn't intregal to the plot and could easily be altered."

Carnzee, as I trust you know from the film (but as your post might unintentionally mislead others toward the wrong conclusion) ,Margo doesn't give up her career in the movie.  Rather she enters a different stage in her career, accepting that she's at a different stage in life.  When she tells Lloyd she no longer wants to do Cora in Footsteps on the Ceiling, she makes clear that she will make it up to him and that she intends to keep acting.  There is nothing in the movie to make us think she is giving up acting for Bill, nor that Bill would ever want her to.

So to your point, Margo's giving up her career in APPLAUSE is not merely not integral to the plot, it's a complete perversion of it.

 

Updated On: 7/23/17 at 10:02 AM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 10:26am

The Other One said: "henrikegerman said: ""Audra is 47 years old.  Unless she pulls a Judi Dench and things change for her in films, that cinematic pedigree is a far-fetched reality for her as it stands now."

Certainly that train may have left the station.  While it's true Audra may never join the ranks of those few women who achieved movie fame in their 40s or beyond - Dench, Viola Davis, Kathy Bates, Melissa McCarthy, Ruth Gordon, Jessica Tandy, Tilda Swinton (for Tilda, her movie fame only became mainstream in her 40s), we can still hope, can't we?   Consider that Helen Mirren (though well known in other media) didn't achieve bigtime mainstream movie fame until well into her 50s."

Audra doesn't come through on screen the way she does on stage.  Not everyone is at home in all media.  Nothing wrong with that.  And I agree that Applause just isn't a good enough show for her.

The OtherOne I agree with you on principle, of course, but am far from convinced Audra is not capable of good work on screen.  She was, for instance, quite wonderful in WIT.

 

 

"

 

[The Other One]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 10:42am

Yes, she was, Henrik, and in the televised A Raisin In The Sun as well.  Having seen her work as a guest on The Good Wife and in the film Rikki and The Flash, however, I still think she is first and foremost a stage animal.  

Time will tell.

[carnzee]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 11:18am

I know Audra told Zoe Caldwell that she didn't like acting to a camera, or something to that effect.

[The Other One]

Posted: 7/23/17 at 11:40am

carnzee said: "I know Audra told Zoe Caldwell that she didn't like acting to a camera, or something to that effect."

II had not heard that, but I believe it.  Audra isn't bad on screen, but she glows on stage.