Broadwaybelter reviews "Lestat" 1/15/06 *spoilers*

[broadwaybelter]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 12:05am

First and foremost, these are my opinions, you dont have to believe me, this is simply my view though feel free to argue with me or disagree with any/all my thoughts.

Now my review/opinion:

I walked into the theatre completely openminded and disregarding everything i had ever read about this show, I love forming my own opinion and I am glad I did because I really didnt sympathize with anyone elses reviews (I'm going to briefly describe it, but if you want details please PM me or IM me w/questions) In fact, I really did like this show--- and go!

OVERALL REVIEW

The lights go down and the curtain comes up w/hugh having his back to the audience and he began singing. Right from the beginning Hugh had me and kept me through the whole show. He turned around to reveal a gorgeous man w/blonde hair and he continues singing (and let me mention Hugh is quite a water machine, he spat like crazy, but he had crazy diction, which is good). Then a screen comes down to reveal wolves.....literally like a movie w/wolves.....wtf? I thought that was kinda weird, I would perhaps recreate this on the stage. Overall the projections were distracting and perhaps a little long; they included (a fetus being eaten?, a constant firey projection that said "wolf killer", and the set design was constantly reliant on projections).

SETS:
unbelievably gorgeous! They were very nicely done and were very nice part of the show. They were intertwined w/the scenic projections which delivered an overall wonderful effect. Very faithfult to the time period and intriqutely (Sp?) designed. My favorites were probably the church, the end of act 1 w/the big stone head, and the room that was in "The new world" that had claudia's room and the room where lestat was burned.

COSTUMES:
Susan Hilferty deserves another Tony for this work, brilliant and the best eye candy. Very elaborate and lavish, very faithful to the story, overall just amazing.

SCORE:
I didnt like "Aida" or Elton's other scores. I was expecting this to be popped out, but to my surprise I was blown away by the style. I really do love the score in its entirety. It was a traditional Broadway score with some lovely songs (though at times not memorable) but beautiful nonetheless. Some of the songs seemed to drag on for instance i was sitting there watching the show "oh this would be a nice place to end the song---" cut to 3 minutes later. That was only for a few songs, I cant remember the titles, I just remember that they were lestat's songs, definately not "Sail Me away" but a few songs in the first act could be shortened.Also I felt they were a little repetitive though I didnt mind hearing some of the melodies again because they were very lovely.

PROJECTIONS:
I mentioned a little bit above--distracting for the most part, I would've prefered pyrotechnics for the fires and whatnot. It looked kind of corny when lestat blows away claudia's ashes when she dies. Should be cut significantly...

BOOK:
very clever and well thought out, we must give Linda Woolverton some credit for this one. Some of it was kind of akward, as in it didnt transition cleanly. For instance when Gabrielle and Lestat were being followed by a mysterious spirit "Do you think it'll follow us in the church?" boom! they are in the church without walking anywhere......i thought that was kind of weird...some of it was akward...yes...

BLOCKING/CHOREOGRAPHY:
Very nicely thought out, at times awesome. The one thing that bugged me in the blocking was when there was a blackout, the characters would walk in a semi-circle while the set came on, which again was akward...

Wasnt very much choreography, but when there was it was nicely done except in "To kill your own kind" the ensemble was doing something odd w/their feet to the beat of the song

ACTORS:

Hugh Panaro-amazing, enough said. He is soo talented, acting is dead on and really made this an enjoyable experience. He was very connected and made all his scenes worthy of being performed in otherwords they had intention rather than "i'm an actor on stage, i'm performing--okay i'm done". He was very in tune w/the other actors.

Carolee Carmello-Brilliant beyond words, lovely voice, she had a few songs in Act One that got an enormous applause. Her delivery of her lines were none like I had seen, very sharp and concisce. She had such presence which made it a true joy to watch her in the show. I especially loved when she was freshly bitten by lestat and was feeling pain, lestat replies something like "your body is dying..the pain will go away soon, you need to gain others blood" (Something to that effect, I dont remember the lines) and then someone comes on stage and carolee pounces and attacks, it was the funniest thing i had ever seen. She was growling and the whole 9 yards, she did it again later then slowly dragged the body off stage which delievered a humorous effect.

Drew Sarich-Dark and sinister, very in the moment. Loved his delivery and stage presence, a wonderful choice to leave in the role. He had a very distinct way of moving and talking, right away established a remarkable chemistry with the other actors

Jim Stanek-very touching performance, very heart felt and tangible. He knew what he was doing and was a lovely addition to the cast

Roderick Hill-loved his acting, very distinct and fun. His emotions came very full and forceful, which was very effective.

Michael Genet-what can i say? Such a large presence, his lines were delivered as if he were a god. So brilliant, stole the scenes he was in.

Allison Fishcher-an audience favorite right from her first song. "ooh she is good, isnt she?" was the audience's immediate reaction when she finished her song "I want more". Very spirited and fun filled, very developed acting and singing for being so young (17). Was very delightful in every scene she was in and paticularly evil and bitchy when she wanted to be!! I THOROUGHLY ENJOYED IT!

Ensemble-in the words of Seth Rudesky "amahzing". So strong, their voices were incredible and truly added to the show. Their chemistry was essential to this show and it worked so well. Standouts were of course Nikki Renee Daniels; this girl knew what she was doing and was larger than life. Other ensemble truly wonderful and were supportive.

Overall--I loved this show. is some blocking akward? yes. Are the projections distracting? yes. Is the score "Good"? Of course. It is a great show, it just needs a little work and that is perfectly understandable, its only the out of town tryout and it has time. Enough time to make it to New York fully ready to go for everyone to enjoy. Please--if you havent seen the show and have only heard "negative" buzz about it--disregard it, dont let "negative buzz" burdon your mind as you watch. It takes away from the beauty of live theatre. If you havent seen this show, i strongly reccommend you do, its worth every penny and I hope it does well in New York.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 12:28am

Thanks so much for that!

Know what's strange/funny/weird? I agree with about 90% of what you said, but I hardly loved it. :)

[broadwaybelter]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 12:33am

hehe ok very nice to know! i really did enjoy myself though, i'm not really picky about what i see.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 12:40am

From what I hear and from what I've read about previous flops (Not Since Carrie by Ken Maldebaum especially), this show sounds like it's going to be destroyed by the critics. For some reason Broadway hasn't figured out a way to musicalize vampires. I expect the major flaw of this show to be its book and its direction. Basically because what everyone I know has told me is that they're trying to keep too much of Rice's plot and they're not re-imagining the story as a stage show. The projections sound like a horrible idea (wolves? fetus being eaten?), they need to find a way to make the audience suspend reality otherwise some of the dialogue and actions might be laughable instead of dramatic. I truly hope they work out the problems because for the reviews it got from the critics it sounds like it really needs a lot of work before New York.

[JoizeyActor]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 12:44am

Thanks for the review!

[Mark in Oakland]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 1:12am

I too was at today's matinee of "Lestat" & I regret to say that I did not find much to like in the show. I thought that Hugh Panaro, while having a wonderful singing voice, was not very credible in his acting of the role & his physical appearance. One factor was that, from the moment the curtain rose, I frequently felt that I was watching Favio (the supposedly sexy Italian model with the long hair) playing Lestat. Hugh's long, phony-looking blond hair was most distracting and seemed very inconsistent with his otherwise dark good looks. This was in constrast to most of the other cast members whose hair, etc. looked appropriate for the era they were supposed to be in. Worse, I did not find Hugh's acting to be compelling or interesting enough to care about his character. It was kind of one-dimensional and stagnant. I didn't really know much more about Lestat at the end of Act 2 than I did at the beginning of Act 1. Nor did I end up wanting to know more after 2 3/4 hours..

I found most of the music in "Lestat" to be very repetitive in nature and written in what I can only describe as a boring "iambic pentameter"- like structure. Most of the songs did nothing for the would-be drama in the story and tended to slow things down rather than advance the plot. At no time did I feel connected to the characters nor, frankly, did I care about them from their songs. I kept thinking that the show might have been better if the music were eliminated & the show made into a nonmusical.

Most of the rest of the cast did fine, given the material, and obviously they were all were trying their best. Outstanding among them was Carolee Carmello, whose voice & performance was very reminiscent of Betty Buckley during her prime. Her songs elicited the biggest applause response from the audience (especially "The Crimson Kiss" - quite excellent!). Most of the songs by the other actors received rather tepid (if any) applause.

One thing I did like about "Lestat" was the sets (along with the associated projections). I am not a big fan of projections - especially after seeing "The Woman in White". But I found that they were used well (and to a much less extent) in "Lestat". The costumes were ok for the most part, although at times they were a bit over-the-top & looked ludicrous.

Two things I observed (besides the "applause meter") concerning the audience reaction to the show: there were numberous empty seats (at least in the orchestra section) following the intermission - i.e. a considerable number of people left after act 1 & skipped the 2nd act. It seems that when people pay over $90 for a ticket, they'd have to really dislike a show to leave in the middle. Also, the curtain call applause was more polite than enthusiastic, there was no standing ovation. I found this significant because in this day and age, audiences give standing ovations to just about every show, good or bad.

As much as I wanted to love this show, I came away from "Lestat" feeling almost cheated out of what might have been a wonderful theatrical experience. While I have seen many shows that were much worse, I cannot recommend "Lestat" (at least the version that is currently in SF). Perhaps, with a lot of rewriting & rethinking, it might do better on Broadway. Also, the Palace Theatre (at which it will play) has a magical quality to it that the Curran in SF is definitely lacking.

[broadwaybelter]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 1:16am

you were sitting in the orchestra? me too, i was wearing a blue turtle neck and a black blazer jacket, i was in row E, where were you?

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 1:24am

At no time did I feel connected to the characters nor, frankly, did I care about them from their songs.

To steal a phrase from TelevisionWithoutPity, WORDY MCWORD!

It's interesting and kind of sad that most of the reviews I've been reading (professional and otherwise) are all basically stating the same problems that have been there since the previews. What has the creative team been doing? They're working hard, but there comes a time when you have to cut your losses, IMO.

Posted: 1/16/06 at 1:55am

FYI: The review was written by a 16 year old. Glad you liked it, but in a few years, you may come to realize that what you have seen was really subpar theater.

[broadwaybelter]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 2:30am

maybe i enjoy subpar theatre...and it is only an opinion, I may grow to be 50 and have the same opininon Updated On: 1/16/06 at 02:30 AM

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 1/16/06 at 3:16am

Indeed, there have BEEN 50-year-olds who enjoyed it...

Anyway, Belter, thanks again for the post -- I'm glad even people who enjoyed Lestat aren't blind to its flaws. :)

And SB, wow, are you trying to one-up me in the realm of condescension? Because you get a medal. Ouch.

[Unmasked05]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 12:09am

GLAD you liked it and I can't wait to see it.