Jekyll/Linda Eder Fans: Agree with Linda Comments?

[philly03]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 8:14pm

May be such an old-school question......11 years old! But do you agree with what Linda said and think that if the other version of the Pre-Broadway National tour played it would have lasted longer/bigger success by more fans + the critics/press?


Based off of some of Linda's comments on her 'Greatest Hits' CD, it sounds like she wasn't a big fan of the Broadway director (whose name is slipping my mind at the moment).

She put Bring on the Men in it and wrote:
"This song never made it into the Broadway [version of Jekyll & Hyde], because it was the genius idea of our Broadway director to remove it and write a whole new song. And that was the biggest mistake he could have made. It's back in every other version of Jekyll that plays anywhere. It was a big disappointment, because it was such an amazing introduction to my character; I come out in the bawdy pub where I'm a prostitute and sing this great song."

So was it the director's fault that the Broadway version had some many flaws/sudden changes from what it once was?

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 8:25pm

Robin Phillips was the director, and yes I agree with Eder's comments. He eliminated a lot of great songs, including Bring on the Men (replaced with the inferior Good 'n Evil), I Need to Know, and a number of others. A lot of them have returned, and are in the licensed version. The original version was never quite as campy as the Broadway version became. I don't know if that is Phillips' fault, or the book writer, Leslie Bricusse. It should have retained the gothic feel. Incidentally, it got campier and campier as time went on. I never remembered Cuccioli and Eder camping it up the way the "star" replacements did.

[nealb1]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 8:33pm

Absolulely.......the pre-Broadway National Tour in 95/96 was much better than the Broadway version.

[Rypm25]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 8:40pm

Having seen both the pre-broadway tour version and the broadway version, I have to agree with Linda Eder on this one. The only thing I didn't like about the tour version was the confrontation at the end between Jekyll & Hyde done between him and a pre-recorded video image of him projected on a screen...it worked much better when he did it all himself.

[philly03]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 8:42pm

I agree as well! I'm still a little shocked that she just kind of came out and said it like that but who cares she's LINDA!

And by star replacements, I hope you don't mean LUBA Mason & Coleen Sexton (Both great & love both of them (all of the Lucy's are the best!)), but you can't tell me that them or Rob Evan could be considered stars. I'm assuming you mean Sebastian Bach (!), The hoff, etc.

But I'm not totally against all the cuts/changes ROBIN PHILLIPS (thanks!) made. I actually like the putting of "No One Knows Who I Am" before whichever bar song "makes you happy". But getting rid of "Girls of the Night" I felt was one of the bigger losses too. That song really stuck with me.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 8:47pm

Luba Mason and Coleen Sexton aren't stars. They never had a "star" Lucy, other than Eder. I was referring to Sebastian Bach, Jack Wagner, and the Hoff.

[philly03]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 8:59pm

OHHHHHHHH to the contrary, COLEEN SEXTON (whom I love) is apparently a HUGE Broadway star!

http://www.themotorcyclestand.com/


(HAHAHAHAHAHA, poor Coleen. Although I do wonder if she's an avid motorcycle fan..ahah!)

[Eris0303]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 9:02pm

One of my favorite songs from the concept album (other than "Bring on the Men of course) is "Bitch, Bitch, Bitch". It was funny and yet true on so many levels.

[Kev]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 9:36pm

"Good n' Evil" was a decent attempt to convey show-appropriate lyrics, but it never ignited the way the gutsy "Bring on the Men" did for that particular scene.

That said, overall, I liked Robin Phillip's version. It wasn't devoid of problems. But, it was almost like an intimate chamber piece at times, and more focused than the Pre-Broadway tour (which I also enjoyed.)

If we're going to talk J&H camp, then the POST-Broadway tour comes to mind. I couldn't take a moment of it seriously.

[philly03]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 9:44pm

Are you refering to the third and "final" Jekyll tour with Guy LeM. & Annie Berthaim (s/p)? I think was Non-Equity but I thought I heard good things about Guy LeM. But I never saw it! I do have the souvenir program for it for some reason.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 9:48pm

Was the post Broadway tour the one Chuck Wagner did, or was that the national tour?

[philly03]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 10:10pm

That was the "First National Tour," with the Non-Eq. in 2001 being the "Second National". But some people refer to the Chuck Wagner/Sharon Brown one as the Second National tour becuase it's strikingly similar to the pre-broadway, which they call the "First National Tour" also. Jekyll people are sooooooo complex.

His tour ran from Fall 99 to Spring 01, and the Non Eq ran from May 01 to May 02 I think or something like that. But if you're looking for that stuff it's on the jekyll website... www.jekyll-hyde.com !
Updated On: 4/9/08 at 10:10 PM

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 10:25pm

The critics from day 1 hated Wildhorn so nothing would have gotten the show goos reviews.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 11:24pm

"Good n' Evil" was hitting the audience over the head with a hammer, IMO.

Isn't that why Anthony Warlow wouldn't be in the Broadway production? I heard he told Wildhorn that he had ruined his own show.

[Looney]

Posted: 4/9/08 at 11:34pm

The critics from day 1 hated Wildhorn so nothing would have gotten the show good reviews.

If the score hadn't mostly sucked it might have...

[nealb1]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 12:30am

It's a beautiful score....one of my favorites.

[Looney]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 12:45am

Ugh, overwritten, mostly bloated and shapeless, bordering on musical melodrama, not to mention some awful, on-the-nose lyrics...

Like a guy trying to write the same song over and over again and moving a few notes around in the hopes nobody will notice.

I'm glad some folks really enjoy it. It just wears me out in the listening.

[nealb1]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 12:48am

You're entitled to your opinion..absolutely. That's what so great about this board that people can come together and discuss different shows with different viewpoints.

A dear friend on this board worships "Wicked." I'm the complete opposite.

Can you imagine how boring life would be if we were all the same? Yikes.......no thanks.

[WickedBoy2]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 5:05am

Eh! You think that over 1500 performances is 'not' a success? come on!

Updated On: 4/10/08 at 05:05 AM

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 6:36am

"Eh! You think that over 1500 performances is 'not' a success? come on! "

Financially, no. It closed at a loss. Also, I found it to be a success early on (the original cast and first set of replacements), but then it descended into musical camp-dom as the run continued, so much so that the DVD performance bears little resemblance to what I remember being my first experience with the show.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 8:52am

I saw the three pre-Broadway productions of J&H as well as the Broadway production. I spoke to Linda after the Broadway production and she did confess to me that her favorite production was the original at the Alley theatre. My personal favorite was the second, which basically restaged the original for a proscenium stage, though there were a few minor changes.

By the way, Good and Evil was not a new song. It was in the original production, though cut early on, if I remember correctly. My memory is a bit fuzzy, bit I believe it opened the second act as a solo for the inn-keeper. It was not sung by Linda's character. By the time the second pre-Broadway tour rolled out, it was clear the show was going off-track. Already it was showing signs of wear from too many cooks and it resembled something of a quilt with scenes rearranged and cuts that made no sense. Elements of different directors and designers were popping up into the show without any sense of cohesion or concept. By the time the show hit Broadway and had cycled through various directors, designers, cuts, additions and changes, what opened on Broadway was a completely different show bearing little to no resemblance to what was rumored to be the show of the decade. The buzz about J&H was so big for so long, it was to be the show that finally overshadows Phantom on Broadway. So of course, when it arrived, the critics had a field day shredding it to bits after the years of buildup and anticipation. And I can't blame them. It was a major embarrassment. And critics (as well as musical theatre snobs) will never let him live it down.

I only hope Broadway will one day get to see the brilliant and chilling show J&H once was. It could have been a huge smash hit.

[BkCollector]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 11:56am

I agree. I saw the first and last preview of J&H and I couldnt believe they took out Bring on the Men, and some of the other songs. I Need to Know could have stayed as well.

I think it could have been a good show.

[Calvin]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 12:04pm

I saw that second production, too, Matt, and never saw the show again until one of the tours after the Broadway production have shuttered. I barely recognized the show.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 12:12pm

what was the song that the ladies of the night sang? i dont think it was in the Broadway version but it was in the disastrous UK National Tour of the show

[Calvin]

Posted: 4/10/08 at 12:46pm

"Girls of the Night"?