2009 revival of "Guys and Dolls"

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.

2009 revival of "Guys and Dolls"

Posted: 5/31/16 at 7:41pm

Whenever my musical theater friends and I talk about classic musicals "Guys and Dolls" always comes up. Also, what comes up is the apparent disdain for the 2009 revival of the show. Then, whenever I ask them about it, they really never go into any detail about it. Admittedly, I am not that well versed in "Guys and Dolls" so I can't make a sound judgment about it. So, if y'all could tell me what was so wrong about that revival, it would be very appreciative.

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 7:42pm

did not see it but I saw clips of silly projections bad acting and stupid direction

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 7:45pm

It was dreadful. Platt and Graham were so miscast. Bierko and Grant were fine but not exciting in any way. The direction was lazy. If it was your first time seeing the show, you'd have had no idea why it's considered a classic.

"You travel alone because other people are only there to remind you how much that hook hurts that we all bit down on. Wait for that one day we can bite free and get back out there in space where we belong, sail back over water, over skies, into space, the hook finally out of our mouths and we wander back out there in space spawning to other planets never to return hurrah to earth and we'll look back and can't even see these lives here anymore. Only the taste of blood to remind us we ever existed. The earth is small. We're gone. We're dead. We're safe." -John Guare, Landscape of the Body

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 7:53pm

I am going to forgo any snark, cattiness or trivialized lists. It really boils down to one thing. It was an ill-conceived evening where the director sought to ad dramatic gravitas and urban grit to a show that is meant as a cartooned love letter to a certain type of NYC character and wrapped in a bow of comedic joy and tried to cinematic storytelling with a libretto that is very traditional in structure. The cast was not bad, the designers were not bad... They had no chance to succed because of the production concept.

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 7:58pm

Say what you will about the production but I still wish they had recorded a cast album. That arrangement of "Sit Down You're Rockin' the Boat" was complete merriment.

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 8:23pm

I agree re the projections. The rapid movement frequently made me nauseous until I began watching peripherally . Graham didn't quite capture Adelaide's mixture of sweetness and sexuality either.

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 9:05pm

Want to see how desperate this production was for a laugh? Check out Mary Testa's shameless shtick in this clip as she plays General Cartwright spanking her ass and proclaiming that she's "been a very bad girl". Wait, what?

https://youtu.be/s7gU_e8wlNE?t=173

Updated On: 5/31/16 at 09:05 PM

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 9:07pm

The projections. I literally became physically ill due to them at intermission. Whoever designed the projections clearly never sat and watched them, because I wasn't the only person who didn't just think they were hideous, but caused illness!

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 9:42pm

Completely agree about the projections. The cast ranged from OK (Bierko) to horrible (Platt). Not only was the show itself uninspired, it was a bad idea to do a revival when the celebrated 92 revival was still reasonably fresh for a lot of people. I wish I could have seen that one instead of this one

#10

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 9:45pm

It's really quite sad to look at the "Awards and nominations" section of the Guys and Dolls Wikpedia page. Scroll after scroll of accolades for several previous productions... and then a measly two for this production. Not even any acting acknowledgements. It was terrible.

#11

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 9:48pm

Simply put, it wasn't funny. Guys and Dolls should be filled with laughs and this production wasn't.

The supporting cast (specifically Testa and Burgess) just decided to go chew the scenery and put a contemporary spin on the material. It was as if they were in an entirely different show.

Whether that lies with the direction or the casting (or some combination of the two) is debatable.

#12

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 10:33pm

Imagine an "Adelaide's Lament" that didn't get a single laugh.

As bouyantly great as the Nathan Lane/Faith Prince revival directed by Jerry Zaks was, this one was dire.

#13

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 10:38pm

Between the Windows 95 screensaver being used and the miscasting of Lauren Graham and Oliver Platt, the thing was an absolute mess. Poor Craig Bierko and Kate Jennings Grant tired so hard, and were both very good, but couldn't save it. A friend and I always say - I didn't know you could screw up Guys and Dolls, until that production.

"Anybody that goes to the theater, I think we’re all misfits, so we ended up on stage or in the audience.” --- Patti LuPone.

Updated On: 5/31/16 at 10:38 PM

#14

2009 revival of

Posted: 5/31/16 at 11:11pm

ClumsyDude15 said: "A friend and I always say - I didn't know you could screw up Guys and Dolls, until that production.

"

Agreed... I feel like Guys & Dolls is one of those shows that is hard to mess up but this revival proved me wrong. I've seen HS productions of the show that were more inspired

#15

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 3:59am

Ugh, too many bright projections!

#16

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 6:57am

You knew there was something wrong the minute you stepped into the theater and saw those huge neon dice. Had Guys & Dolls be reset in Reno? The direction was terrible and as others have mentioned, there wasn't a laugh to be found. It was almost embarrassing to watch; you got the sense that the actors knew it wasn't working too and a quiet desperation set into their performances.

Yes, Graham and Platt were miscast, but the leads just weren't playing as a cohesive group either. It wasn't just Burgess and Testa that felt like they were in a different show- all of them felt like they were in their own separate revivals. I blame the director for this, of course. It was like McAnuff was so caught up in his new concept for the show that he neglected to direct the actors and they were left to their own devices.

Add me to the list who hated the projections. Ugly, ugly, ugly.

Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco. Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!

#17

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 7:47am

It was horrendous. It's one of those shows that from the moment the curtain goes up, nothing clicks and the rest of the evening becomes a matter of seeing these people get through the show.

Oliver Platt had no idea who Nathan Detroit was or what was funny about him. Lauren Graham was absolutely miscast. Again, she had no grasp on the character or the humor, her comedic timing and delivery were nonexistent and I remember the only reason I knew who she was during the chorus numbers was because she had a different costume. Needless to say, Platt and Graham had no chemistry and looked like they had just met 30 minutes prior to curtain. Really, they didn't have chemistry with anyone in the cast.

Bierko and Kate Jennings Grant were sweet and at least were believable as a couple but the show around them was so atrocious that it didn't matter. I actually loved Testa and Burgess for at least getting that the audience was bored out of their minds and trying to entertain.

"Some people can thrive and bloom living life in a living room, that's perfect for some people of one hundred and five. But I at least gotta try, when I think of all the sights that I gotta see, all the places I gotta play, all the things that I gotta be at"

#18

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 10:47am

I'll never turn down a chance to talk about how bad that production was. Everything that has been said is true. The stage was literally hard to look at because the lights and projections were so bright and disorienting. I see some saying Platt was the worst in show, though for me Lauren Graham gave the deadliest performance. To be fair, this is splitting hairs. But Adelaide feels like the easier role to get laughs in (not that either seem particularly difficult), so for her performance to be as utterly joyless as it was felt like it was especially soul-sucking. Tituss Burgess and Mary Testa went hurtling over the top as though bound and determined to make the audience get a shred of joy out of SOMEthing. In a better production, their performances would have been terrible choices. In this one, they were breaths of fresh air because they at least seemed alive and like they were trying (desperately) to entertain the audience.

The framing device of Runyon typing out the stories didn't work which was the least of the show's problems. It truly was, as mentioned below, the ugliest and most lifeless version of the musical imaginable. I had always thought that Guys and Dolls was a show so perfect that you couldn't ruin it. Now I know there's no such thing.

#19

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 10:59am

This was the biggest train wreck of a Broadway production I have ever seen. The reasons why have been echoed by the majority.

Honestly, it was painful to watch such great material be butchered.

Updated On: 6/1/16 at 10:59 AM

#20

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 11:10am

While she was in no way great, I liked Graham. I think in an entirely different production with a better concept and stronger director she would be great. It didn't help that she and Platt did not get along (at least it was reported at the time) and she was clearly directed to be a more "real" Adalaide.

#21

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 11:17am

will second, third and fourth what everyone else has said. still a horrendous version that i try to push out of my memory from time to time. terrible production design, embarrassing acting performances and messy staging. basically the EXACT OPPOSITE of the magical '92 revival with Lane, which nailed the comedy and whimsy.

#22

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 11:20am

I don't mean to threadjack, but did anyone see the 2001 tour with Maurice Hines? How was that production? I seem to remember hopes of a Broadway run after the tour ended, but the tour began in August 2001. Broadway was a different place after September.

#23

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 11:29am

It's interesting for me to read these reports, as I had tickets to see this production, but it closed before the ticket date. I was coming in from out of town as a young 13-year-old, having grown up watching the movie. I was incredibly disappointed at the time to show up to the theatre and find that the show had closed (I wasn't following Broadway news in those days). I guess it was for the best, though. I knew this revival was poorly-received, but I didn't realize until reading this thread just how much of a train-wreck it was.

#24

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 11:33am

JBroadway said: "It's interesting for me to read these reports, as I had tickets to see this production, but it closed before the ticket date. I was coming in from out of town as a young 13-year-old, having grown up watching the movie. I was incredibly disappointed at the time to show up to the theatre and find that the show had closed (I wasn't following Broadway news in those days). I guess it was for the best, though. I knew this revival was poorly-received, but I didn't realize until reading this thread just how much of a train-wreck it was.

"

i promise that you dodged a bullet. would have probably traumatized you for life and negatively impacted your love for theatre.

#25

2009 revival of

Posted: 6/1/16 at 11:35am

most has been said about this revival. Honestly it's hard to screw up GUYS & DOLLS, but they did. This along with the SWEET CHARITY revival are two of the worst revivals to have ever graced a Broadway stage. I've seen community theater & high school productions of GUYS & DOLLS that were better.

A Chorus Line revival played its final Broadway performance on August 17, 2008. The tour played its final performance on August 21, 2011. A new non-equity tour started in October 2012 played its final performance on March 23, 2013. Another non-equity tour launched on January 20, 2018. The tour ended its US run in Kansas City and then toured throughout Japan August & September 2018.

← Back to Message Board

View all Videos

Tickets From $59

Tickets From $70

Tickets From $106

Tickets From $71