A Little Night Music 2009 Revival- Page 2

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 12:33pm

She cries too much and speaks too slowly. She needs an old-fashioned musical-comedy director to yell "FASTER! LOUDER!" in her face and she needs someone to take her back to Acting 101 and remind her to "Hold back your tears and the audience will cry, but cry and you cry alone."

[Gothampc]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 12:40pm

"It was just annoying how she eventually SPOOOOKE.LIIIIIIIKE .....THIIIIIIISSSSS!!!!"

She did that in Sunday In The Park With George. Put a bustle on the woman and she starts acting like she's a combination of Medea and Lady MacBeth. PalJoey is exactly right in what she needs. A director that will take her in hand.

[ABB2357]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 12:41pm

For what it's worth, I saw the show twice with Peters/Stritch and Stritch was note perfect both times. Maybe I just got lucky. I remember an NY Times profile that said they each had a brief conversation (and maybe a work session) with Trevor Nunn before going on, so he was barely there at that point. I think that accounts for everyone loosening up.

And newintown hit the nail on the head with Leigh Ann Larkin. Her showboating and bizarre phrasing is on full display on the cast recording. She delivered "The Miller's Son" like it was a "Rose's Turn"-style eleven o'clock number and seemed to have no idea what the song was about.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 12:46pm

"and Stritch was note perfect both times"

You should have recorded it because it was the only two times Stritch was ever note perfect.

But I'll give her a pass because she's from the old style of musical theater where acting a song was more important than hitting every note perfectly.

[TalkinLoud]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 12:49pm

I saw and loved both, but I do definitely think La Cage should have won. I think that production of La Cage was as good as the show can get. It just really got the material and feel for the two central characters lives. Performances were great, and it was very, very funny.

ALNM was sort of stripped down and made more like the source material, Bergman-esque if you will. Lots of people thought it was too stripped down though. I didn't. It worked quite well. I liked the whole cast quite a bit. CZJ was great. It's a shame her Tony performance was so awful and now people who didn't see the show think that's how her whole performance was.

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 12:51pm

And newintown hit the nail on the head with Leigh Ann Larkin. Her showboating and bizarre phrasing is on full display on the cast recording. She delivered "The Miller's Son" like it was a "Rose's Turn"-style eleven o'clock number and seemed to have no idea what the song was about.

Exactly. She might as well have been on AMERICAN IDOL: she seemed to think that as long as she belted loud and high, she was giving a performance.

[E.Davis]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 1:07pm

The opening of Night Music was absolutely stunning especially from the balcony. The way the waltz was done was just breathtaking.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 1:15pm

I saw the show a number of times and actually preferred the second cast to the first, because the show seemed much looser and, well, funnier, at that point. I attribute much of this to the fact that Nunn had mostly disappeared from the scene by then and the cast seemed to have more freedom to play around with their line readings. This was most evident in Erin Davies' performance, who, early on, seemed to not understand that her role was supposed to be funny. I remember her reciting hilarious dialogue and getting not a single laugh in the early part of the run because of how she was (presumably) directed to deliver the lines.

I was not completely enamored with CZJ, and for the most part preferred Peters, but not near the end of the run, when she was doing all of the things described above (the weird inflections, slurring her speech, etc.). I will say this, though. No matter when in the run it was, Peters always delivered a pitch perfect rendition of Send in the Clowns. Even when she had taken to mugging, for that glorious 6 minute song, she reigned it all in and delivered something truly special.

I thought Lansbury was magnificent and deserved the Tony. I actually found her Armfeldt to be much different from Madame Arcati, which someone above compared it to. Arcati was a kooky woman, whereas Armfeldt, as played by Lansbury, was sharp as a knife. Arcati's jokes were funny because you sensed she was on edge and out of control, not really sure what she was saying or doing. With Lansbury's Armfeldt, you got the sense she knew exactly what she was saying and doing with each of her insults.

I also loved Stritch, for entirely different reasons. Yes, her performance wavered. There were nights she was on fire, and nights when it was a real struggle. I didn't mind, mostly because I will gladly sit and watch a performer like her "warts and all" over any number of younger performers working today. When she was on...her performance was breathtaking. She took Armfeldt in an entirely different direction than Lansbury and focused a lot on the relationship with Desiree. She discussed this in numerous interviews, referring to it as "the show's other love story. A mother-daughter love story!" The chemistry between she and Peters was much stronger than CZJ and Lansbury. Stritch also played Armfeldt as a woman on the brink- you were very aware from the moment the show began that this woman was near death. As played by Stritch, Armfeldt could go at any moment. Her Liaisons (all 7 glorious minutes of it) was like a master class on the nights when she was sharp. She told that story (and held the audience's attention) remarkably.




Updated On: 7/9/13 at 01:15 PM

[TalkinLoud]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 1:16pm

Issues with Larkin's protract should be directed primarily at Trevor Nunn.

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 1:37pm

I'm not sure which Leigh Ann Larkin you all saw because the one I saw was lovely, in both this and Gypsy. It is true that it was a broad comic performance, but I saw Night Music many times and her delivery of The Miller's Son was a highlight every time.

I do agree with others about the rest of the cast loosening up once Peters and Stritch were brought in. Erin Davie in particular improved quite a bit, and by the end of the run I think her Charlotte was pretty solid (though not as good as I think it could have been if she had been directed differently from the start). I also thought Peters was wonderful in every way, certainly a massive improvement over CZJ's hammy and presentational performance. It disappointed me quite a bit that after her lovely performance in this she gave such a self-indulgent and strange performance in Follies...she is clearly capable of greatness (or at least she once was).

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 1:47pm

I saw Larkin six times overall. Each time it was the same: a weirdly acted performance culminating in a dead-eyed, emotionlessly belted "Miller's Son." Her performance worked for some people, but it made no sense to me.

[newintown]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 1:50pm

These things are all relative and subjective; what is amateurish overacting to me may be perfect acting to perfectlymarvelous and others.

I also find Raul Esparza, Norbert Butz, and Bobby Steggart to generally be overdone ham; clearly, many others disagree.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 2:04pm

I think it also depends where you sit in the theater. For someone in the first few rows of the orchestra, the acting may seem too big. But if you're sitting in the last role of the balcony, you may think it's underacting.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 2:14pm

I wish Trevor Nunn would stop thinking all musicals should have a Chekhovian bent. He approached OKLAHOMA like this, and I fully expected Patrick Wilson to sigh and say, 'To Kansas City, I beg you!'

I actually liked A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC because I love the show, thought CZJ was truly effective at the performance I saw and had a major flashback when Alexander Hanson came on the stage I realized I saw him in ARCADIA in London in 1995. Like a fine wine, that man.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 2:26pm

Wow thanks for all the insight and comments! Sounds like this was pretty similar to Follies in terms of audience reactions.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 2:53pm

No the reaction to Follies was better. Follies didn't make the party into a picnic.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 3:45pm

^ I guess I meant in terms of such enthusiastic opinions and views.

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 10:17pm

I loved this production- probably my favorite show of the millenium. I saw both casts twice, and each brought something different to their roles. My favorite performance was the one I saw very close to the beginning of the Peters/Stritch run... the entire cast was on fire and landed every joke. Stritch was excellent both times I saw her, and did not have a single flub.

[Kad]

Posted: 7/9/13 at 10:48pm

Saw it once with each cast and enjoyed it both times, but there is no question in my mind that La Cage was the better production.

[goldenboy]

Posted: 7/10/13 at 1:38pm

Saw it with Zeta Jones and Lansbury. Lansbury was a revelation in the role; funny and
moving. The rest of the show was dull as dishwater. Couldn't wait for it to end. Zeta Jones was lackluster. Yawn.

Didn't go back to see it with Peters and Stritch as the production was so dull, I saw a non union production in Coral Springs Florida that was eons better than what was seen on Broadway. It had wit, humor and levity. The Broadway Production did not have any of those things.

[RaisedOnMusicals]

Posted: 7/10/13 at 1:53pm

PianoMann, you're right. I saw the show with CZJ and Lansbury and loved it. (I feel badly for those who only saw CZJ sing SITC on the Tony show, and I feel badly for her as well). She deserved the Tony that she won.

I then saw the invited dress with Peters and Stritch, with Sondeheim there, and you wanna talk about a train wreck? Poor Elaine really struggled. And then I saw the show a month or so after it opened with the new cast, and Elaine, on that night, was virtually flawless. But unfortunately, she was not consistant, and had significant line diffulties during the entire run of the show. But I've also spoken to two featured cast members, who have told me that they wouldn't have given up the experience of working with Ms. Stritch for anything. She was loved by the cast, she would tell stories to them that were riviting, and she mentored as much as she could.

Bernadette was also inconsistant through the run, though I liked her interpretation of the role very much. But I'm a Bernadette fan, so her emmoting version of SITC had an impact on me. I also thought she was great during "You Must Meet My Wife." There was a lot of great comic acting during that song.

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/10/13 at 2:03pm

I also thought she was great during "You Must Meet My Wife." There was a lot of great comic acting during that song.

That was actually her hammiest moment in the show. But it actually worked for that particular song/scene.

[Will42]

Posted: 7/10/13 at 2:23pm

I've only seen Catherine Zeta-Jones/Angela Lansbury's version and while the show itself wasn't that great, the leads were terrific, especially Lansbury.

I feel really bad for Catherine Zeta-Jones, because now most people associate her with that unfortunate performance at the Tony Awards (which was all over the place) when they think of her in that role. Not sure what went wrong there, I believe she was sick at that time, but it was NOT a performance she was giving 8 times per week and for which she won a well-deserved Tony Award.

Ms. Lansbury was spectacular as Madame Armfeldt and no, it was nothing like her Madame Arcati. Lansbury is never the same and always brings an original take on whatever role she plays.
She was funny, she was poignant when needed, she was everything. Just great. Think Maggie Smith in Downton Abbey.

I always liked Erin Davie and Aaron Lazar. Ramona Mallory not so much.

Alexander Hanson was unfortunately out that night, although his understudy was very good.

Overall, it was a very enjoyable night at the theater.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 7/10/13 at 5:48pm

The first time I saw it, with CZJ and Lansbury, I remember feeling as though it was somewhat never-ending and so terribly slow, with no humor or heart. I did, however, like their performances very, very much. I thought Zeta-Jones was luminous, and her "Send in the Clowns" was surprisingly fantastic. I remember looking over to my friend when the number finished and mouthing "WOW." I really thought it was a lovely, lovely moment that she absolutely nailed. I liked Lansbury as well, but to a lesser degree. The woman is a legend though and seeing her live is always a pleasure.

When I returned to the show, not long after it reopened with Peters and Stritch, it was as though they had revamped the entire production. It wasn't anything groundbreaking, but it was a lot less of a slog to sit through, and as has been mentioned, the humor and heart of the piece finally showed. They were both, for me, unquestionably stronger than their predecessors. And it seemed like the rest of the cast rose to the occasion. I will say though that Ramona Mallory was painfully bad. I mean...atrocious. I didn't have as much of an issue with Hunter Ryan Herdlicka, as most did, and I actually adored Leigh Ann Larkin's performance.

But there is no question in my mind that LA CAGE deserved the Tony that year.