Pashacar said: "I don't know if I agree; Be More Chill was loud like a pop concert, but the mixing generally kept the lyrics primary and comprehensible, both off and on Broadway.
And, even if that kind of mixing is a conscious choice, why is it just coming into play now, after a 99.5%-identical version of this show just ran at two other venues? Someone had an epiphany this far into the process that they should drastically change the mixing style? It's bizarre."
You had a completely different experience with BMC than I did then, but as some in this thread are also saying they didn't have issues with the sound for Strange Loop. If there weren't mixing issues in the much smaller houses of Playwrights and Woolly Mammoth, then this Designer/Whoever is mixing the show live each night does not know how to mix for the house the show is in which is an avoidable, amateur issue to have when dealing on a Broadway stage. The decision to mix it like a concert, if that's true, is a decision likely several members of the team contributed to, so there's definitely blame to go around. It's a glaring problem.
And it's clear that Tony nominator seats were in prime locations where the mix sounded good. Otherwise, none of them actually know what Sound Design is, much less what makes it good. I'd also note that my experience at another show more appropriately "mixed like a concert", MJ was absolutely miserable in the Mezz to the point where everyone in my vicinity had to physically cover their ears it was so loud in Act 2. The entire Mezz was also shaking with every single beat. And they got a nomination as well...so what do I know I guess.
OHHiii, where were you sitting in the Mezz for "MJ"? I was sitting on the right aisle center two rows from the back and the sound was perfect. I was at the second preview. It may have changed since then but I was really impressed with the sound design to the point that I went down to the board and the sound designer was there and they let me chat with him.
uncageg said: "OHHiii, where were you sitting in the Mezz for "MJ"? I was sitting on the right aisle center two rows from the back and the sound was perfect. I was at the second preview. It may have changed since then but I was really impressed with the sound design to the point that I went down to the board and the sound designer was there and they let me chat with him."
I had the two seats on the aisle, center mezz about half way up. And it was probably the most miserable time I've had in the theater. And when I say everyone around me was having to hold their ears, EVERY person around me was plugging their ears from the middle of Act 2 through the end of the show. And the bass making the entire mezz vibrate nonstop was nauseating. I don't typically gripe about that, but to this extent it ruined the experience.
OhHiii said: "uncageg said: "OHHiii, where were you sitting in the Mezz for "MJ"? I was sitting on the right aisle center two rows from the back and the sound was perfect. I was at the second preview. It may have changed since then but I was really impressed with the sound design to the point that I went down to the board and the sound designer was there and they let me chat with him."
I had the two seats on the aisle, center mezz about half way up. And it was probably the most miserable time I've had in the theater. And when I say everyone around me was having to hold their ears, EVERY person around me was plugging their ears from the middle of Act 2 through the end of the show. And the bass making the entire mezz vibrate nonstop was nauseating. I don't typically gripe about that, but to this extent it ruined the experience."
Wow. Glad my experience wasn't that bad. I was really impressed with the mixing in of background sounds. The balance was perfect.
OhHiii said: "I had the two seats on the aisle, center mezz about half way up. And it was probably the most miserable time I've had in the theater. And when I say everyone around me was having to hold their ears, EVERY person around me was plugging their ears from the middle of Act 2 through the end of the show. And the bass making the entire mezz vibrate nonstop was nauseating. I don't typically gripe about that, but to this extent it ruined the experience."
CATSNYrevival said: "OhHiii said: "I had the two seats on the aisle, center mezz about half way up. And it was probably the most miserable time I've had in the theater. And when I say everyone around me was having to hold their ears, EVERY person around me was plugging their ears from the middle of Act 2 through the end of the show. And the bass making the entire mezz vibrate nonstop was nauseating. I don't typically gripe about that, but to this extent it ruined the experience."
I had a great seat in the mezzanine when I saw the show in April. I’m 71 years old and my hearing isn’t so great anymore. I got a hearing device, and I’m so glad I did. Everything was crystal clear. Maybe this might be a solution.
ThisGuyLovesTheatre said: "I totally agree with this.
I am also a gay man around 60 years old. I saw the show at Playwrights Horizon. It was awful. I wanted to run out of the theatre.
It is vulgar. It's so woke it is dizzying. The reasons it doesnt work theatrically is that it has a main character who has many serious mental health issues and for the great portion of the show, the audience is laughing at his illness. Laughing at his awful, destructive life choices. I found it sick. I don't care if the show was about black people of white people. He acts out in very self destructive ways, including the awful anal sex scene, where again, the audience is laughing (at least they were when I saw it at PH.
The character also has no perspective on his youth, which is also a problem. There is no self awareness.
And the score sucks. The music is dreadful. The lyrics a mess. There are ten musicals that have won the Pulitzer, To put this awful show in the same category as the other nine is a disgrace.
and it doesn't make me a racist because I didn't like it. I've disliked plenty of shows with all white casts as well. This is self indulgent tripe, which theatre goers are SUPPOSED to love. I can't see how what audience is going to sustain this awful show.
and yes, it is vulgar. To argue that is absurd."
As a 40-year-old black gay man, I have to say I was also disturbed by this musical, and found the show to function mostly in ways that I don't think are generative to racial equity. My main point of disagreement with ThisGuyLovesTheatre is that this is "woke theatre". To me, it is not. It played into a lot of white supremacist notions and imperatives that I question may be the real motive for why this has become so critically acclaimed by white audiences and critics. I see where the impetus and concept of the show may have begun, but in its execution, it falls into many of the traps that will relegate as pure novelty the path of shows that Michael believed he may have been paving.
Laugh lines include: (1) a call-out of "corporate n***atry" as pro-black rhetoric, (2) "Thought: 'I bought two of my houses on slavery, police violence, and intersectionality my brutha' / Usher: 'who knew slavery, police violence, and intersectionality could be so profitable'" (knowing look referencing Patrice Cullors), (3) The presentation of Usher's desire for an "adonis-like white gay man" as obvious fact (a pathology not reflective of "what it feels like to be a black gay man in NYC theatre" for most black gay men. Most black gay men I know, even the plus-sized guys, desire and seek relationships with other black gay men), and (4) the incessant recitation of the n-word which I wonder is to be accepted as normalized and celebrated for its "raw, realness" by the white audience.
Also, is his name Usher because he's acting as your 'Negro Tour Guide', leading the white audience through the haunted house of his self-denigrating thoughts? What is the purpose of this theatrical experience? Is it really anything more than black trauma porn? (The fact that 'black trauma porn' is acknowledged as a reality means that there is a wide and eager white audience who delight in observing black dysfunction and abuse.) Also, why does Usher wear a suit during Intermission Song reminiscent of a lawn jockey or old movie theater usher suit? Disney ushers, in reality, do not wear this. These choices, I feel, indulge the white audience's desire to see racist tropes performed on stage, more so than indict them as abstract criticism.
The end of the show mostly focuses on Usher's troubled relationship with his homophobic and overly religious parents, including a particularly disturbing/monstrous depiction of a straight black father. After what at times begins to feel like a Klan rally, Michael lets the white audience off the hook and bestows white virtuosity with an applause-inducing monologue about black men loving black men as a revolutionary act (quoting Marlon Riggs, but this is told, not shown). Finally, the psychic battle with the homophobia of his mother, allows the white audience to extend their paternalistic/maternalistic arms to Usher. This "woke" musical does not challenge the white supremacist, capitalist, patriarchy that he quotes on his bell hooks shirt, it openly embraces it.
So, I'm curious, did this musical change any of your world views? What function do you hope this musical will serve toward future stories told on the Broadway stage? What do you think white audiences leave with upon exiting the theater?
Minstrel shows served to allow white audience to vicariously experience the stereotypical care-free lives of happy slaves and blacks during Jim Crow, who were depicted as child-like-to-subhuman in intellect and morality. Here, we have a musical that allows white audiences to vicariously experience all of the negative stereotypes and debasing language/interactions that a black gay man "at the margins" is imagined to experience, providing a sort of masochistic relief. I'm not sure this theatrical experience does much more than reinforce the white supremacy it purports to challenge.
I too am a Black gay male, but in my 30s. But where you saw a lot of the show as problematic, I saw it as an honest exploration. And the Broadway mount is MUCH better than Playwrights. (I didn't love it there but respected the original effort. The new lead and tweaks to the script grabbed my heart on Broadway.)
I totally see and understand your critiques, but actually, I think this is the most respectable Black show that has been on Broadway in a while. I don't believe in Black suffering being the only narrative of Black-made/centered theater. (Not a fan of a lot of Black "classics" and a LOT of new stuff by Black writers for this very reason.) But this show is not even based in real life — it's all in Usher's head.
This is true because he has many, many conflicts with the thoughts throughout the show. The Tyler Perry part is most notable: Where Usher's tearing down Perry, his "thoughts" are lifting him up. And remember, the thoughts, though realized by other actors, are still Usher. Whatever they are doing or saying is another perspective from Usher.
The thoughts also recall Usher's memories/traumatic moments. This is a human experience anyone can relate to, but it's very specific to Usher, a fat, Black, gay 25/26-year-old that has come from a very "urban" (I'm Black, so I'll just say it, and with love, "hood" environment. This is my story too. I understood everything Usher was struggling with.
As we know, when you come from challenging environments, urban or not, maybe people accept that "it is what it is" no matter how wrong/damaging they intellectually know it is. But to change that, to dream something wildly new and better for yourself and your family, seems quite unfathomable to many in that position. So the cycle/loop continues. Throughout the show, Usher is trying to be the one who breaks this cycle for the future of him and his family.
Maybe if he were to do something difficult for him to imagine, like make his play happen in a splashy way, it will inspire his family to reach new heights too? Or at the very least, through his success, he can give them resources to try.
The longing for a sexy white boyfriend and the sex scene with the white guy (one a fantasy, another a memory) is necessary because it wakes Usher up to how toxic white gay men can be and also why Black gay love is powerful and important. He powerfully denounces his embarrassment and prior longing for white d**k at the end of the show.
As for white audiences consuming this, overall, I believe the joke is on them. The show is not for them ultimately, although it allows them to find space to connect on a very surface level through their own experiences. But I imagine most will be confused about many of the references.
To sum up, the show isn't asking anyone to leave changed or anything. It's asking audiences to think about why they see and navigate the world in the way they do, and to question when that perspective is toxic to yourself and (especially for white folks) others outside of yourself, continuing a strange/toxic loop. (We see this now politically and socially, and it will continue until the majority decides to step out of the loop and stop doing the same mess that continues to create division.)
A Strange Loop is an introspective experience. It doesn't care how it looks in front of non-Black people because it's all his wild, messy, honest thoughts and memories. And any non-Black person finding pleasure in Usher's reality or longing to be his white savior should reconsider their worldview. Usher isn't asking to be embraced by them; he only really cares about saving his Black self and possibly, one day in his future, his Black family — hoping to live in the world as freely as white people unconsciously, often times in a toxic way (like on this board lol), do.
(This is made very clear in "Inner White Girl," where he drags the privilege that white folks, in the form of white girls, "have wielded since birth." He knows he deserves that same type of freedom though he's denied it as a Black person, but still desperately longs for it.)
Today? I know they worked on finishing the cast recording on Monday and I think his understudy was on last night too (according to his IG story)?
I'm going next Wednesday to the matinee-it will be my 4th time. I'm bringing a dear friend to see it. I'll also be there at the first performance after the Tony Awards and then i'm totally broke :)
"If we don't wake up
and shake the nation,
we'll eat the dust of the world,
wondering why...why?"
Oh no... I hope he's OK... My sense is that he worked himself too hard. He's been doing a LOT since the show started rehearsals for Broadway and I think it's catching up with him...
OffOnBwayHi said: "Tjlovesmusicals said: "Jaquel out mid show "
Oh no... I hope he's OK... My sense is that he worked himself too hard. He's been doing a LOT since the show started rehearsals for Broadway and I think it's catching up with him..."
Any more detail? It's a grueling role, especially for a newbie.
I am looking at seats in September and see there are orchestra right row B for $79. Has anyone sat this close ? It would be on the aisle and seems like a decent price.
They've been doing a lot of promos and appearances lately, too here's their Tiny Desk concert.
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.
From what I've 'heard' the understudy has a better voice than Jaquel. Always understand the disappointment of course and I'm sure Jaquel is offering more than just a voice but I'd be curious to see the show with an understudy.
"You can't overrate Bernadette Peters. She is such a genius. There's a moment in "Too Many Mornings" and Bernadette doing 'I wore green the last time' - It's a voice that is just already given up - it is so sorrowful. Tragic. You can see from that moment the show is going to be headed into such dark territory and it hinges on this tiny throwaway moment of the voice." - Ben Brantley (2022)
"Bernadette's whole, stunning performance [as Rose in Gypsy] galvanized the actors capable of letting loose with her. Bernadette's Rose did take its rightful place, but too late, and unseen by too many who should have seen it" Arthur Laurents (2009)
"Sondheim's own favorite star performances? [Bernadette] Peters in ''Sunday in the Park,'' Lansbury in ''Sweeney Todd'' and ''obviously, Ethel was thrilling in 'Gypsy.'' Nytimes, 2000
I saw the show for the first time Tuesday night. While initially I was disappointed to see Spivey out, Ramsar did a wonderful job- in fact I actually commented at one point it was hard for me to imagine the role being sung better. Luckily I did not have any mixing issues, which I’m usually aware of and has been happening at many shows I’ve attended lately. Thought 5, I believe, he’s the one that plays the father, was also out on Tuesday evening and also did a decent job in a role that seemed a little out of his vocal range, it’s set low and his voice didn’t sound as strong on the deeper notes. I definitely want to see it again only because it was a lot to process, which isn’t a bad thing.
BwayinVan said: "I am looking at seats in September and see there are orchestra right row B for $79. Has anyone sat this close ? It would be on the aisle and seems like a decent price."
The stage is VERY high. I was AA (First row), and needed a booster seat which didn’t help much. B appears to be third row. I would try sitting a little further back if possible.
Based on his Instagram message it sounds like he is not 100% better so I don't he will be on tonight. Follow him on Instagram and send him some love. I can't imagine how he must feel.
"If we don't wake up
and shake the nation,
we'll eat the dust of the world,
wondering why...why?"