ANGELS IN AMERICA QUESTION ?

[heaja123]

Posted: 6/21/05 at 7:08pm

hi i know this has probably been posted before, so sorry in advance. I have only seen the movie of Angels in America and i was wondering which characters are considered leads and which are considered supporting .. thanks! :)


EDIT : .. when the show was running, was it shown in two seperate parts or once the perestroika opened where they played together as act 1 and 2 ?
Updated On: 6/21/05 at 07:08 PM

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/21/05 at 7:19pm

Well, they're all great meaty roles, but I would say that the main story over the course of the two plays is Prior's and his is the Lead role, as much as there is one in the ensemble.

If you want to go by the Tonys (which is based as much on politics as anything), for Millenium, Ron Leibman was the only cast member eligible for the Lead Actor categories that year, while the rest were considered Featured. The next season, when Perestroika was up separately for Best Play, Stephen Spinella was considered Lead (and he won for Best Actor; he had won for Best Featured for the same role in Millenium the year before), while the rest of the cast (including Leibman) were deemed eligible only for Featured.

Basically, Prior's the protagonist, but the rest of the ensemble has very large, key roles to play.

Updated On: 6/21/05 at 07:19 PM

[CostumeMistress]

Posted: 6/21/05 at 7:32pm

.

Updated On: 2/7/06 at 07:32 PM

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/21/05 at 7:40pm

The parts performed in rep on Broadway. It started with Millennium playing a regular eight show a week schedule for about six months while Kushner finished rewrites on Perestroika (FYI --he went to the NYU Tisch grad program and used the students to rehearse and workshop the changes; Debra Messing played Harper and Ben Schenkman played Roy Cohn -- both were MFA students at the time).

Once Perestroika was ready, the Broadway cast rehearsed it during the day and then performed Millennium at night and when it was ready they went to the following rep schedule:

Monday night: Millennium
Tuesday night: Perestroika
Wednesday Matinee: Millennium
Wednesday night: Perestroika
Thursday night: Millennium
Friday night: Perestroika
Saturday matinee: Millennium
Saturday night: Perestroika
Sunday: Dark

This allowed you to see the entire play on consecutive nights or in one marathon all-day session on Wednesdays or Saturdays if you liked (you bought each ticket separately, so if you only wanted to see part I or only Part II, you had that option as well).

Each part had a running time in excess of three hours, resulting in tons of overtime for the union stage hands (who dubbed the show the "cash machine") and eventually leading to the Broadway run closing after a year and a half at a loss of $1.1 million (later recouped on the road).

Updated On: 6/21/05 at 07:40 PM

[heaja123]

Posted: 6/21/05 at 11:11pm

thanks ! :)

[kyle.]

Posted: 6/22/05 at 2:23am

this might sound weird, but i never tire of reading your posts on angels margo.

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 6/22/05 at 2:53am

I always thought that the openings had something to do with being eligible for Tony Awards, I guess not.

I always wondered how they set up the showing of the two halves.

What was it like seeing Millennium and then having to wait all that time to see Perestroika??????

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/22/05 at 3:23am

Agony.

I think I saw Millenium three times before Perestroika even opened. I spent six months wondering how Kushner was going to finish the rest of the story after the Angel crashed through Prior's ceiling.

When Perestroika was finally ready and started previewing (I can't remember exactly, but I think that the production might have gone to a mostly Perestroika schedule for a couple weeks to help the actors get their bearings), I saw an early performance with another completely obsessed friend. At the first intermission (after the epic "Angel scene" that ends Act Two -- more than 90 minutes in) we both ran out of the theatre to get air. I thought my head was going to explode. My brain was in overdrive. I had never had SO many metaphors and symbols and narrative conceits thrown at me all at once like that and my friend and I were shaking and all but stuttering, trying to piece it all together before Act Three (I looked over where we were standing -- on the sidewalk in front of the parking lot next to the Kerr -- and saw Harvey Fierstein and a friend apparently doing the same exact thing). It was a mind f*ck, yet was a rationally, intellectually and emotionally satisfying continuation of the epic and by the end, the single most compelling piece of theatre I've ever seen. I returned several times with friends -- seeing Perestroika, individually, as well as both parts together in a one-day marathon -- and have yet to completely get over the experience.

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 6/22/05 at 3:36am

Thanks Margo!!!!!! Your the Offical Angels in America and Dreamgirls Guru!!!!!! If I ever have to do analysis of Angels for school, I'm searching for your old post :)

While we're on the subject, How was Marcia Gay Harden?????? I'm a pretty big fan of hers and was so happy see won the Academy Award for Pollock and when I found out she was the original Harper I thought "How great is that!!!!!!"

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 6/22/05 at 3:38am

My goodness. How did the actors survive with a schedule like that? Wow.

I know it's too early right now, but I'd love to see it revived on Broadway in the future. I've never seen a stage production of either but have studied the plays and seen the movie.

~Steven

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/22/05 at 3:45am

Harden, to me, is the definitive Harper. Raw and vulnerable, but still steely and powerful. As much as I loved Parker in the movie, Harden still owns it for me.

The show lost too much money to ever be revived on Broadway, at least commercially -- maybe if MTC or LCT wanted to do a limited engagement, it would work. Perhaps, we'll see an all-star fund-raising concert sometime or a short run at BAM or something in the future.