Anyone going to the first preview of A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC tonight?- Page 4

[Princeton2]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 10:48am

Act 1 dragged in London well after opening so it may not improve in NYC.

[Oldschool]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 11:20am

I really think its a bit much to assume that a performer should sign anything. Your ticket was for the performance, not the side door fawning. Would it be nice if they signed something? Sure. But the over the top hero worship at stage doors goes beyond the pale -- I've seen any number of people lie to get near someone. I agree with the theatre that anything for a performer must be left with the stage door security -- no one, no one but the cast, crew, and creatives belongs backstage unless they are brought back by one of them, and no one but the performer and perhaps crew belongs in a dressing room unless they've been invited in. Period.

[bundy5000]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 11:20am

I had the privilege to sit next to Victoria Mallory and her hubby Mark Lambert last night. I got my playbill autographed by CZJ but she did not pose for pictures. I could feel the barricade railings cling and clang almost giving in as she came out due to the overwhelming crowd last night. A great night at the theater. I'll check it out again after it opens.

[wickedfan]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 11:23am

Sounds like a lot of the problems here were problems in London. It sounds like Davie, who I thought was sensational in Grey Gardens, is giving a similar performance to her London counterpart as is Mallory, and I blame that on Nunn. The only improvement might be that the singing will be better than it was in London. I bought my ticket for this with the hopes that Nunn would let this wonderful cast do what they do best, but it sounds like he's determined to enforce his muddled vision. Hope things turn around when it opens. The first Broadway revival of Night Music and I want it to be great.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 11:42am

I really do believe Nunn just doesn't 'get' the humour in secondary characters in musicals, or perhaps feels the humour that originally came out of characters (like Charlotte and Ado Annie) somehow was a disservice to the dramatic conceit of the story.

At any rate it seems to be his mantra to make everything played for Checkov (perhaps not remembering how funny Checkov really is).

And the pace sounds identical to what was seen in London, which again shouldnt really be a surprise. Even with all the cuts in dance music and script trims, Nunn's production of OKLAHOMA was almost half an hour LONGER than the original production from 1943!

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 11:49am

Having heard audio of the London production, Mallory is in a completely different league from Buckley. Her vocals are just sensational. What a voice.
And Davie just needs to nail the humor in act 1, she had some really fabulous moments in act 2.
Updated On: 11/25/09 at 11:49 AM

[wickedfan]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 12:21pm

I hope so. It doesn't seem likely, though. Again, that's no fault of Davie's. Nunn's vision for Charlotte (and the production in general) is very...melodramatic, for lack of a better word. What makes a lot of Charlotte's humor work is that it's dead pan, pretty much commentary on the action. Nunn has made it clear he has no intention of doing that. Maybe they'll find another way to make the humor work. I'm trying to be optimistic, but it's becomign difficult.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 12:22pm

I was going to spend the $137 each or whatever it is for 2 tickets for Christmas week.

Now it seems as if the ONLY reason to see this is to see Angela's "Liaisons," which frankly isn't worth $280.

So I'll cling to my memories of having seen and loved the original and go see Ragtime instead.

[mywonderwa11]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 12:37pm

I know it was only the first preview, but all of these reviews and the commentary is making me really worried. I've been looking forward to this revival all year! A Little Night Music is my second favorite musical and I'd be so sad to see it not done well for its' first Broadway revival.

I'm optimistic though! It was only the first preview.

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 12:53pm

There hasn't been one negative review yet. Why are some of you worrying or writing it off?

It was only the first preview. They just need some work, and need to get more comfortable with the piece.

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 1:00pm

ljay, I was totally going to say the same thing...it sounds like the production needs some work, but it was only a first preview and the only shows I've seen that I could call "amazing" at a first preview were Next to Normal and Ragtime, both of which had just completed runs out of town and had mostly the same company. They have a really talented group of actors here and I'm sure the show will grow in time.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 1:05pm

^ Completely agree. It seems as though the response is overwhelmingly positive: and that's after the first preview. I was tempted to see it this weekend (and darn it, I still may!!) but waiting until the performance I have tickets for in December seems like a better choice.

All in all, this thread has made me even more excited about the production!

Oh! And quick question: how much of "Weekend" remains in the production? For those of you who have seen it in London, more than what was originally edited?

[GYPSY1527]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 1:08pm

I saw it last night as well and I have a few thoughts.

- Can everyone in the show take their acting down a notch? It was bordering on hysterical and pushy.
-Catherine Zeta Jones needs to stop shouting and running around so forcefully! There is an amplification system for a reason and she's gonna fall off the stage if she runs like the way she did in "Glamorous Life" again! I have faith that her line readings will improve- she has the most potential!
-I was very disappointed in Davie and Larkin. I disliked Davie's over-emotionality and Larkin was too sexual and less thoughtful in "Miller's Son".

[MissAnneThrop]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 1:11pm

can anyone post a pic of the title page?

[Scripps2]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 1:11pm

I loved this production on its own terms when I saw it in London. However I don't think Sondheim purists will enjoy it.

I'm pleased to read so many good opinions of Alexander Hanson's performance.

"perhaps not remembering how funny Checkov really is"

Or even how to spell his name.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 1:37pm

What makes a lot of Charlotte's humor work is that it's dead pan, pretty much commentary on the action. Nunn has made it clear he has no intention of doing that.
I'd never seen a production of the show before last night, so I don't know how Charlotte is "supposed" to be played. However, I can tell you that there was not one bit of deadpan from Davie as Charlotte. She had a lot of moments (in act 2) that work really well, but there was no deadpan. If anything, the deadpan moments are coming from Lansbury.

Now it seems as if the ONLY reason to see this is to see Angela's "Liaisons," which frankly isn't worth $280.
That's certainly a highlight, but there are a lot of other reasons to see the production. Hanson is (in my opinion) fabulous, and Jones acquits herself well onstage and will only get better. Did I love the production? No. However, it's not the disaster that Bye Bye Birdie was. Do I think it's as good as the Ragtime revival? Not at all. But again, I enjoyed the production a lot and would be eager to return after opening once they've all settled in.

[wickedfan]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 2:23pm

adam- I'm aware that Davie isn't doing dead pan. The Charlotte in London didn't do dead pan. She did "over emotional" and all that and it didn't work. "Supposed" isn't the right word to say. There's no "right" way to do a show or a role. There IS a most effective way. Having seen quite a few productions of Night Music, read through the script numerous times, even having seen the awful movie, I can say that Charlotte being done as dead pan has been the most effective.

The only reason I'm worried about this production is because everything that I'm hearing that isn't working, is stuff that was in London and didn't work. Nunn has been working on this production for almost a year, and hasn't made any major changes in all that time. For this production, the singing might get smoother, the transitions a bit faster, but the major changes that need to be made don't seem likely to happen.

The one thing that seems to work here, that worked in London, and has worked since the show opened in the 70's is the portrayal of Madame Armfeldt. Dead pan and deliciously bitchy. Maureen Lipman was sensational in London and was the complete scene stealer. Her character was borderline caricature and it played beautifully. It sounds like Lansbury is doing the same. it's not the "right" way to play Armfeldt, but it IS the most "effective."

[Pgenre]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 2:38pm

Well, some things that won't change between now and opening are the lack of an acceptable set, no table for the freaking DINNER scene, the eight member orchestra and Nunn's imposition of a languid and melodramatic directorial conceit that doesn't necessarily work. Essentially nothing has changed since London, it seems, except sticking a cast with many of Broadway's brightest talents into a production that doesn't fully work even with casting that is to-the-letter what the director wanted (35 year old Desiree, no-names, etc) the first time around. As Sondheim recently, and snidely, remarked about Nunn's version of ALNM: "It's Swedish Chekhov."

I have to say that unless discount tickets show up, I am not interested in seeing full-wattage stars in a half-wattage production of one of the greatest musicals ever written with a teeny tiny band orchestra.

As PJ said, is it really worth $280 to hear a good though probably not definitive "Liasons" and suffer through a production that the majority of which you will probably abhor? And as much as I love Miss Zeta Jones, Desiree is not a very large role, I mean, Count Carl Magnus has nearly as much stage time and sung material. There's just no bang for the (big) bucks here. The cast deserves better, the show deserves better and the intellectually starved audience CERTAINLY deserves better. Especially for $140 a pop.

I'd almost rather see the new cast in Arthur's distasteful, but seemingly better in comparison or at least more enjoyable and less frustrating, revival of WSS.

I think it says everything about Nunn's miscalculations that the weakest link in his cast is the actress playing Charlotte, possibly the most fool-proof and audience pleasing character in musical theatre.

This does NOT look or sound good anymore... at all.

I am VERY depressed about all of this, but I have to be honest.

P
Updated On: 11/25/09 at 02:38 PM

Posted: 11/25/09 at 3:00pm

Could people please preface their criticisms of this production with "I SAW THE SHOW" or "I DID NOT SEE THE SHOW"?

Because it seems to me that two or three people said they were going to the preview last night and 10 or 15 have blasted it for sucking.

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 3:09pm

I think only about 6 people (including myself) in this thread saw the show last night. And none of us have said it "sucked."

The production just needs some tightening, and they are working on that as I type this.
I think it will be top-notch by the time it opens.

[romgitsean]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 3:11pm

OT: Is there any way I can get tickets from 12/26-1/2? Or would that be ridiculous? Cuz that's when I'm in town...

[Scripps2]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 3:20pm

"It's Swedish Chekov."

I doubt Sondheim ever said that.

What he probably said was...

"It's Swedish Chekhov."

[mywonderwa11]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 3:24pm

I'm sure everyone is going to get better and stronger during previews. That's the point of previews. Nonetheless, I'm still extremely excited to see this in December!

[mybigsplash]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 4:02pm

Mr. Sondheim was at the Performance last night near where I was sitting, and he was laughing and having fun the whole time. He's been very involved in this production, he enjoys it very much. He even came by and said Hi to the merchandise kids before the show, and he's been in and out of Tech rehearsals. If it's good enough for Sondheim IT SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR EVERYONE ELSE. I guess some people are too good for Sondheim?

I thought the production was simply beautiful with strong performances from all the leads.

[Pgenre]

Posted: 11/25/09 at 4:07pm

Glad you enjoyed it, mybigsplash, but you do realize Steve smokes A LOT - and I mean A LOT - of weed, right?

Maybe he hallucinated a set, or at least a dinner table!

P