Anyone going to the first preview of A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC tonight?- Page 8

[bnyc]

Posted: 11/30/09 at 6:55pm

I saw it in London this summer and loved Hannah Waddingham as Desiree and Kasia Hammarlund as Petra. Wondering if I should go see the Broadway production or just stick with my memories of the London Production.

thoughts?

Posted: 12/1/09 at 10:16am

"nd, I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that if that dungeon were real, I wouldn't mind taking a trip down there. "

No comment

[jagfkb]

Posted: 12/1/09 at 11:25am

Having seen the production this past Saturday, (with a full house including Barbara Cook and Raul Ezparza, I must say that, while still in need of work, it is a beautiful production. Not exactly on the magnitude of Sunday's pitch perfect revival (save orchestrations), it's a lock with ragtime for Best Revival, and Angela is a lock for another Tony win. Here are my more indepth thoughts:

Design- Perfect. Though the simple mirrored wall set reminds some, including myelf, of Billy Elliot or Sunday, it in many ways transcends such preconcieved notions by swinging outward, revealing doors, passage ways, and in Act Two a beautiful forrest (seen above). One of the best designs I've seen in quite some time.

Cast- I'll be brief: Catherine, Angela, Alexander, Ramona, Leigh Ann, and Aaron = Perfection, beautiful performances, as said before. Hunter and Erin, work is needed. Hunter improved greatly in the second act, and Erin began strong in her first scene, but the audience shouldn't see her break down so much in "Every Day a Little Death", my favorite song in the show, which is almost completely ruined by Erin's incessant weeping, and a pace that could kill. Erin does improve in the second act, and if she nails "Death", she could easily swipe the Tony from Lansbury. Katherine as Fredricka was excellent, nailing her short, but vital part.

Direction- Overall, Trevor Nunn's take on the piece works, though the pace in the dressingroom scene needs to practically doubletime, and "Weekend in the Country" needs to be restored to it's full glory. Otherwise, a success on his part, with such beautiful moments including the opening waltz, the picnic in Act Two, and the finale waltz.

A great production, which I'll be happy to see again in January after it has opened.

[bnyc]

Posted: 12/1/09 at 12:12pm

oooooo and i loved Alexander Hanson in London.. Didn't know he was in the Broadway company too.. may have to go see it.. maybe in january... are tickets selling out? any chance there will be discount tickets available with star names??

[binau]

Posted: 12/1/09 at 3:42pm

"it's a lock with ragtime for Best Revival"

If Ragtime closes several months before the Tony Awards, will Night Music have more of a chance?

(Well let me add a disclaimer that this is not a bitter-wish, if Ragtime closes I'll be VERY annoyed since I want to visit NY in April and the trip will seem much less satisfying - I'm just wondering)

[The Tony Awards seem to favour shows that are actually open]

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/1/09 at 5:59pm

Can we please get rid of this Tony "lock" nonsense? There are no "locks" because different people predict different things and someone is always pissed off no matter who wins. The only possible scenario for a lock is when there is simply only one option for nomination in a category. And that's not really a "lock" so much as it is a really crappy season.

Erin does improve in the second act, and if she nails "Death", she could easily swipe the Tony from Lansbury.

Except you said Lansbury was a lock to win the Tony.

[ElizabethAngela]

Posted: 12/1/09 at 9:42pm

Is that picture in one of these previous posts a still from the "Night Music" that is in previews now? I can't tell if that lady is Angela as Mme Armfeldt in that still or not.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/1/09 at 9:44pm

I won't be going until March 11th. But I'm very excited!

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 12/1/09 at 9:59pm

"There are no "locks" because different people predict different things and someone is always pissed off no matter who wins."

Dear Grumpy Mister Matt:

Allow jagfkb a little fun. After all, who doesn't like a good Tony prediction now and again. Certainly, you can find ways to use them against people later. (see: "Except you said Lansbury was a lock to win the Tony.")

I for one see Memphis leading the pack! (Please god: let this attempt at sarcasm not be rewarded with actual nominations!)

Best regards,

Play Esq.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 9:47am

This is not by me, but by a knowledgeable friend who is not on BWW. The subject line of his email was "A Lugubrious Night Music":

===

Come back "A Doll's Life," all is forgiven.

Oy. If Lou Dobbs wants my vote, he should campaign against allowing British directors into this country to direct revivals of American musicals. Mr. Nunn evidently watched the wrong Bergman film. He thought he was directing a musical version of "Cries and Whispers" (or perhaps "Persona"). I swear, at least for the first act it was "Edvard Munch-The Musical." Everyone was dressed in black and grey, overemoting on a dingy brown and off-white set. It was all very dark and very dull, particularly for a show that takes place during the summer when the friggin' sun isn't supposed to set. I mean has everyone just come back from a funeral in Lapland?

And as for pacing and humor, I swear I've seen Heddas that were cheerier (and faster).

Then in the second act - hallelujah - everyone changes into white and there's even an occasional birch tree stuck in the dark brown paneled floor. Evidently, that's also the cue for everyone to start hammering home the comedy. Nunn has no feel for the show at all. There' s no consistency of tone, no sense of pace or style, and he seems determined to highlight all of the show's potential pitfalls: the witty book is now out-of-balance and seems a mish-mash of arch pseudo-aphorisms and broadway banter; the Quintet role as "Greek Chorus" is underlined by a lack of characterization or relationships between them, making their constant reprises blunt, over-obvious, and annoying, as well as the subject of inappropriate "Fosca" laughter in the second act; and the cast appears to have been directed to play directly on the text and lyrics, which is a huge mistake for a comedy of manners, which is, after all, supposed to deal with the artificiality of the characters' public masks and behaviors and the distance between what they say they want - and how they think they should act - and what they really need. Worst of all, the music now seems kind of dull and repetitive (oh god, not another melancholy waltz!)

Nunn has also done a terrible job in staging the show. The script requires multiple locations in overlapping scenes -- think of "Weekend in the Country" or the simultaneous second act couplings in the woods and in the mansion. He provides no sense of that wonderful "cinematic fluidity" that Prince and Aronson were able to bring to the piece. (With each new Sondheim revival, it just becomes clearer how much the "Sondheim" shows were really Sondheim- Prince-Aronson shows, and how they were all equally vital to the show's success.) Granted, in this case, he is severely hampered by his set, which is apparently a bigger version of the basic box set from his original Chocolate Factory staging, complete with doors that have to be opened manually and a gateleg wall that needs to be moved mid-scene by the actors, as well as beds and benches to be carried onstage and off. But we're on B'way now and you're asking really big bucks for tickets; could ya maybe, I don't know, upgrade the physical production a bit and perhaps get a set that works for the show (Where's that bloody "Les Mis" turntable now?) I mean they fit the bloody Grey Gardens house on that stage just a year or two ago.

And look, I know it's redundant at this point to complain about the singing when the Brits direct, but even when the actors can sing they are encouraged to talk sing whenever possible and to refrain from sustaining notes or singing too robustly, lest they remind anyone that they're in a musical. Or maybe it's to make sure that they don't overwhelm the piped-in orchestra, which is not only reduced to seven pieces, it's virtually banished from the theater. Seriously, it's tucked away like the Franks; sealed up in a small little attic room that sits above the set off stage right. (If you sit house right upstairs, you can see the lighted conductor's score through a little window.) I know everyone loves Sondheim's lyrics, but perhaps someone ought to give some weight to his music as well. Not to mention Jonathan Tunick's orchestrations.

My issues are not with the "scaling down" or even the chamber orchestra, per se. Nor do I have problems with productions that bring out the "darker side" of shows or that bring different interpretations. I just feel that so many of these productions just drain the life out of these shows. (Sweeney, perhaps, being the exception, despite Doyle's efforts to obscure as much of the piece as possible.) They constantly treat his shows as "difficult," and somewhat unknowable "texts" that come from some distant and unfamiliar land that need to be translated and decoded.

Here's a thought: if you don't like or understand American musicals, don't direct 'em.

As for the cast, CZJ is fine, looks great, has plenty of stage presence and brings some welcome pizazz and energy to the first act. Though I still don't know that she's really right for the role - she doesn't look like she would lose a man EVER -- she might have delivered a Desiree if she had a director who knew what the f-ing style of the show was. But at least she's a pro. Her "Clowns" is fine but she's playing for tears instead of against them and, alas, Sir Trevor has staged the scene as Frederick's and not Desiree's. He's placed her in a lovely off-white dress, on an off-white bed, playing in front of an off-white set, while seated behind Frederick (who's also in off-white). And, not fer nuthin, but given the 7-piece "chamber orchestra," couldn't they have transposed her songs into her key? Frederick, by the way, seems to be the spine of this production -- is he usually? The British actor who was brought over is fine, but there's nothing particuarly memorable about him (though perhaps that's the role). To be sure, he certainly doesn't have half the voice of Len Cariou.

Angie already has some delicious line readings, while she searches for others. (She spent an awful lot of "Liaisons" with the Baron DeSignac and his duchy, with nary a tiny Titian in sight.) Erin Davies is a very young, flutie, and amateurish Charlotte. She is playing very broadly, both comically and dramatically, and lacks the necessary sophistication for the role. Where's Jan Maxwell when you need her? (Oh, nevermind.) Aaron Lazaar is fine (if also young) as C-M, and is at least given permission to hit the big note at the end of "In Praise of Women" (and take off his shirt). As for the young'uns, Henrik overacts a tough part badly and since he doesn't have the requisite top notes, he tries to yell them instead (a bad idea). Anne is extremely giggly and goes flat A LOT, and Petra - who at least can belt - unfortunately thinks she's still playing in "Gypsy" (albeit this time as one of the strippers, and not Dainty June). Our Fredrika, however, was lovely.

And did I mention that everyone is attempting a British accent?

Alright, to be fair, the cast is talented, and they only started previews last week. Certainly Angie will get her lines down, and I'm most of the cast will settle down as well. Maybe Trevor's notes this week will be all about subtext and light comedy technique. Perhaps Steve will come in to remind people that notes are meant to be sung (and occasionally held). One of the producers might drop by to encourage the cast to pick up the pace so that they won't have to pay overtime when the show comes down after 11 pm. And, who knows, maybe somebody will kick in some extra money - maybe from the theater restoration fund? - so that they can add some color to the first act costumes and open a window for the orchestra.

But what do I know. The critics could love it (just like they did all those others).

Anyway, sorry for the lengthy screed, but sometimes Momma's gotta let go.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 9:51am

Sounds like ATC!!

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 10:24am

To that end Pal, I have had a couple of friends who saw the original several times and loved this production. I think ultimately this is just going to be a go see it and decide for yourself production...

[binau]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 4:48pm

Some random "star stats" http://www.broadwayspace.com/page/star-stats-hunter-ryan on 'Hunter'.

"Pepsi or coke? Diet anything.
Chocolate or vanilla? vanilla
Guilty pleasure? Manicures/pedicures."


...I know someone asked this before, but how does Hunter come across on stage :P? Is he 'believable' as a straight male?

[Scripps2]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 4:57pm

With their references to Hedda Gabler and A Doll's Life, PJ's friend taps into something I posted on the West End board a year ago: that this production is not Sondheim staged as Chekhov (that was already done at the National in 1996) but Sondheim staged as Ibsen.

And ofcourse that treatment can't be carried over into Act II. But that wasn't a problem to me because what I got was as worthwhile as what I lost. And I do like to experiment. The possibility of new revelation, of a different perspective, of being sat in a theatre seat but feeling like I'm sat on a rollercoaster, of a shot between the eyes or of having my mind jolted (without the use of artificial stimulants) is what makes me keep going to the theatre.

And what Nunn also added, that I haven't noticed anyone pick up on yet, was the Scandinavian attitude towards sex. Has this production been expurgated in its journey across the Atlantic?

I hope not because I've never (as an adult) been comfortable with the show's knowing winks at the audience when the work itself is so obviously and fundamentally about heterosexual fornication; and set amongst a people who deal with sex so matter-of-factly.
Updated On: 12/3/09 at 04:57 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 5:02pm

^ I've been told the Broadway transfer has MORE sex than the London production. I didn't see it London, so I don't know for sure. But there's a lot of sex in the Broadway production. "The Miller's Son" is basically now a full out sexual epiphany.

[Scripps2]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 5:25pm

One of the problems I had with the London production (and I omitted this from my review on the West End board) was The Miller's Son, which I thought was over-sexualised. I presumed it was the fault of the actress (who had just come out of the over-sexualised production of Cabaret in the West End) but it must be intentional.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that the sex should be niether too subtle nor too in your face but just there.

(I could say more but I'm far too British and not Norwegian enough!)

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 5:29pm

Yeah, looks like it's Nunn's intention to have the number performed very sexually. It did receive the biggest ovation of any song from the first preview.
Updated On: 12/3/09 at 05:29 PM

[Taryn]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 6:28pm

Some random "star stats" http://www.broadwayspace.com/page/star-stats-hunter-ryan on 'Hunter'.

Oh, Hunter. Your favorite movie is LIFE AS A HOUSE?

Oh my.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 11:04pm

It did receive the biggest ovation of any song from the first preview.

As Arthur Laurents said to Sam Mendes about another perennially crowd-pleasing number, "You could have Saddam Hussein and his two sons sing that song, and it would STILL get a big ovation."

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 11:08pm

Ok.

[lovinlovett]

Posted: 12/3/09 at 11:30pm

I was at last Saturday's matinee and it was truly incredible. This was my first time seeing ALNM and I was very moved. I even cried at the end :) I thought the entire cast was superb and the staging was simple (which I prefer really) but gorgeous. Catherine Zeta Jones was lovely and very effective in her role. I felt honored to see Angela Lansbury perform-first time for me. She was magnificent and stole every scene she was in. I was particularly fond of Alexander Hanson and Aaron Lazar; they were delightful. And, as there is much discussion about 'The Miller's Son' on this thread may I say that Leigh Anne Larkin's version is extremely sexually charged....wow! She did a beautiful job with Petra!

[massofmen]

Posted: 12/4/09 at 2:29am

wow. you are so wrong.

[binau]

Posted: 12/4/09 at 3:53am

massofmen, it would be more helpful if you specifically let us know who you are replying to (e.g. quoting posts, usernames etc.)

[binau]

Posted: 12/7/09 at 4:37am

I found this comment a little depressing, from ATC

"Saw it this afternoon (Sunday) and it ws unacceptable. Angela went up TWICE during Liasons......and just sat there..and mumbled. Tepid applause. A HUGE disappointment.
"

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/7/09 at 7:08am

Angela isn't using an earpiece. She IS going to mess up sometimes. But she makes it work.