Anyone going to the first preview of A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC tonight?- Page 9

[bjh2114]

Posted: 12/7/09 at 9:15am

That's interesting since she didn't miss a beat Saturday night. Not one line or lyric dropped. I was impressed.

[mywonderwa11]

Posted: 12/7/09 at 12:45pm

I am so excited to see this and I know the show is about SO much more than Aaron Lazar taking his shirt off, but...Aaron Lazar takes his shirt off?

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/7/09 at 1:30pm

Yes, he does take his shirt off. And it is glorious.

[Hrududu]

Posted: 12/7/09 at 1:31pm

I went to see this on Thursday night. I was in the front row of the Mezzanine, a little to the left. There doesnt seem to be a bad seat in that section. The mezzanine is very steep. I kept picturing someone taking a tumble and vaulting over the ledge.

I'm not overly familiar with the show. I have listened to the album a couple of times but that was about it, so I'm sure my opinion will be different to someone who knows it a lot better. I enjoyed it very much. I spent the entire show with a big stupid grin on my face. The show itself seemed more like a play with music rather than a musical, if that makes sense. It seems to have more in common with an old drawing room style farce than anything else.

Performance wise I thought Zeta-Jones was terrific. I think she has great charisma on stage. But in some way that kind of made a couple of things not work. Her 'Send in the Clowns' didn't seem to hit the right tone for me. It didn't seem to have the kind of quiet desperation I was expecting. But apart from that I thought she had great chemistry with everyone, and sang very well.

I thought the woman playing Charlotte (I don't remember the actresses name) was very good. She had some great one liners that she nailed, and her "Every Day a Little Death" was just gorgeous. Leigh Ann Larkin was also very good, but she needs to lose the accent. It really took away from what was an otherwise excellent performance. Her 'Miller's Son' almost brought down the house.

Henrik was the real weak link for me. His 'Later' was awful, shouting notes, singing off key. The role allows for the actor to go over the top a bit but I think he needs to reign it in a bit.

Angela Landsbury was a delight. It helped that she had some of the best lines in the show. Everyone in the audience was in her lap. Which in a way wasn't such a good thing. People were laughing at her lines before she'd finish them. Like they weren't really laughing her delivery, they were laughing because they knew the line was coming and hey its Angela Landsbury. But her performance was terrific.

All in all I thoroughly enjoyed it. And I'd recommend it to anyone

[mywonderwa11]

Posted: 12/7/09 at 1:58pm

A Stephen Sondheim musical starring Angela Lansbury AND a shirtless Aaron Lazar!? It's a gay Christmas MIRACLE!

[Scripps2]

Posted: 12/9/09 at 3:44pm

Now, I just happen to have heard one of the previews of the Broadway revival and thought I would share a few thoughts.

I immediately liked Ramona Mallory as Anne because the character’s subconscious confusion between her feelings for Frederik and her attraction to Henrik were communicated very early in the show. I always need this in a production of ALNM otherwise I find the ending for these two characters seems contrived. The problem here is Henrik: how can Anne fall for this hysterical idiot? If I were her I’d ask Petra to take my hairbrush to him. Would the pastors at a c19th Lutheran seminary really tolerate such histrionics or would they scrub him down all the harder for it? Isn’t part of the character’s problem that he has been repressing himself for so long rather than splurging his conscience across the scenery from the start? For me ALNM is as much about Henrik as anyone else: the character wrestles with the conflict between carnality and faith, which is a real dilemma (even today for some of the people I read posting on this board) and I dislike productions where he is treated as being comic relief. Gabriel Vick’s performance in London was definitive as far as I am concerned and Hunter can’t hold a candle to it.

Alexander Hanson is once again wonderful as Fredrik. This is the only Fredrik I have seen who comes across as being a smart, consummate lawyer thinking his way strategically through his various predicaments. In comparison, previous Fredrik’s have seemed like silly old men desperate to get their leg over – I wouldn’t want any of them working on my papers. And here also is a Fredrik who, when he cries out for Desiree in his sleep, sounds like he is having a wet dream rather than greeting her for afternoon tea.

At first Madame Armfeldt sounded Bracknellesque as indeed she did in the London production and I was a little disappointed for, as has been discussed elsethreadware recently, I struggle with the character being portrayed as an aristocrat. But one has to make so many assumptions since we are told so little about her. However when Angela got to the wooden ring monologue I had to stop what I was doing and listen: I was riveted! She was revelatory as the determined and self-satisfied façade is dropped and a vulnerable and unsure woman is revealed. The years fell away and you heard the young Armfeldt speak out. This old trout of a character has made me laugh many times but this was one of the few occasions that the character actually moved me.

These are just first impressions and as it’s a preview I’m keeping my comments to what is either very good or very bad. I’m sure that much else will still be evolving and so I will reserve judgement.

[brdwybum]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 3:29am

I saw the show again tonight 12/10/09 and thought it was a solid show but walked away wishing it had moved me.

Angela Lansbury is the reason to go and see this show. She is truly a legend of theatre and everything she does is remarkable. She stole the show in every sense and made the other actors that had the privilege of sharing that stage with her look like nothing but amateurs.

Jones is too aware of how pretty she is. She could be an amazing actress if she would stop relying on her looks. It ruins her. Larkin suffers from this syndrome as well the only difference is Jones is actually pretty but I'll get back to her in a bit. Jones sang a fine "Send in the Clowns" But it lacked the quiet desperation it should scream. Definitely not the best I've seen this number performed. I wanted to love her but to be honest was not impressed. She is beautiful though. She didn't move me.
Davie gives a lovely performance. I find her really present. Her voice is effortless. All around solid performance. Clear soprano.

Lazar does a fine job but lacks a certain something, I can't explain it only to say I wish he gave more than just a pretty voice.

Larkin is the one that bothers me the most in this production. She was fine in Gypsy because the fake over acting thing worked in that but it definitely doesn't in this,she butchers this role. Her accent is awful and I was embarrassed for her every-time she went to speak. "The Millers Son" Is all sex and nothing else. She is a big voice and I'm sure thats why Sonheim cast her. But an actor she is not. Every other time I have seen a production of Night Music, Petra has been a major highlight and in this Leigh Ann has managed to turn what should be a vibrant, grounded, earthy Petra into nothing but a slutty, sexed out, belter. Such a shame. I feel as though people are wowed by her belting and let that distract from the fact that she can't act and is wrong for the role. Look a bit closer people.

Herdlicka for making his Broadway debut does a fine job. Not much else to say.

Mallory as Anne is one of the few in the cast that really comes off very young. I do not enjoy this cast being so young and she is one that really reads TOO young. She also is making her Broadway debut and does a fine job. Doesn't move me.

All in all this Production aside from Lansbury lacks the heart at it's core. I wish it was an older cast and I also wish Sondheim had sacrificed some of the money notes for some amazing actors... or not, I'm sure there are people out there that can sing this score beautifully and act it with the depth it needs.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 4:46am

Very interesting, brdwybum, that you saw the show tonite--I'm sure you meant 12/9, not 12/10. But that's not what is interesting.

What is interesting is that Larkin was out tonite, and yet you didn't even mention that amongst all of your disdain for her.

Hmmmmm.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 8:37am

I saw it last night as well (12/9). Larkin was out, which disappointed me, but her u/s was fine, I thought. She had a good voice, but she didn't really make much of an impact, which I think is how most of the show came off. There were great moments, great singers, great actors, and some good direction, but at the end of it, I was just unaffected. I've never quite understood "Send in the clowns" and Jones' interpretation didn't really help explain it anymore. She seemed confused throughout the whole song. However, I thought she was wonderful in the role. The show sort of lagged whenever her and Frederick weren't on stage (for the most part).

The supporting cast was fine. I agree about being disappointed by Henrik. I thought he acted the role fine, but I wish his later had been better sung. And why did they sort of "cut" the cello part? He only plays for the very beginning of the song. I think it makes the rest of the song kind of awkward without him playing along. But other than that, I thought he was fine.

Anne was good. She kind of got irritating, but I guess that's sort of the role. But I never quite understood why Henrik would be interested in her?

Erin Davie stole the show for me. I thought she was SUBLIME! She had me cracking up every moment she was on stage, and I wanted to rewind and watch her "Everyday A Little Death" again. So good! I wish her part were bigger so she could get some awards for this, but oh well. She's giving a crazy good performance.

As for the show as a whole, I thought it was pretty slow moving, but interesting. It didn't quite play out like I thought it would, which I liked. I didn't understand the point of Lansbury's "Liasons." It just seemed like such an afterthought. She was just sitting there and singing. I lost focus about halfway through her rendition.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 8:44am

I didn't understand the point of Lansbury's "Liasons." It just seemed like such an afterthought. She was just sitting there and singing. I lost focus about halfway through her rendition.

Oh boy.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 9:18am

LOL

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 9:24am

So good! I wish her part were bigger so she could get some awards for this, but oh well.

Patricia Elliott won a Tony for Best Featured Actress when she played Charlotte in the original production.

[Hrududu]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 9:27am

I didn't understand the point of Lansbury's "Liasons." It just seemed like such an afterthought. She was just sitting there and singing. I lost focus about halfway through her rendition.

I get what you mean in a way, for me it was like the show stopped so that she could have a song. I did think she did it very well though.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 10:29am

I mean you can make fun of my comments all you want, but I'm honestly looking for some insight. So instead of being a pretentious ass, I would appreciate someone maybe explaining the point of it?

And yes Hrududu, that's what I meant. It's like all this is going on and and then WHAM. There's a spotlight and she's sitting in her wheelchair singing this song. It just seemed to slow everything down. I mean, she was great in her part, but she lost me halfway through that song.

And can someone please explain "Send In The Clowns?" I think I sort of almost understand it, but I still think its meaning is lost on me.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:01am

Why don't you tell us what you think those two songs might mean? It's very possible that you don't realize that you get it. That's part of the magic of Sondheim.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:23am

Well, Liasons I just didn't pay attention to. Maybe it's my youthful attention span, but I just wasn't invested in that song at all. I tried, but I just kept looking at the set or the theater. However, "clowns," I was really trying to figure out what it was about. It was tough because of the way Jones delivered the song. She would almost "breath" the last words of the phrases making it hard to figure out what she was saying, but to me, I thought it meant that they thought what they was doing was so foolish. The idea of him leaving his wife and them running off together and being happy at such a late age. That it must be some sort of joke, so send in the clowns.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:28am

I actually think your understanding is pretty good, RentBoy. I'm sure PalJoey can give a much better explanation, but my understanding was that she's referring to the practice of sending in clowns to drive a bad act in a vaudeville show off the stage. I guess I think Desiree is saying that this whole encounter was nothing but a bad act, and that the clowns should come in and end it all. But, like you said, they're the clowns in the situation.

But I could also be pretty off with that.

[birdboy782]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:40am

"Send in the Clowns" references a practice used in circuses. If an emergency happens, (ie say a tight rope walker "losing her timing"), clowns are deployed to come in and distract the audience from the disaster that just occurred. It's very unsettling. This is a tradition that continues to this day.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:43am

Sondheim has always maintained he's referring to theatrical tradition, not circus.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:45am

Rentboy, maybe this thread will help you "get" Liaisons.
https://cincinnati.broadwayworld.com/board/readmessage.php?thread=1007109

Sorry you couldn't appreciate this wonderful song.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:48am

It's a little bit of what both of you think and a little bit of some other things: there are some touches of irony, which is different from sarcasm, and a big pinch of ruefulness, which is different from regret.

And it's Sondheim, so it's going to mean something different to someone of Desiree's age than it does to you, just as it means something different to Desiree than it does to Frederik (at least until the reprise, when he comes back, shaken), and something different to each person who sings it.

Watch below how Glynis Johns performs it, then watch Dame Judi Dench. Watch their eyes, watch their little laughs, their flashes of anger, their acceptance and their smiles. Then watch Sondheim talking about what it meant to him when he wrote it and how he thinks it should be performed.


Glynis Johns

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAl-EawVobY


Dame Judi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rEhOnd8S-8


Sondheim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWC5qfVnsVs


After you watch these 3 videos, you'll know exactly what it means.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:49am

Re Liaisons: I think it's got to be closer to the second theory posited there. "It's but a pleasurable means to a measurable end." It's not that she lucked out in getting what she got from her suitors.

In a way, it's a similar sentiment of the chorus from Evita's "Good Night and Thank You."
Updated On: 12/10/09 at 11:49 AM

[massofmen]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 11:58am

rentboy you are the exact reason why 90% of the posts on this board are trivial and wonderful to laugh at.

15 yr olds who love wicked and think it's the height of musical theater come on this board and espouse their great knowledge of what is "good" and what is "bad". It's like a kid going to to the musee' d'orsay in Paris and saying "in these monet paintings i cannot really see the water lillies. They are all out of focus. Ugh this is annoying"

This is why it's so fun to sit and read your comments and the comments of so many others on the board. Because the knowledge that most possess is limited to the amount of youtube videos they have seen of original casts and deem them to be "worthy" of their attention.


Please go back to to the kids table at thanksgiving an let the adults speak for a while.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 12:05pm

This adult is speaking to you, massofmen: STFU.

[Hrududu]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 12:29pm

Dame Judi's rendition of Send in the Clowns has always blown me away. No matter how many times I've seen it.