Anyone going to the first preview of FOLLIES? - Page 10

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:45am

I feel that the Loveland sequence itself is a major problem with the show. Its succession of six songs is just too much, it makes the show top-heavy and fatiguing. Moreover, with the exception of Losing My Mind, the songs just repeat what has been made perfectly clear already. The first song is unnecessary, except for the chance to display beautiful costumes (when they are beautiful), the second is just a mean little typical Sondheim jab at the hopes of people who want to find happiness together in life, and the songs for Buddy, Phyllis, and Ben are not very good and are a chore to sit through. It's too bad Loveland couldn't be dropped altogether and have Losing My Mind be placed in the context of the regular story. Maybe then the show would work, or at least work better.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 8:03am

After Eight, I think if you really find Sondheim so nasty and upsetting, you should stick to Jerry Herman musicals (many of which are quite good). Why torture yourself any more?

Surely "You're Gonna Love Tomorrow"/"Love Will See Us Through" are heavy with irony, given everything that has gone before. But they are also beautiful songs with brilliantly adept lyrics. "Nasty jabs"? Seen Threepenny Opera lately?

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 8:11am

Loveland is in the right order as written. It builds to Ben's breakdown because his is the biggest change among the characters (and because doing so parallels a traditional psychoanalytic catharsis).

Moving "Losing My Mind" would condemn it to being upstaged by the production numbers that would then come before it.
Updated On: 8/22/11 at 08:11 AM

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 10:32am

" Seen Threepenny Opera lately?"

Not lately. But its social commentary is far more accomplished than the silly pettiness of You're Gonna Love Tomorrow.

And incidentally. I'm not in the slightest bit tortured by Follies. In fact, I like quite a bit of it. But that doesn't make me blind to its faults, which I'm offering for discussion here.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 5:37pm

After Eight, what is petty about "You're Gonna Love Tomorrow/Love'll See Us Through"? The lyrics are sunny and optimistic, the tunes are catchy and, to me, delightful. Whatever irony attaches to the number comes from the context of knowing where these characters will end, not from anything in the songs themselves.

For the record, I wasn't suggesting you stop posting. I'm not the boss of this or any other thread.

But you've insisted several times now that the show in general and Sondheim in particular are maliciously assaulting you as a viewer. If the man won't stop pissing on your shoes, maybe for your own good it's time to cut him out of your life...
Updated On: 8/22/11 at 05:37 PM

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 5:40pm

Updated On: 8/22/11 at 05:40 PM

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 5:56pm

^^^^

tmg, I can't tell if your photo is supposed to represent Sondheim or me. LOL.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 6:17pm

"After Eight, what is petty about "You're Gonna Love Tomorrow/Love'll See Us Through"? The lyrics are sunny and optimistic, the tunes are catchy and, to me, delightful. Whatever irony attaches to the number comes from the context of knowing where these characters will end.

Well, as you obviously know yourself, it's the very context of the song that makes a mockery of those words. What is petty and silly is to target cheery peaches and cream songs of long ago, that no one took to the letter in the first place. The cruel irony, here, though, is that songs like Life Is Just a Bowl of Cherries and On the Sunny Side of the Street are better than anything in Follies!

I will tell you I enjoy reading your posts. You're intelligent, articulate, and insightful. I'm glad you've joined this group. But try to be more accurate when summing up another person's opinion. I've used words like "mean spirited," "snarky," "nasty," and "petty," to describe this show. That's not the same as feeling "maliciously assaulted." I do not feel maliciously assaulted.. I feel irritated, for the reasons I've stated. I also like other elements of the show.

And one other thing. You've made several recommendations to me. Now I'll make another to you. Don't patronize or condescend to others. I have no need to stick to Jerry Herman musicals. (And don't be so condescending about those either.) I'll see whatever I please.

But for the record, I prefer Dolly, Mame, Milk and Honey, La Cage, and even
Dear World like 5,721 times more than anything Sondheim has written.

So cheers, and have a good evening.




Updated On: 8/22/11 at 06:17 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 6:21pm

"You're Gonna Love Tomorrow/Love Will See Us Through," performed by the original quartet: Kurt Peterson, Virginia Sandifur, Harvey Evans and Marti Rolph:

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=8QGPUZSU

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 6:36pm

Ugh. Just look at that horrible filth.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:10pm

After Eight, it makes no sense to berate me for knocking Jerry Herman or accuse me of condescension. I happen to think Herman is often very good and made a point of saying so when I recommended him to you. My point was merely that the things you don't like about Sondheim are central to Sondheim's world view and dominate all his work (with the possible exceptions of West Side Story and Passion). You seem to have something more similar to Herman's outlook and I have said nothing negative about that.

I certainly didn't mean to misrepresent you. What is the difference between "mean-spirited" (your term) and "malicious" (mine)? My dictionary says they are synonyms.

You keep insisting that sentimental love songs are unfair targets for irony because nobody took them seriously in the first place. And I keep wondering why you think such songs and themes have dominated comedies for millennia if nobody believes in them. And what, exactly, do you think Herman writes about?

All the same, I appreciate your kind remarks. I respect and enjoy your posts even when I disagree with them, so I'm glad you realize this isn't a personal quarrel between us.
Updated On: 8/22/11 at 07:10 PM

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:19pm

PalJoey, you are my hero! I've never seen video of the original cast doing that number expect for grainy long-shots. What a treat!

(I worked on a production of Show Boat where Harvey Evans and Virginia Sandifur stole the show as Frank and Ellie. Harvey, in particular, can do no wrong in my book. Well, except for singing sharp on the word "cards" in that video.)

[GoSmileLaughCryClap]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 8:38pm

I don't know if it's stating the obvious, but After Eight writes-quite expertly - with the defensively post enlightened syntax and jaundiced rancor of none other than Benjamin Stone. I'm sure that Goldman's book would have been richer for quoting some of his more contrarian comments from these threads.

It must be tough to have yourself nailed by some creative types back in 1971. To be around in 2011 and have it keep coming back at you can't be pleasant.

So, After Eight, don't hurt the Sally in your life, shower your Phyllis (if you still have one) with kisses, and make sure to never pick up a cane and join a chorus line extolling the virtues of your life. As much as you vex us, we don't want to see you collapse into a chasm of self loathing.

There's certainly a road you didn't take.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 8:52pm

^^^^

I know you're mostly joking and your post is very funny.

But I do want to thank After Eight and others willing to criticize Follies. I can't imagine anything more boring than a bunch of Sondheim devotees agreeing that every word and note of his shows is perfect.

And, yes, I've been to dinner parties like that.

[GoSmileLaughCryClap]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 8:55pm

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:06pm

"You keep insisting that sentimental love songs are unfair targets for irony because nobody took them seriously in the first place. And I keep wondering why you think such songs and themes have dominated comedies for millennia if nobody believes in them."

It's all about fancy, poetry, metaphor, the ideals that these songs embody. They embody an essential human need, that of beiing able to hope for some kind of happiness in this life, even though we know full well that life is not a bowl of cherries. One can not do without that hope for happiness, it's integral to the human condition. Yet, at the same time, even though no one thinks that life could be a bed of roses, it's appealing to hear songs that tell us the reverse, as one can enjoy the thought of how nice that would be, like the Beach Boys asking, "Wouldn't It Be Nice?"

Look, no one thinks that a stork drops a baby down the chimney, and yet, cards and wrapping paper for newborns continue to have that very image on them. Why? Now, if someone were to rail on about how false and riidiculous it is to proffer this sham, it would be as petty, ahd frankly, as stupid as what is being done in Follies.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:21pm

Wow! Those youngsters are wearing costumes in that Follies number.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:23pm

After Eight, I don't think jokes about the stork bringing babies can be fairly compared to the prevalence of the "love conquers all" theme in Western culture. We've only discussed musical theater, but the magical power of love is an even more dominating theme in pop music, as you suggest, and film.

People may recognize that other people's relationships often sour, but that doesn't mean they recognize the same potential in their own marriages.

You're arguing for fairy tales (not a condescension, just a term we both understand) and I agree they have their place. I recognize the human need for hope and the occasional leap of faith.

But Sondheim and most of his collaborators have been more interested in what happens after that leap. I understand that their conclusions aren't what you want to hear in the theater, but personally I find their shows true and moving.

(FWIW, I've lived with the same great guy for almost 35 years. I'm not a cynic about marriage.)

Updated On: 8/22/11 at 09:23 PM

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:46pm

GoSmile,

I got a good laugh from your post, nasty though it is. So I'll clap for you.



" As much as you vex us, we don't want to see you collapse into a chasm of self loathing."



Perhaps you could enlighten me as to who you are including in that "us." As for the "we," how do you know there aren't others here who would love to see me collapse into a chasm of self loathing? Or just a plain chasm? In any case, since I assume you are including yourself in both the us and the we, I don't understand why you or anyone else wouod be vexed by what I write. Because I don't like something you do? If what I have to say is junk, then just reject it.

And incidentally, there's a difference between offering a contrary point of view and being a contrarian. I don't believe I am one.

[GoSmileLaughCryClap]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 10:09pm

Whatever you say Ben. And doubletalk aside, the typos suggest that at the very least you've had a long day.


Updated On: 8/22/11 at 10:09 PM