#26
Posted: 8/7/11 at 9:16pm
The Loveland transition/set remains completely the same.
Anyone going to the first preview of FOLLIES? — Page 2
#27
Posted: 8/7/11 at 9:30pm
Agree with a lot that has been said here....I'd never seen Follies before.
Loved the 'environmental design', loved Houdyshell and thought she played a character I never 'got' from recordings. Mary Beth Peil was funny and I enjoyed "Ah, Paris!", which I never had really cared about before. "Rain on the roof" didn't do much for me but I think with the Montage it makes it useful. I feel like the new cast/the addition of the montage must have made act 1 a bit more lively compared to DC.
Sally is truly a desperate, pathetic, sad character. I don't think there is any problem with BP playing it this way..she stays in bed for 'days', turns up to her son's 'doorsteps' or whatever to argue and sings "Losing My Mind" :P. I really, really like the book of Follies. The leads are so interesting and complicated. It's interesting that many consider it problematic.
Liked Elaine Paige but agree there was something off about her end of "I'm Still Here".
Don't know much about dancing but loved "Who's that Woman" and especially the interaction with the ghosts etc...thought the dancing in Lucy and Jesse was less thrilling.
I really think this is Bernadette's show. I liked Maxwell but I don't think she steals the show, maybe if her Lucy/Jesse was more thrilling and she was on the stage more (it felt like Bernadette was on the stage so much).
P.s. when Bernadette looked in Ben's eyes during "Buddy's Eyes" her face looked very similar to the artwork, is this "the face"??
I found the show to be amazing and insightful. I've seen something like 20 shows on my trip so far and I think this show is by far the best musical on Broadway at the moment. I hope it succeeds...
Loved the 'environmental design', loved Houdyshell and thought she played a character I never 'got' from recordings. Mary Beth Peil was funny and I enjoyed "Ah, Paris!", which I never had really cared about before. "Rain on the roof" didn't do much for me but I think with the Montage it makes it useful. I feel like the new cast/the addition of the montage must have made act 1 a bit more lively compared to DC.
Sally is truly a desperate, pathetic, sad character. I don't think there is any problem with BP playing it this way..she stays in bed for 'days', turns up to her son's 'doorsteps' or whatever to argue and sings "Losing My Mind" :P. I really, really like the book of Follies. The leads are so interesting and complicated. It's interesting that many consider it problematic.
Liked Elaine Paige but agree there was something off about her end of "I'm Still Here".
Don't know much about dancing but loved "Who's that Woman" and especially the interaction with the ghosts etc...thought the dancing in Lucy and Jesse was less thrilling.
I really think this is Bernadette's show. I liked Maxwell but I don't think she steals the show, maybe if her Lucy/Jesse was more thrilling and she was on the stage more (it felt like Bernadette was on the stage so much).
P.s. when Bernadette looked in Ben's eyes during "Buddy's Eyes" her face looked very similar to the artwork, is this "the face"??
I found the show to be amazing and insightful. I've seen something like 20 shows on my trip so far and I think this show is by far the best musical on Broadway at the moment. I hope it succeeds...
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
Updated On: 8/7/11 at 09:30 PM
#28
Posted: 8/7/11 at 9:34pm
Sally is truly a desperate, pathetic, sad character. I don't think there is any problem with BP playing it this way..she stays in bed for 'days', turns up to her son's 'doorsteps' or whatever to argue.
Exactly! She is delusional and quite possibly bipolar.
Exactly! She is delusional and quite possibly bipolar.
#29
Posted: 8/7/11 at 9:38pm
madbrian - I got there around 12:20pm, twenty minutes after the box office had opened.
Everything in life...is only for now.
#30
Posted: 8/7/11 at 9:43pm
>> The Loveland transition/set remains completely the same.
Bummer. As much as I enjoyed the production, the whole "ned of roses" thing for Loveland just didnt work for me. I think I';ve been spoiled by Aaronson's gorgeously lacy Valentines arches.
Bummer. As much as I enjoyed the production, the whole "ned of roses" thing for Loveland just didnt work for me. I think I';ve been spoiled by Aaronson's gorgeously lacy Valentines arches.
http://docandraider.com
#31
Posted: 8/7/11 at 9:45pm
I didn't see the Washington version, but this afternoon, it struck me as a creditable, if unexciting production. What it lacks are directorial imagination and flair, and as a result, the show emerges as less than the sum of its parts. I liked Bernadette Peters’s rendition of "Losing My Mind," and admired many in the cast.
But ultimately, it's too unwieldy and top-heavy a show for its frail narrative. As a result, it drags, and becomes something of a bore. The points it makes are none too interesting themselves and are repeated redudantly, and to ever diminishing returns.
Add to that that the show itself is something of a turnoff. It's jaundiced and rather mean-spirited, and however dazzling its individual numbers, it can't hide the fact that its major foursome are an unlikable lot, and it's hard to care about any of them. That does little to hold one's interest. After all, why should we be expected to care that callous, two-timing Ben Stone, loaded to the gills with money does not feel fulfilled? Yeah, my heart bleeds. Likewise for his acerbic wife, and the other philanderer. I guess one could feel some degree of pity for poor jilted Sally, but really, if I were at a party, I'd try to avoid all four of them.
Too bad the show didn't focus on the other characters, who are far more interesting and appealing, and who would be a hell of a lot more fun to be around.
But ultimately, it's too unwieldy and top-heavy a show for its frail narrative. As a result, it drags, and becomes something of a bore. The points it makes are none too interesting themselves and are repeated redudantly, and to ever diminishing returns.
Add to that that the show itself is something of a turnoff. It's jaundiced and rather mean-spirited, and however dazzling its individual numbers, it can't hide the fact that its major foursome are an unlikable lot, and it's hard to care about any of them. That does little to hold one's interest. After all, why should we be expected to care that callous, two-timing Ben Stone, loaded to the gills with money does not feel fulfilled? Yeah, my heart bleeds. Likewise for his acerbic wife, and the other philanderer. I guess one could feel some degree of pity for poor jilted Sally, but really, if I were at a party, I'd try to avoid all four of them.
Too bad the show didn't focus on the other characters, who are far more interesting and appealing, and who would be a hell of a lot more fun to be around.
#32
Posted: 8/7/11 at 9:54pm
I actually think Ben is a fascinating guy. Guess I'm weird.
#33
Posted: 8/7/11 at 10:02pm
I saw the show with someone who said the reason he loves it so much is precisely because it's not a typical, linear narrative. He likes the fact that it's kind of sketchy and leaves things unanswered.
Anyway, I really enjoyed it (again) today.
And I still contend that it has the BEST overture of ANY musical.
"Be on your guard! Jerks on the loose!"
http://www.roches.com/television/ss83kod.html
**********
"If any relationship involves a flow chart, get out of it...FAST!"
~ Best12Bars
Anyway, I really enjoyed it (again) today.
And I still contend that it has the BEST overture of ANY musical.
http://www.roches.com/television/ss83kod.html
**********
"If any relationship involves a flow chart, get out of it...FAST!"
~ Best12Bars
#34
Posted: 8/7/11 at 10:06pm
I agree that Ben is interesting, if not standing-alone then at least considering his relationships with the other leads.. The other supporting characters may appear interesting but I think it's about the *relationships* between the leads that is truly what warrants them getting the most stage time. I think it's most interesting because these relationships are so much more complicated than in other musicals (e.g. Death Takes a Holiday, to name a recent example).
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
Updated On: 8/7/11 at 10:06 PM
#35
Posted: 8/7/11 at 10:19pm
For the mega fans.... someone on ATC has posted all of the new book changes.
http://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat/d.php?id=1999234
http://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat/d.php?id=1999234
Updated On: 8/7/11 at 10:19 PM
#36
Posted: 8/7/11 at 10:22pm
I think one of the reasons it seems to turn some off is because it is, as Sondheim has said, 100% atmosphere and not terribly narrative.
#38
Posted: 8/7/11 at 10:53pm
I find Benjamin Stone more fascinating and more attractive and ultimately sympathetic than I found him forty years ago.
But maybe that's just me.
But maybe that's just me.
#39
Posted: 8/7/11 at 10:56pm
I think that may be the point, PJ. It's like reading don quixote when you're a kid and then reading it again as a "gentleman of a certain age". Perspective changes things.
http://docandraider.com
#40
Posted: 8/7/11 at 11:01pm
Don't some West End theaters use technology that scrambles cell phone signals? I feel like that's something that needs to be looked into here in New York.
Such technology is completely illegal in the US, unfortunately.
Thanks for the reports, all.
Such technology is completely illegal in the US, unfortunately.
Thanks for the reports, all.
"You travel alone because other people are only there to remind you how much that hook hurts that we all bit down on. Wait for that one day we can bite free and get back out there in space where we belong, sail back over water, over skies, into space, the hook finally out of our mouths and we wander back out there in space spawning to other planets never to return hurrah to earth and we'll look back and can't even see these lives here anymore. Only the taste of blood to remind us we ever existed. The earth is small. We're gone. We're dead. We're safe."
-John Guare, Landscape of the Body
#41
Posted: 8/7/11 at 11:21pm
Which is, in many ways, what the whole show is about, SeanMartin.
#42
Posted: 8/8/11 at 12:25am
I saw it in DC in June and I'm well aware that Peters has apparently been giving performances that vary wildly (at least from the reports I hear), but I think my biggest problem with her performance was not that she was playing up the delusional and pathetic aspects of Sally's character, but that that was ALL she seemed to be playing. She came wandering on stage all dewey-eyed, looking like she might be on the verge of tears as it started and she pretty much stayed there. Someone in that ATC thread lljay linked said "she is a walking wound from the moment of her entrance" and THAT is the perfect way to describe her.
Yes, she's crazy. Yes, she's delusional. But that's not all there is to her. This is a woman who - crazy or not - had the determination to get across the country with the express intention of winning Ben back. Under her surface, there's just as much rage and ... maybe bitchiness (I think of lines like "I don't want to fight with you Phyl. I don't HAVE to") as there is sad-sack craziness. I thought Victoria Clark understood the character at Encores better than Peters does here.
Yes, she's crazy. Yes, she's delusional. But that's not all there is to her. This is a woman who - crazy or not - had the determination to get across the country with the express intention of winning Ben back. Under her surface, there's just as much rage and ... maybe bitchiness (I think of lines like "I don't want to fight with you Phyl. I don't HAVE to") as there is sad-sack craziness. I thought Victoria Clark understood the character at Encores better than Peters does here.
#43
Posted: 8/8/11 at 1:04am
Phyllis, Bernadette is giving a performance in NYC that is very different from the one she gave in DC. Much more layered. An air of confidence and determination and less "scattered craziness." I found the change quite remarkable.
She seemed to play Sally like a lost little girl in DC. But this afternoon, she was clearly a woman who was weary from life and looking back in order to look ahead. Today, she also seemed more like "Young Sally," who always struck me as being quite assertive and brash (although highly emotional and dramatic).
Anyway, I was surprised, happily. (Jan still brings down the house though.)
"Be on your guard! Jerks on the loose!"
http://www.roches.com/television/ss83kod.html
**********
"If any relationship involves a flow chart, get out of it...FAST!"
~ Best12Bars
She seemed to play Sally like a lost little girl in DC. But this afternoon, she was clearly a woman who was weary from life and looking back in order to look ahead. Today, she also seemed more like "Young Sally," who always struck me as being quite assertive and brash (although highly emotional and dramatic).
Anyway, I was surprised, happily.
(Jan still brings down the house though.)
http://www.roches.com/television/ss83kod.html
**********
"If any relationship involves a flow chart, get out of it...FAST!"
~ Best12Bars
#44
Posted: 8/8/11 at 1:41am
How was the rush situation today? I'm planning on doing it Wednesday.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#45
Posted: 8/8/11 at 8:45am
"I find Benjamin Stone more fascinating and more attractive and ultimately sympathetic than I found him forty years ago. "
Funny, I feel just the opposite. Every time I see the show, I like him even less. I really have no patience for this man or his "angst."
Funny, I feel just the opposite. Every time I see the show, I like him even less. I really have no patience for this man or his "angst."
#46
Posted: 8/8/11 at 10:03am
One change in Bernadette's performance that I didn't like:
The Mirror Number. In DC, she EXUDED confidance in that number. She was was like a lost, teary-eyed girl from the moment she makes her entrance, but once that number started, it was like she was 19 again. The other women all make little mistakes, since it had been so many years, but you almost got the sense that Sally had been practicing and waiting for this moment since 1941; she LIVED for that moment, to go back to the last time she was truly happy. Her movements were slightly more exaggerated than the rest of the cast, and she was almost "show offy", trying to be noticed--I think she performed the number the same exact way in 1941 that she did in 1971 (in DC).
But this time, her movements and facial expressions weren't as confidant or strong. I preferred the DC version; I felt it said more about her character. She didn't stick out as much while dancing the way she did in DC--perhaps that was the goal, since it's an ensemble number? But to me, the DC version it showed a lot about her character.
The show also now feels less like Sally is the main focus; the four leads seem a little more equal.
It flows better now, too...better staging and pacing.
Also, even though I saw it six times in DC, I can't recall--at the performance yesterday, the whole cast (except the four leads) are on stage watching during Rain on the Roof, Ah Paris and Broadway Baby. In DC, I could have sworn it was just Weissman. Am I dreaming?
Also, Florence Lacey is wearing a brunette wig now. Is this because the show has too many blondes after Regine and Lavin departing?
The Mirror Number. In DC, she EXUDED confidance in that number. She was was like a lost, teary-eyed girl from the moment she makes her entrance, but once that number started, it was like she was 19 again. The other women all make little mistakes, since it had been so many years, but you almost got the sense that Sally had been practicing and waiting for this moment since 1941; she LIVED for that moment, to go back to the last time she was truly happy. Her movements were slightly more exaggerated than the rest of the cast, and she was almost "show offy", trying to be noticed--I think she performed the number the same exact way in 1941 that she did in 1971 (in DC).
But this time, her movements and facial expressions weren't as confidant or strong. I preferred the DC version; I felt it said more about her character. She didn't stick out as much while dancing the way she did in DC--perhaps that was the goal, since it's an ensemble number? But to me, the DC version it showed a lot about her character.
The show also now feels less like Sally is the main focus; the four leads seem a little more equal.
It flows better now, too...better staging and pacing.
Also, even though I saw it six times in DC, I can't recall--at the performance yesterday, the whole cast (except the four leads) are on stage watching during Rain on the Roof, Ah Paris and Broadway Baby. In DC, I could have sworn it was just Weissman. Am I dreaming?
Also, Florence Lacey is wearing a brunette wig now. Is this because the show has too many blondes after Regine and Lavin departing?
"I chose and my world was shaken--so what? The choice may have been mistaken, the choosing was not. You have to move on"
#47
Posted: 8/8/11 at 10:35am
Seeing it Sat. night. I'm sorry to hear that Paige continues to disappoint many people. I've never seen her on stage and am still looking forward to it and hope she still comes through. However, does anyone think they perhaps didn't cast the role optimally?
Should Carlotta ideally be a certain kind of American show girl turned movie star (and yes I know Yvonne was Canadian, but how many people even knew that as she was an American presence?) whose career has had many twist and turns. Someone very much like her character who perhaps has been away from the stage a long time and has become identified in an essential way as Hollywood? As opposed to one of the great ladies of the U.K. musical theater?
In this regard, the memories of De Carlo as a golden age Hollywood glamor girl, as Mrs. Moses and as Mrs. Munster seemed so perfect. I would imagine Dolores Gray offered her own brand of Carlotta-like history as well. I saw Ann Miller who, what ever might be said about her performancwe (pro or con), certainly had that bit going for her.
I know people have said that Karen Black may now be too old or perhaps not in great shape for a big role in a musical right now. But to me she epitomized the type of woman needed for Carlotta, someone who has careered from career to career, who has definitely been camp, and, in Black's case, her being a veteran of Sondheim's first Broadway show as both composer and lyricist would have provided a poignancy also resonant with Follies particular brand of nostalgia.
Should Carlotta ideally be a certain kind of American show girl turned movie star (and yes I know Yvonne was Canadian, but how many people even knew that as she was an American presence?) whose career has had many twist and turns. Someone very much like her character who perhaps has been away from the stage a long time and has become identified in an essential way as Hollywood? As opposed to one of the great ladies of the U.K. musical theater?
In this regard, the memories of De Carlo as a golden age Hollywood glamor girl, as Mrs. Moses and as Mrs. Munster seemed so perfect. I would imagine Dolores Gray offered her own brand of Carlotta-like history as well. I saw Ann Miller who, what ever might be said about her performancwe (pro or con), certainly had that bit going for her.
I know people have said that Karen Black may now be too old or perhaps not in great shape for a big role in a musical right now. But to me she epitomized the type of woman needed for Carlotta, someone who has careered from career to career, who has definitely been camp, and, in Black's case, her being a veteran of Sondheim's first Broadway show as both composer and lyricist would have provided a poignancy also resonant with Follies particular brand of nostalgia.
#48
Posted: 8/8/11 at 10:42am
^ Yes, Weissman was the only person onstage, up right, during the 3 songs, he clapped and then escorted Hattie offstage.
#49
Posted: 8/8/11 at 10:44am
My question is: Does Rosalind Elias still hesitantly "sneak" her way onto the stage for One More Kiss like she did in DC? I still don't know if I thought that was genius or didn't work at all.
#50
Posted: 8/8/11 at 10:54am
Henrik, I've thought Paige was miscast from the beginning. I've never seen her give anything but a terribly mannered, restrained performance in the classic British fashion. Even her Norma Desmond was remarkably sane and calculated. Funnily enough, my friend Bob interviewed Paige while the production was in DC for the Sondheim Review (article linked) and told me that he thought Paige stole the show and didn't buy Maxwell's performance. So, it's all relative.
Karen Black would be a fascinating Carlotta. And the last time I saw her (about two years ago) she didn't look too bad, actually.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/elaine-paige-rare-u-stage-foray-follies-014916842.html
Karen Black would be a fascinating Carlotta. And the last time I saw her (about two years ago) she didn't look too bad, actually.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/elaine-paige-rare-u-stage-foray-follies-014916842.html
"You travel alone because other people are only there to remind you how much that hook hurts that we all bit down on. Wait for that one day we can bite free and get back out there in space where we belong, sail back over water, over skies, into space, the hook finally out of our mouths and we wander back out there in space spawning to other planets never to return hurrah to earth and we'll look back and can't even see these lives here anymore. Only the taste of blood to remind us we ever existed. The earth is small. We're gone. We're dead. We're safe."
-John Guare, Landscape of the Body
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95