Anyone seeing FOLLIES in LA tonight?- Page 11

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 10:45am

I'm just so happy I'm not the only one who thinks Uptown/Downtown is the better song! It's imagery is clear, it tells the story of one person trying to reconcile her life and it has dazzling lyrics.

Lucy and Jessie also has dazzling lyrics, but, I feel, to diminished effect. It just feels so muddled when she's talking about 'two unhappy dames.'

I also like that U/D harkens back to the story she tells of the affair she had with the younger man. Very downtown.

[HorseTears]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 1:11pm

best12bars – you’re right. My knowledge of the history of torch songs is probably nowhere near as comprehensive as yours. And while I genuinely appreciate the insight of others, like yourself, who are willing to share their knowledge and experience, no amount of historical example is going to convince me that this is a great or even good rendition of the song. It just pales in comparison to Dorothy Collins and Bernadette. And, yes, I’m a big Bernadette fan who was disappointed that she wasn’t able to make the transfer. I certainly was looking forward to hearing her sing this iconic song in person because, whether you find the sobbing a bit much or not, no one quite gets to the heart of a Sondheim lyric quite like her.

But, I’m not a Victoria Clark hater, either. Like many (most?) of us, I thought she was absolutely perfect in The Light in the Piazza. And I look forward to experiencing her full performance as Sally, but I maintain that this rendition of Losing My Mind sounds emotionally hollow, dull and overly formal. A lot of it, as I believe has been noted, is probably due to vocal placement. I think they should really consider lowering the key here. With this woman’s talent, this song could (and should) be a knockout. Right now, it may be technically well sung, but there’s absolutely no fire there. It doesn’t even sound particularly sad to me.

Again, I know I’m commenting on a sound recording from a preview performance out of context from Clark’s larger portrayal. I just hope her vocals aren’t so stately on “In Buddy’s Eyes”. I’ll give her this. I’m sure that her top notes blending with Ron’s Raines’ booming baritone on “Too Many Mornings” will be absolutely thrilling and stronger than what Bernadette was capable of mustering.

[brettarnett]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 1:38pm

I saw Follies last night. I have been waiting for a long time to see a fully staged production of it. For those who were wondering the environmental design is alive and well at the Ahmanson. I myself was left a little disappointed by Clark's Losing My Mind. It started off well but didn't have the arc that I was hoping it had, nor did it seem to have any real emotional release. During the tiny musical break during the song (sorry not very educated in my music terminology) when bernadette would look around in fear, Clark looked a little confused but thats a bout it. But her interpretaion of the song is pretty close to here encores one. But this time with a little tiny tiny tiny touch of more sadness. That bootleg sounds like what I heard in the theatre last night, no high note on the last "mind." The show seemed to be filled with Sondheim lovers, the orch seemed pretty full for a tuesday night. Many claps here and there for the cast. Every song got an extended applause. Back to Clark, I never noticed how much of Sally's songs and lyrics are sung in her head voice. Maybe the raised some of the keys for the whole score? Probably not but I noticed the shift from Clark's lower register to her higher quite clearly. I love Sally's dress, it is great and I thought that the pockets of the skirt are so telling of the character(that she does not in fact wear clothes from paris). Sorry for the stream of consciousness post. If you have any questions ask away.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 2:26pm

"but, oy that Losing My Mind Dress? WTF? Were those the last scraps of fabric available in the shop? It looks like three different dresses pinned together. It's ill fitting and unflattering too. Abort. Abort. For the amount of gum flapping that's been going on in this thread about dresses, I'm surprised no one else thinks it's a frumpy disaster."

I agree, HorseTears. I was sitting in the second row and was not impressed with either costume she wore. I thought the first one (the green) looked cheap and it's didn't fit her around the neckline. And the LMM dress was just a jumble of mess.

I also thought she looked way too plain and washed out. Like she hardly had any make-up on.

The show was amazing and I loved every moment of it. The rest of the costumes were stunning, and the direction was simply perfect. It could very easily become a jumbled, unfocused mess.

There were a ton of tiny moments that I probably wouldn’t have caught, had I not been sitting so close. I loved one bit where a ghost was floating by a waiter and she reaches out as if to take a drink just as the waiter turns away, but you could see him pause and then give a reaction as if he felt the presence of the ghost.

And it was nice to meet Almira and Gaveston2 in person!

I came back from intermission to find three older women who had moved into my seat and the empty ones beside it.

Yea, get permission first BEFORE you move, or you'll get me in your face.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 2:28pm

To be fair, there's really nothing wrong with Sally's party dress looking cheap. I think one of the things most productions get wrong is that they dress every woman to the nines, when it actuality it makes more sense for some of these women to not look like they've been rolling in dough for 40 years.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 2:38pm

I can see that.

It's just that it looked less expensive than Jayne's brown outfit.

I was thinking that maybe it was something that was whipped up at the last second because of all of the talk of them changing her colors.

And because the dress wasn't the same colors as the confetti after the Loveland sequence, you lost that picture of her standing in shattered pieces of herself.

[best12bars]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 2:57pm

Oh, Diva, I can't even imagine someone sitting in your seat and living to tell the tale.

I'm sure they got more than the evil eye.

[ljay889]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 4:01pm

[E.Davis]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 4:07pm

"I think one of the things most productions get wrong is that they dress every woman to the nines, when it actuality it makes more sense for some of these women to not look like they've been rolling in dough for 40 years."

I agree with you, especially since only like what, three or your of them have been.

[Almira]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 4:07pm

Saw the show last and am still feeling the effects of its emotional power. Clark's performance particularly hit me in a way I wasn't expecting.

Trust me, I'm a nobody, but by a turn of events I ended up backstage hobnobbing with cast and crew. That was icing on the cake. A particular treat was chatting with Gene Nelson's son who had won tickets to see the show and when his FOLLIES lineage was discovered, was invited to meet everyone.

It was a real pleasure to meet TheatreDiva90016. "Sue Sylvester" still has me howling. (Inside joke)

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 4:30pm

ljay- thanks for the pictures, is there link to any more?

I don't mind Clark's 'green' dress as much as I mind her hair and make-up. She looks washed out and her hair is WAY too modern. Come to think of it, i never really believed that this production was supposed to take place in the 70's.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 4:59pm

TheatreDiva is a designer and no doubt has a better eye for color than I, but to me, Sally's dress was clearly blue--almost UCLA Bruin blue in the right light. And Buddy referred to it as blue when he was looking for her early in the evening. And just to make the contrast clear, there is a minor character who wears kelly green.

From where I sat (front row mezzanine), both of Clark's dresses looked wonderful on her, but her blue party dress looked like something "off the rack" while Phyllis was wearing the one-of-a-kind champagne outfit that seemed made just for her. Entirely right for their characters. After all, Buddy admits to Phyllis that he is "just a salesman"; even assuming she cleaned out the bank account before she left Phoenix, I don't think Sally has a budget for couture.

I thought Clark's "Losing My Mind" was sublime and much better than the You Tube video from five years ago. She sang it as I think it should be sung: as if Sally is caught in one of those moments where she stands "in the middle of the floor/Not going left, not going right". As another poster said, all the numbers got hearty applause (hell, even "One Last Kiss" nearly stopped the show!), but Clark's "Losing My Mind" got almost as much applause as the usual showstoppers and there were cheers throughout Clark's long, slow exit.

I thoroughly loved the evening and none of the expectations raised by posts here were disappointed. Although I love Bernadette Peters, I am very grateful that I got to see the show with Miss Clark in it.

It was a privilege to finally see and hear Elaine Paige live and I am happy that she is playing the triumph in "I'm Still Here". There are plenty of other characters who are full of regret.

A quibble or two, I thought the direction was exceptionally "clean" but, for FOLLIES, rather uninspired. I mean you have a stage full of "entertainers" and "ghosts"; isn't it time to let one's imagination soar a little? Merely lining ghosts up against the back wall as if they were gay men at the Adonis Theater in 1974 seems a waste to me. And there's a reason they sing about mirrors in "Who's That Woman?"--it might be something to ponder when staging the number!

The choreography for Danny Burstein ("The Right Girl") and Jan Maxwell ("Lucy and Jessie") was atrocious. Even assuming neither performer is much of a dancer (though Burstein was quite a bit better in "Buddy's Blues"), there's no excuse for leaving your stars out there for so long with nothing to do. Good Lord! A couple of viewings of DANCING WITH THE STARS would show some of the things that can be done even with non-dancers!

Finally, in the paring down of the book, I missed some of the "color" of knowing the minor characters better. My memory of the original "Who's That Woman?" was that I knew something distinctive about each of the women dancing; last night, I knew Phyllis, Sally and Carlotta, and that was about it.

Anyway, none of that came close to marring what was a magnificent evening. Actually, compared to the original in 1971, I'd say this production is better sung (on the whole and, of course, improved sound equipment doesn't hurt) and more carefully acted, just as moving but in some ways less haunting. And I should admit that in the long car ride home, my experienced-theatergoing friends, each of whom had seen the show in some version years before, all agreed that this was the first production of FOLLIES that they had really understood.

So maybe "cleanliness" is next to Godliness after all.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 5:04pm

Confidential to Wicked Fanatic: Michael Hayes was on as Roscoe and sang the role beautifully. Yes, he's too young; he would have been in junior high during WWII. But it didn't really bother me. Ditto for Carol Neblett as Heidi.

If they were selling any souvenir merchandise, I looked but didn't see it.

[Wildcard]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 5:11pm

"Come to think of it, i never really believed that this production was supposed to take place in the 70's.

This was my observation as well

[binau]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 5:13pm

They aren't selling the FOLLIES pillow???

(Cool review, Gaveston2)

[DAME]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 5:49pm

Almira,
You met "Sue Sylvester" the house manager? LOL ! Glad you had a good time with Diva. I think we will be returning to the show together some time in the middle or end of the run..

[DAME]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 5:53pm

GAVESTON:

I LOVE THAT YOU REMEMBER THE ADONIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 5:55pm

I didn't see a FOLLIES pillow and I was looking, at Wicked's request. But I was also with a theater party of 8 spread out all over the house and meeting TheatreDiva, etc. So there was plenty of confusion and I could have missed something.

***

As for the time of the show, I agree there isn't much to suggest 1971 except a couple of lines. But that's one directorial choice with which I agree.

The setting of FOLLIES is "now" and "then", Present and Past. And people find that confusing enough. To emphasize the characters' now (1971) v. the viewers' now (2012) would only add another layer of confusion.

And the Past is already blurred, as performers spanning three decades of the Weisman Follies seem to know each other without introduction. And how many years did they perform that mirror number anyway?

I think the director and designer were right to keep the party clothes in classic, "timeless" styles rather than going for an accurate reproduction of the 70s. It's not as if people aren't still obsessed with the past and the mistakes of their youth in 2012.

Updated On: 5/9/12 at 05:55 PM

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 5:58pm

GAVESTON: I LOVE THAT YOU REMEMBER THE ADONIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, good. I feared I had overshared.

[DAME]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 6:01pm

In this crowd? NAHW!

[HorseTears]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 6:19pm

Love all these reports, folks. Keep em coming! Did anyone sit in the balcony? How was the view?

Anyone get HotTix? May I ask where you were seated?

[Almira]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 6:47pm

*sheepishly raises hand*

I remember the Adonis too.

Updated On: 5/9/12 at 06:47 PM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 6:57pm

Yes, I posted it was a green dress, but Gaveston more correct than I. It was blue that had a lot of green in it and, depending upon the lights, its shade was rather indeterminable.

There was nothing on sale last night, even though there was an area set up for it in the lobby. I asked and was told that they were not selling anything until after opening night. Which is a shame, because I was ready to buy!

I also agree with Gav on the choreography. It was… odd. Danny doesn’t seem like the dancer type, and certainly didn’t move like one.

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 7:01pm

Gaveston- i see your point, but i also somewhat disagree. The 2 time periods of the show (1930ish and 1971) are so important to the story. The story wouldn't make sense if it took place today, as most if not all of these woman would be dead.

As for the themes being completely relative to today, you're absolutely right. But to say that an audience can't relate to a 'period piece' would mean that most musicals just don't work if they are set in their actual time period.

[binau]

Posted: 5/9/12 at 7:10pm

I think the main point is that yes it is 'set' in 1971 but when we are watching the show it feels that it is the 'here and now' rather than 'transporting us' to the 70s.