BERNADETTE WAS ROBBED — Page 4

Owen22 said: "The quality of the performances in that production, especially Bernadette, is quite remarkable when you take into account how badly directed this revival was. The Imelda Staunton revival was stunningly directed. And I think with a musical life Follies direction is key. Which is why I enjoying the London Revival so much more.

Plus the American revival was directed by someone who wasn't just a mediocre director, but a terrible, sexual harassing person as well."

And THAT’S why Bernadette was robbed. GURL!

Fun to read this thread again.

Owen22 said: "The quality of the performances in that production, especially Bernadette, is quite remarkable when you take into account how badly directed this revival was. The Imelda Staunton revival was stunningly directed. And I think with a musical life Follies direction is key. Which is why I enjoying the London Revival so much more."

There were some stunning things about the London revival I thought - the staging in Act One was so beautiful, much more elaborate than the Broadway revival. And there was a lot more going on compared to the 2011 revival. I also thought the London staging helped clear up some of the constant ambiguous discussion points that have been discussed on this board in the past (e.g., is "I'm Still Here" a Follies number or book number, in "Lucy & Jesse" clarifying who Lucy and Jesse were). That said, I found that "Loveland" in the 2011 revival was much more striking visually and in general the colour contrasts (e.g. costumes & lights) seemed to 'pop' more, which I loved, whereas I thought the London revival felt more pastelle pallette that were likely more appropriate for the period but less striking.

The 2011 revival had this drab, drab drab feeling in Act One to me - which made the show seem a lot creepier and more mysterious to me (including the broken wooden floor panels across the stage), but at the same time maybe a little more boring. I can see why people seem to resonate towards the London revival - but for me the performances always come first.

"There are SOOO how many terrible things that are going on in this world right now to be upset about, and this is what you're STILL harping about almost a decade later? Lolzz."

I always find posts like this funny. This is a theatre discussion board - I come here and post about these things for exactly the reason you suggest - there ARE so many terrible things happening in the world right now. I want more from life than that. There are very few pursuits that I consider more important and meaningful than the pursuits of hobbies, interests & art - I certainly do not find much meaning in life to ruminate in world events longer than absolutely necessary.

"I know people had issues with inconsistency, which I can't address, and others just didn't like her take on Sally."

Mmmm this was one of the challenging things. I only saw her once (the first Broadway preview), my observation from this performance, the cast recording + bootlegs is that:

* The core interpretation of her performance did not vary greatly
* In Buddy's Eyes was always quite consistent in interpretation + quality, perhaps slightly slower and more induldgent towards the end of the run but I always found this as a strength (the score clearly shows this is a slow song, much slower than sung on the OBC so I never understood why sometimes people criticise the tempo of this song. It was performed as written).
* Her ability to pull off "Too Many Mornings" varied a little - she cracked at the first preview and I think found it hard to transition to the high Soprano notes sometimes (but once she hit them it was fine). In general though, she was never able to get that powerful pure effortless soprano sound here that Victoria Clark, Marin Mazzie or someone like Kelli O'Hara would
* The most inconsistent song performance was probably "Losing My Mind". It seemed to get a bit more teery and wobally as time went on. But her performance on the cast recording was very solid and for the most part, a rather 'straight' reading (I wonder if Sondheim actually whipped her a little bit in the recording session on this point. If I recall, Victoria Clark publically noted that Sondheim gave her a note about the intention of the song that suggests a straight reading is more appropriate).
* In general, the cast recording is a very very good record of her performance in my opinion - I don't think she sounded better in a theatre and she was in strong voice. The only difference between the recording and seeing it live I would say is that when she sang it in the theatre with a lot of open space and sound blending from the orchestra etc. her voice might have sounded a TINY bit less raggy. Whereas when you are standing 5cm from the mic and everything in terms of sound layers is so carefully segmented it does exaggerate and highlight flaws a little I think.

That production of Follies was the only one ever where I thought the male leads excelled in a way that the female leads did not. I never saw it in NYC, but I saw it first in an early performance and again at the last Saturday night in DC.. I thought that Jan Maxwell's performance was well-acted, but her Lucy and Jessie was an embarrassment...both times. BP was in very fine voice the second time, a little worrisome the first, (i.e., when you held your breath wondering whether she was going to hit the note).

My issue with BP's performance was tin her acting choices...I thought she started out a little too overwrought right out of the gate and went downhill from there; it was a serious mistake. Whether that was adjusted for NYC, I do not know; I do recall that she received mixed reviews, which makes me assume she did not adjust her approach much. She is normally a very fine actress, so it was a shame IMO.

Overall, I have to admit that I was greatly disappointed by just about all of that production, although I still enjoyed most of it. Follies is capable of greatness in the right hands, at least in Harold Prince and Michael Bennett's hands, and this production was just reasonably entertaining, perhaps more so if you had no other production with which to compare it. The cast was generally fine, but for me NO ONE was memorable. I thought the Loveland set was about as hideous as it could have been. I was reminded of those 'flowers' we used to make in elementary school a thousand years ago by folding up tissue papers and sticking them through a bobby pin. and ply around with to create a flower effect.

darreyl102 said: "There are SOOO how many terrible things that are going on in this world right now to be upset about, and this is what you're STILL harping about almost a decade later? Lolzz."

And this affects you how????

Oh dear god, it IS tomorrow :(.

In a strong year for musicals and for performers in musicals, Bernadette was in a revue largely singing songs that have been in her repertoire for decades. Not saying that’s bad, or that she doesn’t do it well, or that there’s no worth in it. But award worthy? I personally don’t think so. Reheating nachos doesn’t win you a James Beard award.

Updated On: 5/1/25 at 10:34 AM

"Reheating nachos doesn’t win you a James Beard award."

Spot on, and the truth. And I concur as one of her uber fans.