#1
Posted: 10/20/08 at 6:08pm
I saw Billy Elliot on Saturday night October 18th. Having seen the Original London production with Bily played by Liam Mower (who is on the CD recording and was the Billy reviewed by Brantley and other major reviewers).
I was slightly disappointed by the current state of the Broadway production but feel all that is wrong can be fixed by opening.
My thoughts-
- David Alvarez who played Billy was a wonderful dancer and acted adequately enough. His acting was rough around the edges and he may need more time to get into the role. He is, however, showing signs of starting to change his voice- his voice was cracking in some of the songs. The man sitting next to me said " there's no way he's 11 years old"- i.e. he definitely came off as being too old.
- The mostly American cast danced and sang better than the London cast. However, they weren't always quite believable as miners, townspeople or cops. While the dancing and singing were of the highest caliber, I feel that more work needs to be done on the acting side- i.e. the chorus especially still needs work in fully fleshing out their roles/backstories/etc.
-The North England accents were softened too much, making the accents quite inauthentic.
- Changes to the original London production such as having Billy's father on stage during the Electricity scene were unncessary and distracting.
-It may be my imagination but staging and direction seemed to add more Broadway "pizzazz" to this production than in the original London one. That extra pizzazz or razzle-dazzle really detracts from the gritty nature of the story and really took away from the dramatic qualities of the story. I didn't feel the sadness of the miners' plight in this production and felt that the emphasis needs to move back to the dramatic rather than the comic.
Since so much of Broadway "traffic" depends on the Times review, I'd advise the production team to go back to basics and to not tamper with the original production which was received a rave from Brantley.
I was slightly disappointed by the current state of the Broadway production but feel all that is wrong can be fixed by opening.
My thoughts-
- David Alvarez who played Billy was a wonderful dancer and acted adequately enough. His acting was rough around the edges and he may need more time to get into the role. He is, however, showing signs of starting to change his voice- his voice was cracking in some of the songs. The man sitting next to me said " there's no way he's 11 years old"- i.e. he definitely came off as being too old.
- The mostly American cast danced and sang better than the London cast. However, they weren't always quite believable as miners, townspeople or cops. While the dancing and singing were of the highest caliber, I feel that more work needs to be done on the acting side- i.e. the chorus especially still needs work in fully fleshing out their roles/backstories/etc.
-The North England accents were softened too much, making the accents quite inauthentic.
- Changes to the original London production such as having Billy's father on stage during the Electricity scene were unncessary and distracting.
-It may be my imagination but staging and direction seemed to add more Broadway "pizzazz" to this production than in the original London one. That extra pizzazz or razzle-dazzle really detracts from the gritty nature of the story and really took away from the dramatic qualities of the story. I didn't feel the sadness of the miners' plight in this production and felt that the emphasis needs to move back to the dramatic rather than the comic.
Since so much of Broadway "traffic" depends on the Times review, I'd advise the production team to go back to basics and to not tamper with the original production which was received a rave from Brantley.
"It does what a musical is supposed to do; it takes you to another world. And it gives you a little tune to carry in your head. Something to take you away from the dreary horrors of the real world. A little something for when you're feeling blue. You know?"
