Barbour, Lazar, Edelmann to star in TALE OF TWO CITIES- Page 4

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 1:34am

KQuill, the fact that the lead actor had sex with a minor, ambitious or not (and how has it helped her career?) makes you want to buy a ticket?
I wouldn't be putting that out there on the internet, it could give people the creeps about you.
If you like his acting and singing that's a different story.


Updated On: 7/1/08 at 01:34 AM

[scaryclowns223]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 1:45am

Ok, hold on!

Before you start talking about Florida, let a guy who has been to theatres across Florida and knows its theatre industry quite well give you the inside scoop.

Florida has a theatre scene that is (save for the touring houses) 100% non-profit. Thus, we see lots of short runs of shows, and each theatre puts on about 6 shows a year. Because of the high volume of shows and the availability of actors in certain situations, theatre is hit-or-miss.

I consider myself a pretty discerning theatre-goer, and I would like to think I know a good show when I see it. On one hand, I saw an absolutely wonderful local production of "Blackbird" just a few months ago. On the other hand, I saw what was quite possibly the worst production I've ever seen in my life- a regional production of URINETOWN at one of our most popular theatres, that was absolutely terrible.

Theatre critics down here are idiots. In my experience, I've found that they know very little, and that often theatre reviews are often not theatre reviews at all. Instead, they are promotions for the show and basically feature articles that encourage patrons to support the theatre and the non-profit companies who need their money.

When critics do dislike a production, I often disagree. I saw a production of Altar Boyz that I adored that the critics did not like at all.

So yeah, don't trust reviews. They are very strange, and usually inaccurate.

However, trust the Florida theatregoing community. Generally, we know good theatre when we see it, and while we may not hold shows to a Broadway standard, we wouldn't run to see a show if we knew it was terrible. We have too many beautiful beaches to waste time in a theater.

And thus I have concluded my dissertation on theatre in FLorida.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 2:11am

Okay, I know that I'm beginning to sound like a broken record here on this subject, but people do keep bringing up the same argument...

KQuill: This isn't the case of a 15-year-old girl and a 16-year-old or even 18-year-old guy. Barbour was in his 30's. 5+ years has potential to be a coercive relationship. He has power over her, not only because of his age but also because he is in a profession into which she wants to break. We have no idea if she came onto him or not. It's possible that she did not and that he forced himself on her. Even if she was ambitious, she still could have been sexually assaulted. Any type of girl, no matter how conniving or amoral by anyone's standards, can still be sexually assaulted. In fact, that is why the victim's past sexual history is not allowed to be brought into court in most states.

And even if she did come onto him, which I admit could have been the case just as equally as him coercing her into the act, it was still his responsibility as the adult to get out of that situation. Minors cannot consent, and Barbour was well aware of that.

Updated On: 7/1/08 at 02:11 AM

[winston89]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 2:31am

I think that what EponineThenardier and Kquill were saying was this.

That there are going to be people who have heard of Barbour from the newspaper articles about him and nothing more. And those people are going to want to buy tickets to see who that man realy is and what kind of performer he is. People might want to see the show because of what he did as oppose to avoiding the show. I think that EponineThenardier and Kquill were saying that they would go becuase they would want to see the reaction that Barbour would get and that now Barbour is offically cast in the Broadway production it would intreague them to go when they might not have wanted to go before.

Like it or not, but there are going to be people who have heard of the name from the small amount of time he spent in the papers just as there might be some who would avoid the show because of the same thing.

As for trying out this show in Florida and about the reaction to this both from the audience and critical. I have no trouble belieaving that the papers down there praise everything to the point of comming off as an advertisment for the show. However, I find that people who attend the theatre in small theatre communities like Florida go to the theatre often enough because they want to. Thus making them get a sense of what is good thetre and what isn't. I agree wih what Scaryclowns223 said.

And, I feel that the reason why I don't smell another Pirate Queen with this is because Pirate Queen was using the fact that it was a Boublil and Schonberg musical and that they were the creators of Les Miserables and Miss Saigon to sell tickets. They never let the show sell itself and let it sell based on if it was good or not. I think that there were also a lot of pepople who saw that it was new work from them and thus used that as the reason to go to buy tickets.

And, keep in mind that it is starting to get less uncommon that shows will try out in places that are far from being considered major cities so they can do the work of the ou of town try out process in a place where it won't get large amounts of press etc. Keep in mind it wasn't that long ago that someone posted a link to a Ridel article talking about how a new Broadway revival of Dreamgirls was going to try out in Korea rather then America because they didn't want the lurking american press or people on theatre message boards to talk about the show.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 2:38am

Updated On: 5/3/09 at 02:38 AM

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 3:21am

I'm not personally going to go because of the headlines, but what I'm trying to say is some people WOULD. And I'm not saying it's right either...


I however, would love to see this show because I adore the story, enjoy a lot of the performers and just seems like my sort of musical.

[NY_Broadway2]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 10:14am

I'm really excited to see this now! Great cast. I just don't know if the show is any good or not. I love the book...hopefully they won't ruin it.

Note to younger girls: Don't go backstage with James Barbour! LOL!

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 10:56am

winston89, I can't read your posts anymore.

If anyone wants to translate Winston's posts to basic, grammar school level English, please go ahead, otherwise I'm not wasting my energy.

[sydney23]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 11:04am

Note to NY_Broadway 2
they won't ruin it...
and your avatar is their assistant director!

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 11:14am

I've read the book, saw the Wishbone version, and saw this production. Jill cut away a lot of the grizzle. Her version is a bit more concise that Dickens paid-by-the-word novel. Not knocking Dickens because I did enjoy the novel. But, I feel, she cut away enough to let the story's true heart shine through.

[MungoGypsy8232]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 11:25am

Michael Arden is the assistant director?

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 11:43am

winston89: I am aware of that. What I was more concerned with was the poster's comment that Barbour simply got oral sex from an ambitious girl who was a few years too young.

Updated On: 7/1/08 at 11:43 AM

[NY_Broadway2]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 12:53pm

sydney23 - Is Michael Arden really their assistant director? Has he ever directed anything before? I know he's directed the readings for his shows that he has written but has he ever done a full scale production? That's really interesting if he is. I'm really excited to see this show.

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 2:29pm

"saw the Wishbone version"


Meee tooo! Awww wishbone.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 2:37pm

Wishbone was a great show. My younger sister always wanted to read the books that were discussed on the show. Anything that promotes reading the classics is fine by me.

[winston89]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 2:45pm

Foster. To quote George Carlin " Simon says go F--- yourself."


I saw the wishbone version of Two Cities on youtube a couple of weeks ago. But, now I can't seem to find it anymore. Wishbone's great stuff.

I would be interested in seeing what kind of reaction this show gets from Barbour being in it. I doubt it will get any because the articles were hardly a blip on anybodies radar screen.

[sydney23]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 3:02pm

i don't really know michael's directing background, just heard he's assisting warren carlyle.

i really can't imagine you not liking the show if you loved the book - honestly. i haven't run into a single fan of the book who's seen the show and didn't like it.

[Shawk]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 3:18pm

I am somewhat surprised to see Barbour still in the show. Yes, Broadway stars don't necessarily register in the news, but all it takes is one vigilant mother of a kid whose school decides to go on a group trip to TOTC doing a little Google research...

[winston89]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 5:16pm

Most people know that it was "some broadway actor" and not really who it was. I am sure there are people out there who heard about the story and heard that it was some Broadway actor who got into trouble for having sex with a young girl and they might not know who exactly that actor was. Therefor, if and when a school group goes it might not even show up on the parent's radar that the person that they read about in the paper is the same person that is starring in the same show that their kid is seeing.

And, correct me if I am wrong. I know that there are child actors in the show. I don't know the story well enough to know if they are boys or girls. But, in any event didn't Barbour have to clear any jobs he got with his parole officer before he could sign the contract? If that is the case the I am sure his parole officer didn't see him as a threat in doing this show on Broadway. So, I don't know if people should get totally up in arms.

[philly03]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 5:38pm

"Most people know that it was "some broadway actor" and not really who it was. I am sure there are people out there who heard about the story and heard that it was some Broadway actor who got into trouble for having sex with a young girl and they might not know who exactly that actor was."

It seems like out side of NYC and Broadway fans, no one even remembers/ever knew about it. Just my two cents. Everyone saw it on the news for the most part that he went to jail, but after that nothing.

[KQuill]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 5:39pm

CurtainPullDowner: Had you read and understood my entire post (or at least the first paragraph), you'd realize what I meant which is that Barbour's "scandal" brought Barbour's singing and acting skill to my attention. The fact that he is still playing his role after all this, along with peoples comments about his PERFORMANCE is what makes me want to buy a ticket.

SporkGoddess: I realize James screwed up. I am not excusing what he did, but I do feel bad for the guy when he is made out to be a "sexual predator" that preys on small children. I speculate that she did come on to him and he just wasn't strong enough to stp it from happening. Maybe he doesn't agree with the consent age and decided to take his chances legally. If it happened in a different state then everything would have been legal as well. We can only speculate about how it actually happened, but in any case I just feel bad for the guy when people talk about kids being in the show with him, as if he is actually going to hunt down the child actresses in the show. He isn't a monster. He is a human being. We are all mammals charged with sexual desires. I appreciate your perspective because I realize that many of these situations can be very damaging to minors, but it just doesn't seem like it happened this way in Barbour's situation in my opinion. And why is the girl automatically this helpless princess? Should she take no responsibility for what happened? Apperently birthday number 18 hits and she is suddenly able to think and decide for herself.

I don't really care how this post makes me look. There is a whole other perspective to this sensitive issue that usually gets lost due to a need for political correctness.

[Shawk]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 5:41pm

Oh, good. I was momentarily afraid this thread wasn't going to go as badly as all the other James Barbour threads...

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 5:41pm

I agree with KQuill. I think the age of consent should be lowered to 18 months!

[KChenowethfan]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 5:50pm

I wish Christiane Noll was doing this. She did the concept recording and NEEDS to be back on Broadway.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 7/1/08 at 5:56pm

I'm sorry, he wasn't "strong enough" to stop a 15 year old girl from having sex with him? Really? Point is, he broke the law. He knew she was underage and he still went ahead and had sex with her. He raped her, legally. She's more than welcome to seek counseling for it, and if she had a role in "seducing" him, she can explore that with her therapist. Bottom line, if you are 34 years old and a 15 year old hits on you, you have to have the presence of mind to say "No."