I remember reading years ago (in Jerry Herman's memoir, perhaps?) that Judy Garland very much wanted to replace Angela Lansbury in the original production. If I recall correctly, the deal fell through because no one would insure Garland due to her notorious health problems, since it was rather late in her life.
What an incredible performance that would have been. She also would have been one hell of a Mama Rose, maybe opposite Liza as Louise and Lorna as June. Can you imagine?
My ideal Mame would be Donna Murphy in a revival at Lincoln Center where they wouldn't have to worry about her marquee value. Her and Beth Leavel as Vera would be a knock-out!
However, I do love the idea of Zeta-Jones in the role, I think it'd be the perfect role for her to come back to the stage.
I love the Toni Collette idea! She's a fabulous actress and a great singer, I'm still bummed out that she didn't get to play Mrs.Wilkinson on Broadway but then again she got to do her brilliant turn on the underrated UNITED STATES OF TARA instead.
I heard someone say of the recent Kennedy Center production that Harriet Harris should have been Mame and Christine Baranski should have been Vera; that made a great deal more sense to me as well.
Henrik, I remember that was the word around this board when casting was announced for the Kennedy Center production, and I feel even after the show opened people still had the same reaction. When Baranski is on she's *on* but I don't know that she's the rangiest actress, audiences didn't seem to be impressed by her Mame Dennis, same with her turn as Carlotta in FOLLIES. She seemed to be having a ball when I saw her in BOEING-BOEING, so I guess it depends on the role for her.
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/17/04
The perfect MAME right now is Streep. It just won't ever happen.
Broadway Star Joined: 6/26/11
Yes Zeta Jones cause we need to hear the score sung by a goat.
Broadway Star Joined: 12/31/69
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/30/08
Meryl and Midler are perfect but it'll never happen!
Branski's DC production was going to play a limited season but the math and the risk of branski not being a massive name pull put a stop to it.
I would kill to see this show back and be a massive hit, it is such a lovely show.
Re Judy Garland and Mame, Judy wanted the role so badly and Jerry was heart broken over the producers the turning her away. It was just insurance but her health and issues over her reputation of missing shows, it would have been a nightmare....bless it could have beem musical history gold
Zeta Jones would be a decent enough draw to get people in and she probably wouldn't embarrass herself in the role. I think she could be lovely.
this would be the number one show i'd like to see a revival of (how is it that Gypsy has had 3+ revivals in the past decade or so and Mame..well...)
Baranski would be great, Jan Maxwell would be amazing, Bette Midler would be perfect...
Wasnt there talk of Cher doing a TV musical version?
Broadway Star Joined: 6/26/11
Cher would been a great Mame, i wonder, she is short a tony for her egot....
I'm not really sure why Mame hasn't been getting an revivals. Sure, Gypsy has that great book and score, but Mame's no slouch. The book is pretty solid as far as musical books go and every song in the score's a winner. With the right name attached, it could be a huge hit.
I'd actually like for them to attempt a movie version again even if it were only for TV.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/15/03
I think MAME is a very expensive show to mount. The number of sets and costumes are staggering.
Broadway Star Joined: 6/27/07
Herman's other big musical (HELLO, DOLLY!) always gets the "She-would-be-great-in-the-revival talk." It's nice to see MAME getting some respect here, too.
With that said, you definitely need a BIG name to line up producers who will open their checkbooks to mount a revival. Otherwise, forget it. With that said, I vote for Midler. Cher would be a riot, too. She deserves to join Whoopi, Moreno and the small group of others in the EGOT club.
They're just going to wait to do MAME in another ten years when Kristin Chenoweth (who would probably be great) is age appropriate for the title role.
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/15/03
No matter how "age appropriate" Chenoweth becomes she'll still sound like a 14 yr old with sinusitis.
And she'll always be 5-0. Mame is many things, but short? Dont think so.
I don;t think Zeta-Jones has the warmth that Mame needs. She's always seemed a little cold; Mame needs to love Patrick as her own son and then he leaves and breaks her heart. Jerry has always said it's his hardest role to cast, much moreso than Dolly. I love the show and the score - it's long but many shows are, and Phil Lang's orchestrations and Don Pippin's vocal arrangements are some of the best.
It is an expensive show - it has a big cast with a lot of supportinng roles, many set locations, and Mame and Vera need to look like a million bucks.
This would almost be a good thing for Encores!
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/28/11
I agree that Mame has to have warmth. Even more than Rosalind Russell in the non-musical version; Russell could get away with being mostly glamorous (and very funny). The musical Mame has to sing "My Best Girl" and "If He Walked into My Life."
SeanMartin, I mentioned above that Jerry Herman told a friend of mine about his Garland-as-Mame dream. The reason he mentioned it was because my friend was auditioning for the role and she isn't very tall; Herman's point was that he didn't originally picture Mame as tall. That was an accident of casting Lansbury.
For what it's worth. I'm not suggesting you have to agree.
No way in regards to Peters. Just, no. However, to throw out a couple different ideas which would be more fitting: Liza Minnelli. Or maybe Patti LuPone. Or even Emily Skinner?
Stand-by Joined: 12/31/69
Mame and Vera both need to be larger than life, outrageous women (Or drag queens). The key is that you have to love Mame. Vera you are just amused by.
How about an actress/singer who isn't pushing 60 all the way to 70? Angela Lansbury was only 40 when she originally played MAME (And Russell was 4 -- the right age to cover the time span in the story. Why do both MAME and DOLLY always have to be cast by women who are far too old to play them as written now?
This was provoked by the asinine comment that Cheno would be right for the role in 10 years -- she's the perfect age NOW (no matter her size), as is Zeta Jones (no matter her vocal ability which IMHO is at least as good as Lansbury's).
ETA: And Toni Collette. A brilliant choice.
Midler, Streep, et al -- all of them probable marquee names but far too old. And don't forget how "perfect" Midler was for Rose, and how disappointing she actually turned out to be.
D2, while Chenoweth may be just over forty, I would argue that (in large part due to her size) she still reads a good ten years younger than that. I don't see anything wrong with suggesting that she would still be very right for the part closer to fifty when she wouldn't look that age on stage.
And, for the record, you can politely disagree with someone without being so pompous and disrespectful.
Videos