Brief thoughts on COMPANY- Page 6

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 3:34am

My understanding is that there are no longer walkers for plays, but I think that's been true for the last couple of contracts.

I believe that houses which are playing musicals still have minimums. If a producing team wants to use fewer than the minimum, they can appeal I guess. Basically, I do think it's still possible that a musical might choose to use fewer than the minimums, but the minimums have become very low.

Still, I think that Mamma Mia! might have walkers because I'm pretty sure that there are fewer musicians in the pit than the house minimum for the Winter Garden.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 3:35am

There was actually a blurb amongst the credits in the SWEENEY playbill saying something to the effect of "All musicians for the production are a member of Local 802."

There's no such thing in the COMPANY playbill. Hm...

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 3:40am

While this is all fascinating, I am very curious to see what you thought about this "Company" production, Margo. Have you seen it?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 3:45am

I actually enjoyed it, with a few reservations:

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?boardname=bway&thread=915907#2601025

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 3:56am

Margo, you're really, really smart. I've always thought that. That said, why this?:

"It's as if the whole story is taking place in Bobby's head and we see him envying the others in relationships, even when they fail and they become disenchanted with their partners. "

Of course the whole story is taking place in Bobby's head. It's the way the musical is constructed.

And you know that. It's elemental.

I assume you were making a basic point.

Crap, I went to the theatre tonight with a whole bunch of people who were trying to make a basic point.

However, my head kept saying this: "Is Company a good musical because it works, or is it a good musical because it's a temperature of it's time?"

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 4:13am

And I wonder about this, Margo:

"In addition, the reduced orchestrations -- the sound is noticeably wanting for brass and percussion and instead emphasizes woodwinds, strings and reeds -- give the score a much less punchy and propulsive sense than usual, and more of a plaintive, somber and melancholy feel. It's less "Broadway" and more of a ruminative, almost poetic chamber music sound that aptly suits this take on the core material."

While that's a lovely piece of writing, I think your point is way off base.

Of course, it all comes down to personal judgements.

But do you really think that a "less "Broadway" and more of a ruminative, almost poetic chamber music sound that aptly suits this take on the core material"? suits "Company?"

I think of you were talking about "Sunday," that would make sense. As far as "Company" is concerned, I respectfully disagree.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 4:35am

It's not necessarily elemental. I've seen other productions where the direction has made the interaction between Bobby and the couples as realistic as possible -- that the encounters ACTUALLY happened. Here, Doyle clearly suggests -- at least to me -- that these "friends" and "couples" are all representational concepts of Bobby's imagination. That they aren't real, but rather mere manifestations in Bobby's mind of his insecurites about being alone, about what it could mean to be coupled, about his pursuit of the so-called "ideal partner" (which doesn't exist, which make his ruminations on the subject in "Someone is Waiting" so powerful), about his uncertainties in all phases of his life that have rendered him incapable of commiting to anyone and anything (which is why I compare him to Hamlet). The lighting and Doyle's staging emphasize and highlight this "unreality" -- that Bobby is not actually part of any of these dinner/cocktail parties or even observing them from the side, but that he's playing out scenarios in his own mind of what it MIGHT be like -- pro and con -- to be in a real committed relationship. Doyle points out Bobby's detachment from the real world in scene after scene -- all of which seem farcical and unreal, as if in a dream.

That's certainly not the take I got from the Donmar production or other productions which copied the original Prince staging. Yes, the scenes were kitschy and comedic, but they were meant to portray actual events, not imaginary, otherwordly scenarios in Bobby's mind. And taken as that -- and I'm not saying that Doyle's take here is either definitive or without flaw -- but I do think that it is a valid reading of the piece. And while I think that it lacks the propulsive force, the crackling dynamism, and some of the wit that I generally associate with COMPANY, I don't think that Doyle was aspiring for that particular interpertation of the piece. His view is a much more somber, reflective, internal and yes, cold, look at he mores of "contemporary" Manhattan single life.

Mind you, even under Prince's direction, the piece is more than a little cynical, unsentimental and somewhat bitter -- and Doyle's direction simply heightens this, eschewing all razzmatazz and the remaining disparate chards of warmth, and focuses on Bobby's loneliness and frustration and longing to connect. If a few numbers end up not landing as they have in past productions and certain liberties with the text and score have been taken that wind up diminishing the impact of certain characters, I'm personally fine with that because I think those choices were specifically made to shift any and all focus away from anything except Bobby's primary story, which I think here, is clearer and more dimensional than it has been in previous productions.

Does it make for a less "fun" evening? Probably. But, I think the sacrifices are justified in Doyle's attempt to get to the real and meaningful core of what the show is about. Is it the only version of COMPANY that should ever done henceforth? No, absolutely not. But, I think that this is a valid and -- if you go with it -- a very powerful interpretation of what Furth and Sondheim were trying to say when they created this rather conceptual piece exploring what it meant to be an unattached single man in present day New York City some 36 years ago that still resonates to this day.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 5:08am

And just to add, I think Doyle has taken the COMPANY that (I thought) I knew very well, sifted out all the extraneous bits and shown it to me in very different light. He's refracted it through a darker prism and left me with only a portrait of Bobby in his solitude, trying to find a way to personal contentment, which his many friends, lovers and hangers-on only serve to confuse, distort and obscure. That's why Doyle has diminished the potential impact of all of the rest of them -- though Amy still shines through since, I suppose she's on the threshold of the thing that Bobby most desires (and I think that's why his last second awkward "proposal" to her has more impact than any of his other encounters with his single female friends).

Again, this production worked for me because I specifically erased all the other productions of the show (and the hundreds of times I've heard the OBC) when I went in, and tried my best to look at it with fresh eyes (and ears), as if it were a brand new show I'd never seen before. I try to do that with every revival I see, not always successfully -- remember, I'm someone who had serious problems with Doyle's production of SWEENEY, finding that the actor-musician concept was simply too distracting for the narrative and, even seeing it a second time, found it impossible to lose myself in the story with musicians running around the stage and playing characters at the same time and thought there were so many inconsistencies in the staging that it interfered with the production's ability to coherently tell the story.

Here, if it all takes place in Bobby's head -- and that's what I'm going with -- then none of the instrument playing or presentational style of the acting bothers me. And since Furth's book has no narrative through-line and consists of unrelated vignettes only united by a central theme, then I find it much easier to accept all the liberties that Doyle takes with the staging. I don't think that they all worked, but, in the main, they did for me.

I don't have any problem with a director re-imagining a given show all the way down to its core -- heck, that's what the great directors do. And, again, no this production isn't as dazzling as many previous versions, but I can't begrudge Doyle for creating a more introspective interpretation. Yes, it's very different, but it brings out certain aspects of the show more clearly than before. It's not the COMPANY I'm used to, but I nevertheless appreciate it on its own terms (and apparently Sondheim and Furth flew to Cincinnati and did as well).

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 5:22am

I find it fascinating that so many people who had problems with Doyle's SWEENEY concept are far more accepting of COMPANY, while so many of us who enjoyed his SWEENEY found this COMPANY smothered by the concept.

Updated On: 11/16/06 at 05:22 AM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/16/06 at 9:24am

Doesn't that make total sense, though? They're so different. So for people who were attached to the way Sweeney did it, change is not treating the concept well. For people who didn't like it, this might be refreshing.

Gonna read what you said when I have more time to sit down and focus, Margo, but I look forward to it. :) And I must say, upon skimming what I missed last night, I am utterly INTRIGUED by the notion that Veuve things Margo is SOOOO SMART, but that he's had a stroke of out-of-character stupidity for liking Company, which is apparently for the feeble-minded. I addressed this earlier, but you chose to ignore my inquiry about your seeming shock at the simplicity being that Doyle is minimalist and further, why it "has" to be complicated.

PS, do you think you could learn to edit your posts rather than posting like four in a row?

Updated On: 11/16/06 at 09:24 AM

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 2:34am

Okay, so I *finally* saw this tonight. Overall, I very much enjoyed it and thought it was good. I honestly think all the bad things I have been reading of late helped me to enjoy it more, as for instance I came out thinking Raul really didn't come out as cold as everyone was making him to be...etc.

But since I overall thought it was good, I'll start with some of the things I didn't like--a little nitpicky from a musical perspective and some studying and analyzing of the show.

First, I missed some of the original instruments for the title song and The Little Things You Do Together. The instruments started sounding really great during Sorry Grateful, and not too many other than those two bothered me. I can't say exactly what instruments I was specifically missing, but...it was some. The songs sounded...lacking, and lacking a bit of energy. I suppose this could be from this version of the show, but...I'm pretty sure I was just missing some instruments. The voices of course were fine.

Though it makes sense in the Doyle style, I wasn't expecting the sort-of imagined karate. I mean, the actors did a fine job with it, and you know I can understand why they made this choice, but I still missed the actual fighting. It made the whole scene more interesting, and I dunno--this is being really nitpicky I know, but...just another thing I missed.

Another Hundred People...oy. I did a huge analysis on this song, especially with the music and sound of the instruments were very important to what I wrote. First, I really really missed the synthesizer. It had such a repeated, apathetic, unvaried sound--which started this whole analysis I had about people in New York and Bobby being repetitive and unvaried--like robots--not alive, etc. The instruments they had making up for the synthesizer just really altered the sound--it sounded melancholy, and...I don't think it should sound that way. It just...makes the mood weird. That in itself could ruin the song for me...

But it was worse. Certain parts of the song were lowered--I really didn't understand why, because some of it was sung with the original notes, and it's not like Angel couldn't hit those notes. Again, it just gave a really weird...I think inappropriate sound to the song.

And...I mean, I hope it was just this performance, but...my sensitive pitch-perfect ear was in intense pain during the last note-"train." One of my friends who certainly doesn't have my ear even noticed it. So, at least for tonight, it kind of put a final stamp on big disappointment I had with the song.

I didn't expect to be so upset with the removal of Tick Tock, but I was...not even because I was especially attached to the song, but I didn't think it was rightfully replaced. To push back Poor Baby to have that go on while Bobby and April are "making love" was just--wrong. It's an important song that should stand on its own, and the dance to Tick Tock was supposed to show the difference between having sex and making love. I think there had to be some sort of demonstration of...the faster, intense action of having sex when it's not in a loving context, and the slowness of Poor Baby just didn't work with it at all. I understand having the whole dance wouldn't make sense for this production, but I don't know. I almost wonder if it would have been more effective to do Poor Baby earlier and just have Bobby and April kiss and leave it at that. I mean, I still think just some important change in music and seeing something is missing. It may not belong in this production, but I think it creates some sort of...hole.

I also missed the point where April tells Bobby she loves him and Bobby can't say it back, and then all the couples say I love you--again, I think another very important part--an important way he's beginning to realize things about himself that makes his revelation in Being Alive more believable.

I think those were my only major quibbles. So now onto things I thought were really good...

Raul. I expected him to sing beautifully, but like I said after reading everything about how cold he was and such, I kept thinking he's not that cold or detached...his cute little dancing during Side By Side was amusing, when appropriate he seemed warm with his friends--laughing, inquisiting, joking around (another friend thinks he improved this karate move or something?) I didn't wonder why they would be friends with him as others have. Obviously, there is a degree of detachment, but I think he acted appropriately in all of the scenes. His jump to Being Alive might have seemed rash, but that's more a fault of the book. The scream and Being Alive...brilliant. The gorgeous high note at the end of Someone is Waiting. And what's really amusing is I'm in the camp that doesn't find Raul attractive...and that seems to shape how you react to his Bobby, yet I still bought it. I mean he was making approrpiate seductive motions with the girls and such. But yeah. Totally thought he was amazing.

Heather/Amy/Not Getting Married. What a number! It was the first time I've ever seen this number performed live--it was a long while before the applause after the song died down. Heather tripped over one or two words here or there, but I of course forgive her. She was just so funny crawling on the floor and such. What a crowd-pleasing number. And she did a really great job with the entire scene after, acting all crazy, and almost ending the wedding, the sweet moment with Bobby, etc. I feel like I would have been satisfied just seeing this number tonight. That great. "Susan" also sang the bride part beautifully. And it was also fun for my friends and I to glance at each other and acknowledge the Bobby/Company rhythm we heard under the beginning of Not Getting Married. And right away we mentioned the strong dissonance at the end of Marry Me A Little. Gotta love Sondheim class.

Umm, I also want to say...people say most of the other actors/characters don't make much of an effect. I'm not gonna strongly disagree with this statement, but others have said of course Amy was great, and April too--I also think...though her part was very small, especially without Tick Tock, I really liked Kathy. There was just something really...heartfelt about her. People say you don't care about anyone--I cared about her. Again, she didn't do much, but in her brief scene.

Umm, I was fairly impressed with Barbra as Joanne, but this too I think was due to expectations. I had heard she purposely goes very off-tune at the end of Ladies Who Lunch and was nervous for my ear, but my ear felt fine. I think she did a really good job with that song--getting calmer to crazier, showing how she's talking about herself, how she gets through, seemingly losing it near the end, and then regaining everything. I also liked how she and Raul played each other--they WERE staring at each other a lot, and I did see some tension there--makes the idea that she understands him best...i don't know it just felt that believing their stares enhanced the characters and relationship and breakthrough. Though the dark hair and triangle did make me think of Patti...

I looved what they did with Side By Side. They didn't need the dancing with what they did there. And it is so appropriate that Bobby played kazoo. It seems like such a dorky, solo, lonely instrument.

Also loved the use of the saxophones in You Could Drive A Person Crazy. Really liked that number overall.

The whole instruments and concepts--I don't feel too strongly about that either way. Margo said it wasn't distracting, and I agree with that--but being a musician, I kind of liked that I was able to get distracted by the instruments in Sweeney if that makes any sense. I do realize these are different concepts, and didn't look for any false meanings to the instruments...there was a nice thing of flutes surrounding Bobby during Someone is Waiting--a flute has such a...high, fantasy sound to it, very appropriate.

I loved the staging with Bobby often at the other ends of the stage and the whole thing in the middle and him not playing the instruments and all...but what I wasn't expecting and was so thrilled with was the fact that Bobby plays piano but stops. He realizes part of actually commiting means getting away from his friends, he can't be like them, he must do this in his own way. I wasn't...loving the whole him playing piano, just b/c I really just wished Raul could have sung to us like he did the end of the song b/c that was just...wow.

And of course, I was dazzled by the actors singing, changing instruments, playing, memorized music, no conductor, etc. It amazed me in Sweeney and amazes me here.

And I understand there was no need for it, but it was kind of funny when the lights came up and I was like wait, what happened to the finale?!

Considering how dark I was hearing the show was, I found myself laughing A LOT.

Umm, so these are my most-certainly-not-brief thoughts on COMPANY

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 4:50am

You bring up some interesting points.

Other than the obvious fact with regards to Tick Tock that a dance number wouldn't fit here, everything explained in that song about the differences between love and sex is totally implicit in the way that night is staged in Doyle's production. It's about showing and not telling -- you see in Doyle's staging what would be redundant if you also had Tick Tock to allow you to hear the character's thoughts. Raúl's eyes are OPEN for most of that kiss. He's looking around the room, so to speak. He's not into her, he's just getting some. The whole thing is very urgent and immediate -- he's horny, she's a girl, but it's not lovemaking at all. And so then in Barcelona, he wants her to say because she is SOMEONE, even though she's not THE one. I don't think just kissing and leaving it at that would be good enough -- you need to know he slept with her, and I think "showing" it so to speak, as opposed to just implying it by having Barcelona be the morning after, makes a lot of the above implicitly clear.

I'm still put off by all of the comparisons to the original, especially by people who didn't even actually see it, even though comparisons of the music itself can be drawn. I think the "melancholy" mood given in Another Hundred People (I disagree with the assessment, though; I don't think it's overALL melancholy -- Marta has so much spirit) sort of fits within that idea of robotic nature pretty well (that idea it self IS somewhat melancholy), to me. The lyrics imply robotic nature, and that idea of New York being just... globulous units of people IS sort of a lament, but Marta's character implies excitement and thrill in NYC. Her monologue is, in many ways, antithetical to the ideas of sameness and robotic imagery in the portrayal of New Yorkers, so I think the fact that SHE sings it is very important to what you take out of the song -- these "another hundred people," lyrically are a blob, a unit, but Marta, who seems to take great pleasure in the paradoxical diversity within the supposed similarity by digging beneath the surface, sings it. I think that puts a balancing spin on the matter. And additionally, the blatantly obvious -- the synthesizer is just way too seventies.

The karate scene is interesting to me, because it's one of the most abstract staging elements in the show, yet it's the first of the major book scenes. I think if audiences are willing to buy that, the rest is almost cake, opposite of blatant inability to accept the very symbolism within what Doyle is doing. He does everything for a reason. I think it may have been funnier if they had actually fought, but the statement of it all is so huge for me that I just don't mind it.

I'm too tired to say anything else. =P

Updated On: 11/17/06 at 04:50 AM

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 7:51pm

"Mind you, even under Prince's direction, the piece is more than a little cynical, unsentimental and somewhat bitter -- and Doyle's direction simply heightens this, eschewing all razzmatazz and the remaining disparate chards of warmth, and focuses on Bobby's loneliness and frustration and longing to connect. If a few numbers end up not landing as they have in past productions and certain liberties with the text and score have been taken that wind up diminishing the impact of certain characters, I'm personally fine with that because I think those choices were specifically made to shift any and all focus away from anything except Bobby's primary story, which I think here, is clearer and more dimensional than it has been in previous productions.

Does it make for a less "fun" evening? Probably. But, I think the sacrifices are justified in Doyle's attempt to get to the real and meaningful core of what the show is about. Is it the only version of COMPANY that should ever done henceforth? No, absolutely not. But, I think that this is a valid and -- if you go with it -- a very powerful interpretation of what Furth and Sondheim were trying to say when they created this rather conceptual piece exploring what it meant to be an unattached single man in present day New York City some 36 years ago that still resonates to this day."

Fascinating stuff, Margo, and I see where you're coming from.

I'm not sure I entirely agree, but I don't disagree either.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 10:11pm

"I'm still put off by all of the comparisons to the original, especially by people who didn't even actually see it"

I really hope that wasn't directed at me, since you know I did "see" it, and wouldn't comment on how I missed seeing the karate if I read that it happened. I'll give the benefit of the doubt that you were just ranting about some people in general.

And I don't see how you can expect any revival to not be compared to the original (provided you didn't have to be 90 years old to see the original :-P ). I mean, I don't agree people should dismiss revivals because they are too "attached" to the original, but I think it's natural to discuss specific parts that you might have thought were better done in the original. Now that I think about it...I guess these Doyle productions have been subject to more comparison to the original than some other revivals, and I am thinking about it and think it was because many more people who see these revivals saw the original productions, then say people who saw the revival of The Pajama Game. I think that may be a major reason these are getting more of the comparisons.

I couldn't see that Raul's eyes were open during the kiss from the front row. Or maybe I could and I didn't notice. I wish I did.

I mean in theory you don't even have to be shown in any way the difference between lovemaking and sex because throughout the show you realize the way Bobby is with his girlfriends. But I still *really* didn't like the idea of having Poor Baby sung while they're making love. It just didn't mesh IMO. I still feel that Poor Baby worked better as the sole focus of the stage while it was sung, since it conveys something really important to the audience and is very important to the plot.

For the most part, I see what you're saying re: Tick Tock--we don't need to hear the sounds of their lovemaking, and we don't need the dance--but I personally felt we needed the music, or similar music. Well, needed may not be the right word as if I say anything was needed/necessary, it could certainly be argued. I think it enhances the show to have the Tick Tock music playing during that scene. It leaves an effect on the listener, as it's very different than anything else you've heard all night. And it works well musically between the songs it's between; a nice contrast. It's no so much that without the music/number, a certain message isn't gotten, but in some way that maybe I can't fully verbalize, that music adds something for me, and the scene just lacked...something...without it, IMO.

And in terms of the audience not having to hear the characters' thoughts--I agree. I think Bobby needs to hear his own inability to say he loves her in Barcelona. The second act is an interesting journey for Bobby. At the end of the first act, he sings Marry Me A Little--self-knowingly realize what he doesn't want and accepting it. Throughout the second act, little moments appear that show him that something isn't right and is unacceptable about his way of life--the kazoo moment in Side By Side is one of them, and the lack-of-I-love-you in Tick Tock is another. As it is, Being Alive is a big jump, but these small moments really help it along. And it is not necessary, but enhancing that the other couples then all go on to say they love each other.

Now, Another Hundred People--of course the idea behind Another Hundred People is melancholy, but I think it's just too...easy...to make the parts of the synthesized music that sounded repetitive into something melancholy. I think it needs to be thought of as you know a sad idea, not something that the music has to create. The music, sounding repetitive without feeling sad--really showing no distinct emotion, just perfectly fit the idea of the people in the city. The song paints a picture and you in the audience think wow, that's really depressing. The song doesn't need any part of the music to indicate to you that's really depressing. Now the lyrics you could call sad I suppose...but in this way, the...lyrics are discussing the music. When you have this new sound in, the music is "discussing" the lyrics. I personally really like it better the first way--I think more often music discusses lyrics, so the rarity of lyrics discussing music stands out. And I think the instruments made it sound a bit slower, which opposes the fastness/craziness of the city, so I think just takes a little more of something away.

Hmm, you bring up some interesting points about Marta singing the song. I...don't know, I never took it frankly that Marta was actually singing, though I certainly understand that one could. It just...with everything she discusses, I couldn't imagine that she would sing this. The way it molds in and out of the scenes, it...well certainly IS a commentary, but I kind of...perhaps didn't/don't associate it with Marta as much as I should. But anyway throughout the verses...first the specific music she sings is in sync with the apathetic music, then her music has more emotion to it. The music actually rises in emotion a bit with her--this emotion peaks and then the apathetic music comes back in when she sings "another hundred people just got off of the train." So I thought of the use of emotion in the songs as an attempt for emotion--to not live a purposeless city life, to really live in the city...but the attempts aren't successful...in the end she is just back to apathetically singing Another Hundred People just got off of the train.

But then there's a ****load of emotion at the end of the song, contrasting with the fact that she's repeating the same phrase about something repeating over and over. The phrase gets more powerful each time she sings it, as if she is holding on to any attempt to put any meaning into living in the city. But in the end, she is still just singing the same repeated phrase: another hundred people just got off of the train. But the interpretation certainly changes when you want to figure out why Marta is singing it and such. Just interesting that I hadn't explored it from that angle. Heh. Granted, she could be the biggest example of in a place where she's trying to find meaning in the city and has naively convinced herself that there is...

I definitely said more than I needed to whatever I was trying to say, so forgive me, I get really excited when discussing this music. I think I was somehow arguing that...I think we kind of tangiently argued about the robotic/melancholy aspect of the song and if the emotion in the song is different, and I think somehow my point was even the emotion fits into the robotic element. This may have little to do with missing the synthesizer but...like I said, I get a tad excited.

Anyway...

I see your point about the synthesizer being 70s'ish...I personally think it does so much for the song that it's worth it, for me has become completely associated with the song so it stands apart from decades, but I can understand that argument.

Hmm, you are right that it is an important part in demonstrating what the concept will be very early on. Good observation. I really think that was just having seen them fight in the original...you said you think it would have been funnier if they thought, but I saw them fight. I wouldn't have felt like I was missing that had I not watched the original. Again, I don't think this is a major flaw, because I don't think it will be a big deal to those who haven't seen it. But...yeah, I missed it. It was just so funny, the chopping, the blocking, when they were both caught in each other...of course it would have been soo difficult and pretty much impossible to stage here...again, not saying it belongs in this production...in the original, Joanne appeared on the second floor singing over everyone, giving Harry and Sarah the whole floor to fight. So it's not like I'm saying eww Doyle should have them fought physically it was just more...awww, okay fighting here would be hard, but awww it was so great.

One more thing I thought of today--this is already so long, why not make it longer? This has nothing to do with anything good/bad about the revival, just something I was thinking about today. When I was watching the pot scene, I couldn't get the image out of my head of Robert having the 70s haircut, everyone in 70s outfits, sitting on the grass in the 70s backyard, smoking the pot and making 70s references. I would want to say does it hold up without all that 70's up, but I'm sure it does...I don't know even though there were no 70s elements, I couldn't help but see these actors in that situation--in the 70's. I think that was really the only scene that I felt that way about. But I'm sure it works fine with them the way they are, in the present, just...odd that I couldn't get the original image out of my head.

Also, I loved the fact that Amy was in a black wedding dress.

I'm not tired, my hands aren't tired, but anyone's who's reading this eyes are, so I guess that's why I won't say anything else :-P

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/17/06 at 11:42pm

I was generalizing to a degree, but it's obvious that a video can't stand in place of a theatrical experience. Archival videos exist to document that a performance happened. Yes, you "saw" it, but you didn't see it. Not trying to start an argument, but seeing it live is a different experience, you know that. That's all.

Of course it's going to be compared to the original; it's inevitable. But a lot of the comparisons are leading to people just not being open to change and that's breeding a lot of negativity, which frustrates me.

I think having Marta sing Another Hundred people brings a lot to the song in juxtaposition to what you can get lyrically. The fact that SHE is the one who sings it spins a lot of life into it, I think -- rather than making it totally heavy and emotional, she loves the "pulse" of the city. I actually think the orchestrations in the song are really beautiful and the synthesizer has always bugged me in being TOO period, so obviously that's a major conflict of interest.

Updated On: 11/17/06 at 11:42 PM

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 11/18/06 at 12:26am

Right, I agree...though I think that would incline me towards the revival, no? There's nothing like seeing live theatre, so the experience of seeing the revival was certainly better than watching a tape of the original. I just...wasn't quite sure where you were coming from, wanted to be sure.

Ooh, pulse of the city...now I want to go listen for the percussion part of the song...great catch. Well, it is important that the sound isn't too emotional definitely.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/18/06 at 12:33am

Well, no, I don't think the fact that live theater is inevitably better than a tape of a live performance means you're going to buy into one production more than the other. There are too many factors to how you feel about a show to simplify it that much.

Posted: 12/3/06 at 2:35pm

so was i the only one bothered by "SUSAN"'s fake southern accent? i thought everyone would be pointing that out, as it seemed such a distraction!

maybe its my own pet peeve.