Broadway Productions VS. their Tour Equivalents.. — Page 2

Kev~ the pm feature is temp. lame. Won't bore the board too much, but just to relate my surprise that anyone knows or saw that cast. I was actually re-acquainted with Keith Buterbaugh ( pronunced Bu- ter-boh not Butter ball!) after 10 yrs. and we now work with some of the same theater people!

Anyway, The only fun part about so many reincarnations of J&H between the Bd'w tour and the many regional prods.is the varations of scenes and sets. Lucy singing " A New Life" from a walk bridge by moonlight. A realistic "Confrontation" using two voices and cool lights! etc.

I'd love to compile some of each and put in in front of Frank to consider! Some scene/set changes and song insertions were actually a GREAT improvement.
I've got a video of a production in Long Isle. with Brad Little playing Jekyll. One of the strongest reason why they should have re -vamped this show and tried it again! For one thing, they put "Dangerous Game" in the right setting: the bedroom!. It was very seductive and scary. And his Hyde chasing Lucy through the "city" sets was very cool, very startling! Not campy at all. And Brad was Excellent!Ok no more..J&H is gone for now.

Well, I needed a break before the big night tonight!

Happy, Joy! to ALL!

---

Well to put in my two cents from productions that came to Nashville's TPAC recently, I was VERY dissapointed with 42nd Street with their set, mostly painted back drops, and not even close to as glamourous as the B'way production. Music Man looked like a big cartoon with bad acting, Aida was top notch, Millie was pretty good with keeping the majority of it in (Darcie Roberts was absolutely amazing in that production), Beauty was beautiful, and Les Mis/Phantom looked just like their B'way productions.

I just recently saw The Lion King national tour in Memphis and I must say that I have never seen any tour do what this production did on stage. I haven't gotten to see the Broadway version yet, but I was absolutley blown away by the set, lighting, and costumes. I don't think they held back anything or tried to scale down much at all, it was just big and splashy and pretty! I think Disney followed Cameron's footsteps in upping the quality of touring productions because all of their shows are great on the road.
Tennessee Performing Arts Center

---

PB...mucho agreed with your J/H "splicing" ideas. On the subject of "Dangerous Games," I always thought the staging in NYC...in which the Ensemble comes onstage during "In His Eyes" and then Emma just sorta sleepwalks off afterwards (hehe) was sort of halfa*s. And yes, heard MANY positive comments about the Brad Little production. I honestly wish the show would tour again, in a newer and improved version...but alas.

It's good to re-visit J/H memories every now and again. Thanks

i saw the SUESSICAL tour changes (with Rigby) but am anxious to see the non-union which i hear is much re-conceived and better in concept (won't go into the quality debate about non-Equity tours).

i thought while the scenery in the MILLIE tour did not have the polish of NYC, the ensemble and most roles (including the lead) were very good and at NYC standard. Choreography held up (in fact i find Roberts a better dancer than Foster), but in my opinion stage direction not quite so (particularly in some of Cavenaugh's choices and even Hollis Resnik and the admittedly great singer Pamela Isaacs). What really surprised me on my third viewing of the show (first two NYC) was the strength of the score. It would have been nice had the pit been a little bigger, but the composition work in general, the use of melodic counterpoint, and the lyrics re-impressed me.

i still think BIG and SEUSSICAL could work. It may take quality regional productions of them to get them back in the canon. My take is that MILLIE is already there.

But in terms of figuring out how to make a tour show work, i do think Disney takes the cake. B&B tours are very very close to the NYC product, and AIDA and LION KING have slight adaptations that in some instances i thought were just as artistic as choices in NYC. It all depends on how much the producers can afford to spend on the traveling product's execution...Disney, like Michael Bennett knew with CHORUS LINE, realizes that the public can tell a difference (either consciously or not). They make their brand on the road as strong as possible. i think 42nd STREET has done that, but i haven't seen the new tour version to really tell. i don't think MUSIC MAN or OKLAHOMA revival tours have, regardless of their cast's union status. i've seen all incarnations of RAGTIME and that non-Equ tour had nothing to be ashamed of---the visuals only suffered when the house was too small for the road scenery. The casting and choreography were top-notch.

---

by the time i saw B&B on the road, it looked/sounded/moved fine to me, and i'm pretty critical. i think the touring version of AIDA, which i just saw this season, looks terrific as well. It definitely has some differences from NYC, but the choices seemed valid to me. Unfortunately, i can't say the same for MILLIE's scenic choices for the road.

---

I undertstand that the big BATB production at the Palace was replaced by the tour set which consists of a lot more (garish in my opinion) drops when it moved to the Lunt Fontanne. The AIDA tour was certainly similar to the Broadway edition but the smaller scale made me feel like I was watching a wide screen film on a 10" TV.

this is true..

two things about it REALLY irk the hell out of me

~ the fact that they now have dancers dressed liek wolves instead of the mechanical wolves
~the fact that they TOTALLY redisgned the ballroom, which, at the Palace, I thought to be one of the prettier sets in the show