CABARET at the Kit Kat Club Previews — Page 4

magicfingers said: "I hated it in London. The entire production is way too garish. It has zero flair to it. The Kit Kat girls are not sexy and not seductive. The entire premise of the first act rests on the girls and MC seducing the audience into complacency- as a metaphor for Nazi Germany. The only really seduction happening in this production is between the two octaganarians. And that’s not how cabaret was written."

You know how Cabaret was written better than the people who wrote it/control it? Are you aware that John Kander and the Estates of the other authors had approval of both the London production and the Broadway transfer? I think I trust them to know how Cabaret was written.

blasvader said: "If it ''scares you off'', I'd say Cabaret wasn't the show for you in the first place. Do people even know that kind of art that was being created and performed at that time? Only to be later branded degenerate by the Nazis? And people complaining about it, for this particular version, when it has some very beautifully presented club numbers, truly bizarre."

It didn't scare me off. I meant the people who would have been in the audience of the Kit Kat Club. I got a Sally who was outright screaming the songs from Don't Tell Mama on. Audiences in Berlin wouldn't return, considering the bevy of offerings at the time, to that specific club when there is such a glaring lack of talent and an inability to even get a drink without being screeched at. There's a fine line between talent-deficient and profoundly unpleasant.

As for the beautifully presented club numbers - I'm happy you found them so. For me - every number was choreographed in a completely different style, with a completely different vocabulary, and seemed to be happening in a totally different era. One number seemed like it was from Cabaret. The next was choreo straight out of Hamilton. Later there was a Stephen Hoggett-esque movement piece.

It underlined the main problem I had with the production - a lack of specificity. The production traverses eras and references knowingly, and I thought it lost specificity along the way. I did not get the sense these were specific people in a specific era under a set of specific circumstances. If you want to talk about art that was happening at the time, as you well know, the more burlesque style cabaret houses tended to not be the same venues as the politically motivated cabarets. The Kit Kat club itself in the show is a melding of places. To further meld did not work for me. This production, at least in London, wants to remain an enigma. For some that may work. For me, considering the current political moment we are in, in this specific time, in this specific place, I find that something of a cop out.

And I readily acknowledge all of this is fixable and may be fixed for the Broadway outing.

Still collecting my thoughts but give Gayle Rankin the Tony now.

Lol.

Post 84: Give Rankin the Tony

Post 85: Rankin has no stage presence!



Not disparaging either opinion, I don't see the show until next week, just commenting on the duality

Updated On: 4/2/24 at 02:35 AM

I second that emotion. November for me. If Eddie leaves in August or September, I'll live.

Does it feel/look like 65 million or whatever that crazy number is/was.

RippedMan said: "Does it feel/look like 65 million or whatever that crazy number is/was."

I believe it’s 40 million. And I can’t answer that. I don’t know what the transformative costs are for something like this.

I was at the first preview last night and sat in the West Mezz/Mezz 4. We were in the last row E two seats off the end and I would sit there again in a heartbeat! It felt closer to the stage than the regular mezz and possibly better raked in that I didn't feel like we had to shift between or above heads to see (and we had leg room). And we really did feel close to the stage! Yes there are times that are slightly more "staged" to the other side, but I felt they did a good job of staging in the round and I did not feel like my experience was diminished (tho I do not have a comparison point).

kwoc91 said: "FANtomFollies said: "Have they re-raked the existing orchestra section? I'm sitting in Row E, which isthe 2nd row of 'real' seats behind the tables and wondering if heads are going to be an issue."

I'm sitting in row E as well and I'm wondering if we had the same thought process! I wanted to be as close as possible, but wasn't interested in the glorified Lunchables snacks and drinks, and was concerned row D would be blocked by the table seats."

Yes, 100% what was going on in my head! I also don't love audience interaction so I was happy to have a few rows between me and the stage. For what it's worth - there was someone who saw last night's show on Reddit that said Row E is the first row of the Orchestra section with a step up, so you are slightly higher than anyone in front of you. Looks like we both made a great choice :)