CAMELOT tonight

I'm planning on stopping by TKTS to see if I can get a ticket later today! Wish I could afford a full-priced ticket!

Shouldn't Jeremy Irons be doing Pelinore or Merlin at this point in his life. Why do they always cast Arthur 20 - 30 years too old?

Yep I got a TKTS ticket for it! I can't wait!

I had a great time as well. I loved Melissa and Jeremy Irons. They were wonderful. I was a bit underwhelmed by James Barbour. I thought he did an excellent job with "C'est Moi," but I found his "If Ever I Would Leave You" a bit disappointing (and had been thinking it would be the highlight of the evening). Overall, I enjoyed Brigadoon more last year, but I also prefer that show to Camelot.

How much were the TKTS tickets? I know prices were varied from $100-300. A friend of mine was in the show (supporting role- I honestly don't know who he played). Glad you all enjoyed it.

Also loved loved loved that some of the dialogue was updated...like when King Arthur was talking about the creation of the round table and it used phrases like "it's in".

Is there any possibility that this could of been a try out for Jeremy Irons? Maybe a revival is in the works.....Jeremy is just so perfect for the role.

And for the person who said why couldn't they cast a 20 year younger Arthur, remembered this takes place over the course of many years so Arthur does end up

No, Arthur is not "supposed to be" older than Jenny and Lance. Their ages are unspecified. It's a very poor choice to have Arthur be significantly older than Guenevere and Lancelot, because then it seems like she is dumping Arthur for a younger man, which isn't the point at all.

I figured out once that Camelot takes place over the span of about 12 years. Five years pass between the first and second scenes, and seven years pass during intermission. I cannot remember the specifics of how I deduced this, but I do believe it is specified in the script.

If there's any guide to how old the actor playing Arthur "should be", why not go back to the beginning? Richard Burton was 35, which is just right; young enough to pull off the boyishness of the first scenes, but old enough to have a sense of the scale of tragedy at the end.

Updated On: 6/7/11 at 03:13 PM

Where does the intermission usually fall? They didn't perform it with one last night. My guess would be after "Before I Gaze at You Again"?

Intermission is after the big "Proposition" speech after the knighting ceremony.

Pammylicious, I think you're influenced by having seen Irons! Arthur doesn't have to be any older than 35 at the end of the play, assuming my 12-year span is correct as specified in the script.

Let's say Arthur was 17 when Mordred was conceived, which is quite possible. (We know it was before Arthur became King, which happened when he was 18 or shortly after.) Let's say the first scene happens 6 years later; Arthur is now a boyish 23. Mordred doesn't show up until 12 years after that; he's now 18, and Arthur is 35. And I believe it's pretty clear that Act II all happens within a relatively short span of time, not over several years or anything like that.

This trend of older Arthurs is fairly recent. (Did it start with Goulet?) Again, to look at early precedent, Richard Harris was 37 when he did the movie.

Updated On: 6/8/11 at 04:25 PM

Wonkit -- What is your source for "the Arthurian legend"? It being a legend, there is no definitive version, but I'm curious anyway as to what you're regarding as "the legend". Idylls of the King? The Once and Future King? Bottom line is that it's fiction, and so totally open to interpretation. The intentions of Lerner and Loewe can best be discerned through how the original production was cast.

True, Burton was roughly a decade older than Andrews or Goulet, a little more for Andrews and a little less for Goulet. But your statement "the trend of older Arthurs started at the beginning" is only true if by "older" you mean "older than Lance and Jenny". Not "older" as in "elderly".

And even so, Burton was 35 and Irons is 62. He's a senior citizen who is roughly 20 years older than Errico and Barbour. Arthur needs to be positively boyish in the opening scene, and without having seen Irons, I'll wager he wasn't able to pull that off, very fine actor though he is.

I'm not trying to take anything away from Irons, I'm sure he gave a fine reading of the role, and I hope you and everyone who saw him enjoyed it. If it worked for you, that's all that matters. I just think it's a lamentable modern trend to cast old men as Arthur, and one that most decidedly was NOT the idea in the OBC or movie.

The ultimate irony though, is that I now realize the "elderly Arthur" tradition was probably started by Burton himself in the 1980 Broadway revival, when he was 55 (and infirm to boot).

Updated On: 6/7/11 at 09:08 PM

Interesting that concerning the Arthur/Lancelot relationship dynamic, Lerner sort of splits the difference when he has Arthur consider Lance "a man for my brother, a man for my son, a man for my friend". I admit this does imply Arthur is a bit older than Lance, but not I think by a huge amount. Still, his feelings for Jenny are clearly not at all paternal!

When Richard Burton revived CAMELOT at Lincoln Center about 20+ years ago, the show was re-written so that it was the older Arthur looking back on the past. Of course it didn't matter how old Arthur was because the night I saw it, Burton was cockeyed drunk and they had to rush the understudy on after "I Wonder What The King Is Doing Tonight?" (Everyone in the audience knew what the king HAD been doing prior to the performance!)

---