CAROUSEL Broadway Revival Officially Set for Spring 2018 — Page 6

Waitress is not a modern-day Cinderella story. What the actual ****, have you seen the show? There is no Prince Charming. It's about a woman who is abused and has to deal with an unwanted pregnancy and domestic violence. There are jokes, yes, but the show itself is not light hearted in content. and just because the two eras had different standards for marriage doesn't mean we need to keep portraying the outdated one. I am sure Jessie can tackle any and all roles, she's proved she's a very versatile actress, but it makes me extremely uncomfortable that the broadway community praised Waitress' message of female empowerment and encouraged its audience to find the strength to get out of abusive relationships and then is silent when misogynistic shows like Carousel are happily revived. It also makes me wonder what kind of head space one needs to be in to switch from a modern character that takes no **** to one that accepts abuse because Billy 'loves her.' And I know that most actors don't have the clout or safety to turn down leading roles, but c'mon, how come no one is talking about how strange it is for Mueller (and the rest of the community, really) to contradict everything that Waitress stood for for the sake of a revival.
 

"

WTF? Waitress has a fairy godmother in Joe, whose inheritance finally allows Jenna to leave Earl and have a new life. 

You have a very shallow reading of Carousel if you think it's "misogynistic." It's a very deep, complex musical that tackles difficult subjects in a way that might not be in the comfort zone of most audiences. And if you have so much outrage of Jessie taking a role that happens to have some of the most beautiful music ever written for a Broadway female soprano, then why don't you take it up with Jessie. I'm sure she won't think you're crazy and unreasonable at all.

Because it's damned good theatre, that's why. 

poisonivy2 said: "Waitress is not a modern-day Cinderella story. What the actual ****, have you seen the show? There is no Prince Charming. It's about a woman who is abused and has to deal with an unwanted pregnancy and domestic violence. There are jokes, yes, but the show itself is not light hearted in content. and just because the two eras had different standards for marriage doesn't mean we need to keep portraying the outdated one. I am sure Jessie can tackle any and all roles, she's proved she's a very versatile actress, but it makes me extremely uncomfortable that the broadway community praised Waitress' message of female empowerment and encouraged its audience to find the strength to get out of abusive relationships and then is silent when misogynistic shows like Carousel are happily revived. It also makes me wonder what kind of head space one needs to be in to switch from a modern character that takes no **** to one that accepts abuse because Billy 'loves her.' And I know that most actors don't have the clout or safety to turn down leading roles, but c'mon, how come no one is talking about how strange it is for Mueller (and the rest of the community, really) to contradict everything that Waitress stood for for the sake of a revival.
 

"

WTF? Waitress has a fairy godmother in Joe, whose inheritance finally allows Jenna to leave Earl and have a new life. 

You have a very shallow reading of Carousel if you think it's "misogynistic." It's a very deep, complex musical that tackles difficult subjects in a way that might not be in the comfort zone of most audiences. And if you have so much outrage of Jessie taking a role that happens to have some of the most beautiful music ever written for a Broadway female soprano, then why don't you take it up with Jessie. I'm sure she won't think you're crazy and unreasonable at all.

 

"

If you think that any story that has a benefactor, even one that shows up at the very end instead of in the middle, is a Cinderella story...then....I'm not sure what to tell you.

Yikes, you don't think that Carousel is misogynistic and I now see what I'm dealing with. Nothing either of us say will change the other's mind so I'm not interested in this conversation any more. 

Robbie2 said: "EM55 said: "kade.ivy said: "Now that we've had some time pass, I still find myself incredibly excited for this show! It has such potential, and I know it will be sung beautifully with the announced stars!

I've been thinking about possible theaters for this production, and the pickings seem somewhat slim, assuming it will be a fairly large production. I, too, assumed that it would take the Broadway until King Kong's announcement for next fall. Now, on the Shubert side of things, it looks like the best possibilities are mid-size houses like the Belaso or the Cort. The Shubert would be perfect if Bette doesn't extend and Dolly doesn't find a new star... The Nederlanders are also without a large house to offer, now that the Marquis and Palace have announced new tenants. 

 

Thoughts? Possibilities I'm missing?

 

"

Also excited for this. How about Charlie and the Chocolate Factory closes in winter, and they take the Lunt Fontanne, and Borle plays Enoch Snow?


"heard that Carousel is going to a Shubert house...so that leaves the Broadway or possibly the Shubert if Dolly closes after Bette AND the Imperial if Great Comet closes!

 
You are smoking dope if you thing Hello Dolly is going to close so quickly, once Bette is gone.  Rudin is smart: when the behemoth star is gone, he will start to focus his advertising budget on the behemoth show that got great reviews, won the Tony, that sends audiences out in waves of joy.  He will do the same thing David Merrick did, bring on multiple stars, some of whom will do great box office, some who will not.  He will move out the stars who do not perform.  Will it be the monster hit that it was with Bette?  In all likelihood, no.  But no one expected much when Pearl Bailey came in...at the time, it was viewed as a publicity stunt by many, until performances began. Dolly ran at least three years longer than it probably would otherwise have because of that casting.

As for Carousel, re other postings, I can't see it opening at too small a theatre.  Since Rudin is also producing this, I assume it is a for-profit production.

Carousel is a large show; unless they are planning or re-thinking it a la Doyle, I don't see how it will gross enough in a smaller theatre to have a chance at returning its investment.  I can't imagine that -- even with spectacular reviews -- it will command many premium ticket purchases, particularly of the super-expensive type; without that, grosses at a smaller theatre -- which the Hudson certainly is -- will be insufficient.  It needs a theatre like the Imperial if is is going to be economically viable.

 

 

GeorgeandDot said: "Seahag, have you ever seen Carousel because your "analysis" of it is both immature and shallow?  

Carousel is an extremely important portrayal of domestic violence.  I love Waitress, but the abusive relationship in it is shallow.  Many women are like Julie where they love their abuser because they're in denial.  Carousel never promotes domestic violence nor does it have anything particularly misogynistic about it.  Seriously, your statement is so idiotic that I can't even wrap my head around it.

 

"

I've seen the filmed concert version, the movie, and own three of the cast recordings. I love Carousel, but I love it in spite of its flaws and recognize that it's a product of the time period. I'm not going to argue which show had a more or less shallow depiction of abuse because that's (imo) really dangerous territory and would not want to minimize anyone's experience with domestic violence. What I will say is that I was really taken aback and frightened by the abuse scenes in both shows and can see how either could severely trigger someone. The difference between the two shows is the outcome and how each woman handles her abuse--that's the part that really matters to me. However, this is also coming from someone who often focuses on how theatre impacts other people's day to day lives. I sort of disagree that carousel doesn't promote domestic violence. I would say that you're right, it talks about the struggles of a woman who is in denial about their relationship with their abuser and doesn't every say 'hey abuse is good', but to me, the kind of grey area in carousel can promote violence in that there is violence in silence and denial. Especially with the song "What's the Use of Wondr'n." 

I think in this era, it would be beneficial to discuss the root and symptom of Billy's abusive behavior instead of writing it off as that being 'his thing.' I know that Carousel is a really complex show and that's why I struggle with this particular casting of both the leads. I'm hoping that the direction will give the show a fresher outlook in the least. 

"

If you think that any story that has a benefactor, even one that shows up at the very end instead of in the middle, is a Cinderella story...then....I'm not sure what to tell you.

Yikes, you don't think that Carousel is misogynistic and I now see what I'm dealing with. Nothing either of us say will change the other's mind so I'm not interested in this conversation any more. 

 

"

It's not misogynistic because Billy's behavior is not condoned or glorified. He dies a loser's death, in a way: unemployed, in a desperate scheme to make money by breaking the law. But what R&H did which was beautiful was that they found a way to portray this troubled man and still have us care about him. Sweeney Todd is the same way. That's masterful craft -- getting the audience to care about someone whose actions aren't admirable. 

The second act is about Billy's REDEMPTION. REDEMPTION means that he has to atone for things he did on earth. There is healing and there is forgiveness. It's a beautiful musical.

I LOVE Waitress, I've seen it three times, but its portrayal of abuse doesn't scratch the surface of how complex and messy of an issue it is, whereas Carousel tackles those issues straight on. I mean, where was Julie supposed to go? Pregnant and unemployed. And the mental prison that abusers create is more powerful than the physical prison. 

and I think it's totally weird of you to hold it against Jessie Mueller for taking on this part, but whatever floats your boat.

I don't get it either. Jessie is an actress. Actresses like to take different roles in their careers. Jessie was IN Waitress, she didn't write it from personal experience, she didn't take the role because she experienced this or agreed or disagreed with Jenna's choices, it was a part....she left the role, it's over. So I can't imagine why taking another part in another show would be affected by a previous job...even if the topics cross over a bit. It's a good role...

Personally I am not sure that Jessie's voice is the voice that I would prefer for Julie in Carousel but maybe she will surprise me. I will certainly give her that chance..

 

Seahag2 writes: "R&H were misogynistic and racist-- and I'm saying that while looking at their entire body of work. To me, that is clear. Most people of that time period were both, I don't think there was much for either of them to do to stray away from that norm, but they were still nonetheless racist and misogynistic. It doesn't bother me too much since that's just how it was back then, but I just don't think it means anything when you try to suggest that they weren't."

You have made some wildly general and inaccurate claims in this statement, and outrageous.  How kind and generous for you to allow for them to not bother you too much.  I'd like to know what sort of extensive research you've done into Rodgers and Hammerstein and their personal thoughts as well as their body of work. Oscar Hammerstein was one of the most  progressive, liberal, and decent people of his time.

Once again, Carousel  is NOT misogynistic.  Billy's behavior isn't excused, nor is it condoned.  It is complicated and messy, just like life. Rodgers and Hammerstein did not shy away from complicated situations.

I'm sorry you don't approve, and I certainly hope you decide to stay home and not inflict Carousel on your sensibilities.

seahag2 said: "R&H were misogynistic and racist-- and I'm saying that while looking at their entire body of work. To me, that is clear. Most people of that time period were both, I don't think there was much for either of them to do to stray away from that norm, but they were still nonetheless racist and misogynistic. It doesn't bother me too much since that's just how it was back then, but I just don't think it means anything when you try to suggest that they weren't. 
 

"

Huh? You've made a lot of weird statements in this thread but R&H were racist is the most astounding. Back when Hollywood's moral code didn't allow for depiction of mixed race couples, Hammerstein wrote the lyrics to a musical (Show Boat) with a fully integrated cast that explored issues of "passing," interracial marriage, and shared culture. 

R&H also wrote South Pacific that again tackled the issues of prejudice in an honest manner. South Pacific still holds its power today. When sweet Nellie Forbush recoils because she knows about Emile's Polynesian children the moment is shocking -- our heroine is not immune from racial prejudice.

R&H didn't know the modern lingo, and their attempts to show multiculturalism are often awkward. But the heart in their musicals is why they are still revived so often. 

Seahag2 writes: "...have you ever heard of South Pacific or The King and I? I'm just gonna say it once: All white people are racist. Even those who try to be anti-racist are still in fact racist. It's not a wild claim to say that two guys from the 20th century were racist and misogynistic, even when they were trying to be liberal and progressive."

All right, Seahag2, I think we're done here.  You can climb down from your soapbox.  You are either very young, very naive, or just ridiculous. Or perhaps you're all three.  This argument has NO MERIT, whatsoever.  Please, do is all a favor: don't go see Carousel.

Wow, seahag. Just wow.

Now that you've successfully slandered R&H, along with the entire Caucasian race, perhaps you'll do us all a favor, and find another venue to express your inappropriate anger issues. I'd recommend a qualified, psychotherapist.