CARRIE Reading?- Page 2

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 12:34am

I think Blaxx to take that thought a bit further, one of the mistakes of the original musical staging was that it didn't build in INTENTIONAL moments of comic relief. Brian de Palma very wisely realized that the over the top situations of CARRIE needed some moments of comic relief. Its one reason why the film works so well. But its very tricky with a musical like this, because the comic relief cant come in the way of musical numbers like (the now apparently aborted) "Don't Waste the Moon" because its cutesy and comic in a way completely out of tone with the rest of the material

But yes, I agree they definitely weren't going for camp, and I doubt would be open to that kind of staging of what they've written.

Faires = how extensive was the staging for the reading. Were numbers like "In" - the original opening of the show still conceived as exercise routines? lol Updated On: 11/21/09 at 12:34 AM

[Fairies]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 12:44am

No staging. It was on an AEA 29 Hour Staged Reading contract. They sat, stood, walked to music stands, occasionally walked to the other side of the performing area. They all pointed at Carrie for the last moment. That's about it. And as a friend of the the creative team, I can say that they definitely do not intend to turn it into a dance piece the way Allen did the original. They are going for dramatic musical theatre (with a bit of comedy - that will hopefully end up in the right places eventually) all the way.

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 12:45am

I agree, that's a good point.

It is also my personal opinion that it is now too late for Carrie to be taken as a serious piece. The more time goes by, the less serious we can take the bucket of blood falling on the girl after hundreds of parodies.
Add singing and dancing on top of it all and I can't imagine it not being part of the infamous musical adaptations of cult classics like Evil Dead or Toxic Avenger, for example.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 12:49am

You know I would have thought that too, but I was surprised in talking to a young group of friends (high school age) to discover they were barely familiar with CARRIE. We may have come out of the other side of that pop culture curve -- the original CARRIE was 30 years ago. If they were targeting the current MTV audience - I think you might be surprised how few of them really are all that familiar with the story...

So what is your anon verdict Fairies - do you think this new version will go anywhere? Was the audience even able to watch it objectively?

[Fairies]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 1:00am

As far as I know - they are basically pushing forward. Asking for some re-writes. Maybe a more involved workshop. But they are solidly planning on Bway - I believe next fall.

As I said before - the audience was packed with uber power gays (and a few women) who were all thrilled to be there for the novelty and the experience. The producers began the performance by holding up a chalk board (slate) covered with all kinds of writing and symbolically "wiping it clean." Everyone cheered. The audience was very opinionated but responded VERY enthusiastically to the performance. Marin's 1st song received extended applause - at least 2 or 3 minutes.

About the camp factor and believability - I don't think the issue is so much the bloody ending - it's the bloody beginning. It is very hard for a modern audience to believe that a 17 year old girl has no idea what her period is and that her mother thinks that it is a sign of evil. Which is the whole set up of the story. If we believed in and got on board for the ride of the story - I think the bloody outcome could be moving.

[binau]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 1:02am

For anyone that is more familiar with the show, can we (well you hehe :P) discuss specific performance of, Eve was Weak, Evening Prayers and the title song?

How does Mazzie compare with Buckley etc.?

[tourboi]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 1:37am

Sad that they cut Heaven Octet, because I find it thrilling.

[Dantes]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 9:17am

"It is very hard for a modern audience to believe that a 17 year old girl has no idea what her period is and that her mother thinks that it is a sign of evil."

Even in the 70s this moment could have seemed absurd but i think you have to look at Carrie's world, she is 'that' shelted, her life begins and ends at home except for the hell that is school where she stays well out of the way.

Mrs white is also the most extreme version of an extreme religious fanatic, she will believe whatever she has read, being told etc, i also think she uses a lot of what she says as excuses to punish Carrie, her 1 mistake

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 9:47am

From what I've heard, Marin Mazzie was a revelation.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 9:48am

"Why would Sue in modern day be telling the audience about Carrie. What is the impetus for her telling the tale?"

Michael Bennett---correct me if I'm wrong, but (at least) in the novel, Sue Snell is the only person to survive that prom night in the entire town. Carrie not only burns down the high school with everyone locked inside it, she systematically destroys the whole town as well.

In the movie, Sue is the only high school student to survive that night, but Carrie doesn't kill everyone in the town, despite going on a rampage after the prom.

EIther way, who else but Sue would or could tell the story?

Posted: 11/21/09 at 10:04am

"If the novel was big, the film is iconic. Turning characters that already are in "bigger than life" situations makes a musical adaptation borderline hilarious.

That's why I think that casting actors who can sing could pull it off a lot "

DePalma directed the movie, at the peak of his Hitchock hommage era, as a straight faced over the top black comedy, as well. and it worked because of that

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 10:05am

Sue and Coach Dejerdan (sp?) survive the massacre in the novel. Sue, for obvious reasons, and I wanna say the coach gets several students and herself out a back door that Carrie missed somehow.

In the film, Buckley talked about how the Coach couldn't survive because it made the "OMG what is wrong in this world?" all the more realistic.

In the remake, a handful of students, the Coach and Sue survive, and it uses the framework of the police interrogation to tell the story.

Honestly, I really like the idea of Sue narrating, particularly if they are using that framework.

The novel has one of my favorite lines towards the end, when they are still attempting to pin all of it on Sue. She says (paraphrased as I don't have time to find the quote):

We were just kids. Tommy was 18, Billy was 18, Chris was 18, I was 17 and Carrie was 17. This wasn't some vindictive attack planned by adults, we were kids.

[Dantes]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 10:20am

husk_charmer haha thats one of my facve lines in the novel as well, something about it almsot made me cry when i first read it, i guess its the whole 'stolen youth'

[AC126748]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 11:27am

I just rewatched the film version of Carrie and I never before realized how closely Jennifer Damiano resembles Amy Irving. That was a good casting choice on looks alone.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 11:46am

I'd go a step further and say that most of the leads in this reading have some resemblance to the film cast.

Yes, Best12, hypothetically Sue is the only one left who can tell Carrie's story - I just think there has to be a reason for her to be a 'narrator.' Why is she telling the audience about this event now 25 years later? So I'm just curious what the context for the narration is. I doubt its that she comes out and sits in a chair and opens her Stephen King novel and begins telling the audience a scary story.

[Dantes]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 12:07pm

"I doubt its that she comes out and sits in a chair and opens her Stephen King novel and begins telling the audience a scary story."

haha she really should

[evic]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 1:05pm

I do too-a lot of the music and orchestrations are hair on back of neck standing up exciting and beautiful...just read the Playbill and the brilliant Harold Wheeler- DWTS- was the musical supervisor. Good choice of the songs cut...though I do like Dream On and Don't Waste.....If Debbie Allen wasn't the choreographer, maybe this would have had a chance, but rewatching the vid, her work really was an abomination...how much crotch grinding and sexual innuendo can you fit in to each number- and the Las Vegas schlock style ography for Chris and Billy was like watching Showgirls.....awful. Miss Thing was always overrated.-as a dancer no- as a choreographer- yes-she never heard of Less is More. Yet I am obsessed with this show and can listen to Linzie Hately, Darlene Love and Barbara Cook all day.

[Famebroadway2]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 2:00pm

It wasnt very clear why or how Sue was telling the story but, I think this is a secret they were keeping and we will find out in the full staging. There were many moments during the show where she stepped out to tell more of the story.

Its a show that really needs a workshop or production to see how its gonna work. The reading was great to hear the material but, so much of this show really relies on visual staging.

Also, i dont know if they skipped the dance breaks all togehter but, there were NO spots for dancing that i could tell. there may have been a spot in "IN" during the vollyball game but, I am not sure how they are gonna go with that.
(IN starts with the girls in various bedrooms getting ready for school, Then to boys bedrooms getting ready for school, Then moved to school hallway, then moves to school gym class - with both boys and girls- then they have a gym class vollyball section where Carrie misses the ball and blows the game.) "IN" is now a full ensemble number.
I think its wrong to eliminate all the dancing all togehter. There a few times it could work and not hinder the story at all. There were however moments of musical staging i could see.

[alliez92092]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 2:21pm

So what was the actual cast breakdown? And how did everyone do (besides Marin, who from what's being said was amazing)?

[TheaterBoy7777]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 2:26pm

Are the songs that remained from the original production exactly the same or are there some lyric/melody changes? Are any of the songs from the workshop or things cut from Stratford in this production?

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 2:29pm

If I'm not mistaken, Wasn't the 2002 TV movie told as a flashback by Sue? Is this "production" copying that idea?
Updated On: 11/21/09 at 02:29 PM

[Pgenre]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 2:34pm

The original novel has that set-up, ljay.

The reason for the 2002 remake was to film a version as close as possible to the book (which it is, though I'm not a fan of the modernized setting).

If you can get past the movie-of-the-week production values, it's not as bad as some may lead you to believe. It is worth it for Patricia Clarkson as Margaret alone, she is magnificent. While I'm a DePalma junkie and his version will always reign supreme, this version is nice to have. The less said about CARRIE 2, the better, though (the destruction scene was almost OK, but... flying CDs, really?).

P

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 2:36pm

Not to mention the evil tattoo.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 2:55pm

Hey, MB, I like the idea of "Stephen's Scary Storybooktime by Sue Snell" as a setup. (now say that three times fast)



I definitely get Sue as a narrator here, but I'm not sure I get the "25 years later" thing either. I'm sure it's a memorable moment in her life, but what prompts the recollections?

In the novel, it's the interrogation frame, a typical setup used in so many noir movies (Mildred Pierce, etc.)

Maybe it's high school reunion time, and she's the only one left ... sitting in her chair with her old yearbooks and a beer. LOL

If Billy Wilder can use a dead writer floating face down in a swimming pool to narrate his movie Sunset Blvd., I guess anything is possible.

[Dantes]

Posted: 11/21/09 at 3:12pm

I love the idea of 'In' now been a full ensemble number

God im so excited about this....can you tell lol