CHICAGO - Here we go again-- Page 3

[mikelg80]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 1:54pm

For those of you saying they loved Ruthie Henshall as Velma, i saw Ruthie as both Velma and Roxie and I know it's hard to belive but she was 100 times better at Roxie than Velma. As Roxie she was just amazing!

[DAME]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 1:58pm

I think she should come back in repertoire. Alternating every week between the two.

[DAME]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 4:41pm

CJR:
What did the audience consist off? Mostly foreigners?

[CJR]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 5:01pm

There were a bunch of people I know (who came to see Roxane as Velma) and a crapload of Trading Spaces fans.

[NBC]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 5:19pm

The audience always has its share of overseas tourists, but not as many as you might think.

Well, I see Anne L. Nathan is the next Mama Morton. Which means I shall have to go back and see it again!! (I was actually considering giving Wayne Brady a pass...)

[DAME]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 5:41pm

Where would I know Ann L. Nathan from?

[NBC]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 5:49pm

She played Miss Flannery in Thoroughly Modern Millie, and she just finished a stint as Emma Goldman in the Assassins revival.

[QueenMuppet]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 7:47pm

I personally thought Ruthie sucked as Velma. I loved her as Roxie but I thought she was totally miscast as Velma. Fair enough, she just had a baby at that time but she couldn't dance and her voice and comic timing were just not right for it either. Otherwise, I think she is an amazing performer and person but completely wrong as Velma.

I don't know but I was going through a very funny phase with Chicago and I'm sure I'm probably the only one who feels that way but:
I'd seen Chicago a few times before the movie and LOVED the show! Then saw the movie (which I loved), returned to the musical and didn't enjoy it any longer! Why? I'm not so sure... I suddenly thought the show (the West End production) looked so cheap and tired compared to the movie. Also, I thought Catherine Zeta-Jones was the perfect Velma and haven't seen anyone who was able to convince me as Velma the way she did.
Yes, fair enough, it was a movie and I doubt CZJ will look and sound as good on a stage but I just couldn't quite get into the show anymore after having seen the movie.

I will definitely give the Broadway production a try soon, hope they will prove me wrong as I'm usually someone who prefers 'live' theatre over a movie anytime

QM

[chasing_rainbows43]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 8:03pm

Dame, I very much like your "Ruthie in Rep" idea, we'd just have to find someone else who can do both to alternate with her.

Posted: 8/10/04 at 8:09pm

I have only seen Chicago once, and that was last year. I really love the show itself, but I didn't think the performances overall were that great. Then again, I was at a matinee, so maybe it was understudies.

[Ruffian]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 8:19pm

James Naughton just OWNS it

[DAME]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 9:03pm

The first time I saw james was in a musical called " I love my wife". Anyone else see this?

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 10:22pm

First, my faves, of who I've seen:
Roxie - Charlotte D'Amboise, Chita Rivera, Marilu Henner
Velma - Bebe Neuwirth, Caroline O'Connor, Ruthie Henshall
Billy - Billy Zane, Brent Barrett, Michael Berresse

It's interesting to see the comments on how the ensemble is doing. I've always though the turning point for the show as a whole is the Roxie monologue, because that's where the audience decides whether or not to invest in the two hours that follow, or whether to coast along. So the casting of Roxie is so vital...I think it's also the reason, despite our criticisms, that Melanie worked out so well (oy). Charlotte is my fave because she not only juices up the audience so much, and from that the ensemble get excited and into it. The performances are always amazing after that.

I saw Paige a couple of weeks ago, and the ensemble looked tired (it was a Tuesday), the most blah since I saw them with Karen Ziemba. It's not that they aren't good, it's just that it's so sensitive a role and it's tougher to pulling off than so many realize.

[DAME]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 10:26pm

I think I am staying away till I hear of a cast shake down. It does sound that they are starting to bring some new blood in. I don't think they should worry as much about the principals. I'm telling you; they should make that ensemble brand new ; head to toe.

Updated On: 8/10/04 at 10:26 PM

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 10:44pm

Dame, it's sad to want to agree with you, especially since a couple of the remainding people are just superstars in the making...but yeah, i think there should some major recasting, bring some fresh energy.

I also think those greedy bastards need to bring back the front row rush back. Losing serious energyAlso, that whole "Sprint Welcomes You..." announcement is an excrutiating reminder of how corporate Broadway has become (it's bad enough those Clear Channel fascists are involved in the show now).

Designwise, the costumes need a major refit, they are looking kinda frayed, and also, the designs are not as daring as they used to be - there was surprisingly little skin on display this past time. The lights look great, but a couple of the spots need bulbs. Seriously shaky. Also the interior of the theatre needs to not look so sterile. The Shubert was such a gorgeous venue, it added to the feeling that the show was special.

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 11:43pm

Just a question for Dame.

When Ann Reinking played Roxie in the Original Production, I didn't know Chita was still Velma? Because my aunts mom saw the original with Ann as Roxie, and she couldn't remember who her Velma was, but she said she DEFINETLY didn't see Chita as Velma.

[CJR]

Posted: 8/10/04 at 11:57pm

When I was there Friday there was no "Sprint welcomes you..." message at the beginning of the show... though it was there when I was last there in December.

As for the Shubert and the front row -- don't even LET me get started again! lol

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 12:07am

How did the production "look" in the Ambassador? I just happen to despise that theatre, because it has awful sightlines. Sit too far left or right, and you get 1/3 of the stage cut off. Which ruins the action when there are scenes that take place on the sides... Hence, why I haven't returned to the show since it left the Shubert.

[Plum]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 12:24am

Grr, tell me about it. I missed the entirety of "Funny Honey" because I was sitting on the right.

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 12:32am

Do you mean you missed Roxie on the latter for Funny Honey? Coz I was in partial view, and I saw it perfectly. And my sister was in the last seat, front row right...and she could see it...just had to look up.

[DAME]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 12:32am

ljay889;
It is interesting because we have two playbills from when we saw Chicago with Chita and Ann. One says Chita and Ann and the other says Lenora Nemetz and Ann. Chita must have just come back. It was definitely her we saw. I think I was 10.

Updated On: 8/11/04 at 12:32 AM

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 12:36am

Oh, thats cool dame! Chita must've been amazing as Velma! And Dame do you feel the original production was better, or the revival? And did you like the original with a full set and costume changes?? unlike the reivival.

[DAME]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 12:41am

To be quite honest. I was very young when I saw the original. I do remeber loving it and I bought the cast album immediately. I loved the revival through out its frist year obn broadway. Always felt there was magic there then.

[Ruffian]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 10:35am

DAME, I saw "City of Angels" 4 times. LOVED Naughton in that as well

[robusa]

Posted: 8/11/04 at 10:46am

not a regular theater-goer so excuse my ignorance.

i have third row orchestra seats to see marti pellow on saturday. it's the matinee performance.

do understudys typically do the matinees?

say it isn't so. Updated On: 8/11/04 at 10:46 AM