CURTAINS review in Los Angeles... 9-8-06

[eatlasagna]

Posted: 9/9/06 at 4:58am

hello all... so i saw CURTAINS here at the Ahmanson Theater in Los Angeles... i must say... i enjoyed it... i didn't really have high expectations from it since i'm honestly not a big Kander and Ebb fan... but i found myself enjoying the evening... the music was great, although not terribly memorable... but to me the book is what excellent about this musical... this musical does kind of remind of the Drowsery Chaperone in that this is also a love letter to musical comedies.... and i think a lot of people who loved or liked Drowsy will enjoy this show... as for the cast... Edward Hebbert was hilarious as the director... i see this guy getting a tony nod should this show go to broadway... i see him as the the Drowsery chaperone character... having all the great one liners and just stealing the show every time he's on stage... and i must also say that David Hyde Pierce and Jill Paice have wonderful chemistry in this show.. and their big production dance number was really special to watch... just a beautiful number... i would give this show a B+

that's about it... like i've always said... i'm not good at writing reviews so whatever....

[SimpleJoysHaveSimpleVoice]

Posted: 9/9/06 at 1:21pm

I was at the 9-7-06 2pm performance and I thought first act was wonderful. The second act, despite a wonderful opening number was a bit predictable, for a "who dunnit" type of a show.

I think it will do well on Broadway because of its tribute to musical theater. Debra Monk is strong, but some of the other principles may need a cast change. I would appreciate the 2nd act being tighten up and having the reason the "killer" murders people be clarified. I felt the 2nd act book could have been stronger.

[mlsheehan]

Posted: 9/9/06 at 2:49pm

SimpleJoy,
I have to agree with you. I liked this show a lot, but I felt the 2nd Act needed work. Most of the reviews that I read stated the opposite - that the first Act needed the work and the 2nd Act was stronger. I agree with you, though. More explanation of the central mystery would have been nice.

[thevolleyballer]

Posted: 9/9/06 at 2:50pm

"The second act, despite a wonderful opening number was a bit predictable, for a "who dunnit" type of a show."

Really? I actually loved the second act because I had no idea whatsoever who the killer was, even though I'm an avid fan of "Law and Order," "Lost", "CSI", and all the other mystery shows on television. You thought it was predictable?

[eatlasagna]

Posted: 9/9/06 at 6:43pm

so i guess... SPOILERS!!!!!!!


i'll semi-agree... act 2 was good... but the ending was rather blah... i didn't really understand why he was the killer... seemed kinda obvious but not at the same time, know what i mean? it's like they were stretching.. waaaaay too much for the ending... and then the secondary killer... yeah that wasn't really needed IMO...

act 1 seemed a tad too long and could use some little tweaking... like a better opening number, which was decent because of the book rather then because of the music....

but overall... a good musical....