Cabaret previews - Page 10

[gstrus2]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 9:49am

mikem- "gstrus2, when you say Bill Heck didn't sign, did you mean that he didn't come out at all, or he came out but didn't sign? And did only 1 ensemble member come out, or did others come out but not sign?"
I was farther back in the line and couldn't see who came out the door itself only saw the 5 people who came to sign.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 10:21am

OasisJeff- I think there is a lot of truth to what you write and it's interesting to me to see so many being disappointed that this revival and Cumming's performance are so identical to what was done before. Obviously one of the grand traditions of theatrical history is the return engagement of actors reprising the roles and productions they made famous- and I can't imagine audiences in the past collectively sighing with disappointment because Larry Olivier, or Sarah Bernhardt or Rex Harrison or Ethel Merman were doing what they had done before. In the past that "did it before" was the entire reason for recreating it.

I think things like YouTube which today make viewing clips of the original productions instantly accessible must be one of the contributing factors. As Kad describes, even those who didn't see the original staging of this Cabaret are going in knowing the production (and perhaps adding a layer of expectation of what they imagine the live experience of those clips must be like).

And the other factor as you say is that the ultimate disappointment is something "legendary" that just doesn't live up to our expectation or memory of it. That is the oldest theatrical tradition of them all -- but is indeed all about "us" and not the production itself.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 10:41am

Eloquently articulate, Michael. AND RIGHT ON.

[GottaHaveAGimmick]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 10:52am

Any merchandise? Will be there Thursday.

[oasisjeff]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 11:10am

"Obviously one of the grand traditions of theatrical history is the return engagement of actors reprising the roles and productions they made famous"

Exactly. I never saw Carol Channing do Hello Dolly, and she certainly did it enough that I could have (which I do regret), but if I did go, I would want to see Carol Channing's Dolly.

There is also something to be said about a work like Hamlet, where people can read it every ten years to find out it is a different play because in that intervening decade, they have changed.

But those two experiences don't cross over in the same manner. And shouldn't.

It would be like going back home after years and years, and your mother saying "Wait until you try this new way I make meatloaf..."

[Kad]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 11:19am

There is one thing to see a performer doing the role that made them famous in the production that made them famous- it is another to see that and feel that it all seemed somehow devoid of vim.

Alan Cumming seemed to be to be doing it all by rote. That's what I was getting at by saying he sounds exactly like he does on the cast recording from almost two decades ago.

And the majority of the rest of the performance was the same- despite being all new cast.

A great return performance or a great return production is more than just replication. Or should be.

Updated On: 3/23/14 at 11:19 AM

[nabajamba]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 12:01pm

Sorry, I'm a bit too lazy to read most of the prior posts and I'd just like to throw my review in there, so…

I saw this production last night and thought it was brilliant in every single way. As somebody who couldn't see it in the 90's because I was five years old and didn't know what the hell a musical was, it was a real treat to be able to see this fantastic production and Mr. Cumming's fantastic performance (which didn't feel marked through or phoned in). Danny Burstein and Linda Emond were both brilliant and heartbreaking as Herr Schultz and Fraulein Schneider. I never saw the revival from the 90's (in fact, I only have listened to the 1968 recording, as my mom's godfather plays Herr Schultz on that one), but what was really present in this production was the element of fear and the slow progression from the looseness and frivolity of the cabaret scene in 20's/early 30's Berlin to the rigid, paranoid march into the rise of the Third Reich. The journey of the Emcee was particularly captivating – and I sure as hell didn't see that final image coming. Holy f**k.

Alan Cumming held down the production the entire time. Perhaps his performance hasn't changed drastically from when he played it in the 90's but it's still brilliant nonetheless, and I personally think it's great that people who didn't get to see it back then (like myself) can experience it.

As for Michelle Williams as Sally Bowles, I thought she was perfect for the role. Her voice wasn't perfect, but I've always thought that the point was that Sally Bowles is NOT a great singer (which is my problem with the film's casting of the truly incredibly voiced Liza Minelli) – that she fools herself into thinking she's a true gem of the cabaret scene, a future star. This is why Jill Haworth and Natasha Richardson (from what I heard) were both excellent choices for the roles. So I did hear a lot of complaints about her voice, but I was so happy Mendes and co. didn't go with a big-throated belty BroadWAY star for her.

Ensemble's dialect work needed a little patching up (sometimes I'd hear them slip into British), but other than that they were great.

So sorry to get a bit off-topic, but I thought the production was great. Go see it!
Updated On: 3/23/14 at 12:01 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 12:36pm

I am curious as to why this revival has a little more than a full month of previews? Seems a bit long. I am looking forward to seeing it on April 20.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 12:56pm

I would suspect to give the actors time to adjust to their roles, since Cummings is the only one who has done it before.

And while the physical production is definitely the same, from where I was sitting at least, I would not say that the direction of the performances is identical to what was done before.

Kad -- to speak to what you felt was a lack of 'vim' by the cast in the first preview -- I can understand how it might have felt that way - from where I was (admittedly very close to the stage) I saw nothing but the absolute most commitment from the actors (in some cases clearly working through nerves) but it does feel like Mendes could goose up the sense of 'urgency' underneath the entire proceedings. There was a little caution from everyone on stage, but perhaps Mendes is being careful about letting the production run away from itself -- which it easily could do. It wouldn't be hard for the performances to quickly move into 'over the top' territory .

Williams is being directed to play the role of Sally without some of the sex or manic desperation of her predecessors in the role - which is a valid character choice but I do think perhaps undermines some of the urgency at the center of that storyline (or perhaps just makes it less interesting).

What is interesting is that people are responding to the Schneider/Schultz storyline as front and center which is definitely not the norm.



Updated On: 3/23/14 at 12:56 PM

[Kad]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 1:15pm

I was actually very close to the stage as well (actually two tables behind oasisjeff, on the aisle).

[DAME]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 1:37pm

Really interesting to read everyones intelligent opinions and reactions to this remounting. As of now I have no plans of seeing this since usually my trips to NY are quick and I prefer to dedicate my theater time to new shows and I did see this revival within one week of its run its last time around. . But I am finding it curious as to how some are commenting as if the MC now has Alan Cummings stamp on it the way Carol Channing is identified with Dolly. Actually... I am a little appalled. This is just my opinion . JOEL GREY, JOEL GREY, JOEL GREY! He created it. He did the film. He toured with it. He revived it. A.C. Might have a different stamp on it......But he is by no means anywhere near being the definitive MC. As a matter of fact.. just by reading this thread.. I wonder if his presence is what is giving this remounting it's "stale" quality" that some have referred to ? Just wondering. These purely commercial remountings of Cabaret and Miz are very sad to me. There is no reason for their existence other than money.

Updated On: 3/23/14 at 01:37 PM

[oasisjeff]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 1:43pm

I don't think we're saying no one else can play the Emcee. Just specifically commenting on him reprising his role in a restaging of this specific revival and the expectation people have going to see him in that show. I'd love to see as many interpretations of Cabaret as possible.

My Channing comment was that when you went to see her in Dolly, you wanted to see her Dolly, whether it was during her first time doing it, or 30 years later.

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 1:47pm

I'm still curious how Emma Stone would have fared in the production

[east side story]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 1:49pm

I was never too jazzed at the idea of Stone starring in this revival. My interests really peaked once Michelle Williams signed on, to be honest.

[DAME]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 1:50pm

@Oasis

Oh I get that. Just a general sense I was getting.
I also wanted to add in reference to another comment I read here... The best thing to EVER happen to the property known as "Cabaret" is Liza and Fosse. Without their contributions to the film I don't think Cabaret would have taken the wonderful road it has taken. Sad that so many people can't understand that while the film and show share the same genes.. they are two different things. I understand that Liza's song rendition is forever ingrained in our pop culture... but it is weird to come on a theater site where usually opinions are a bit more informed and read such a "simple" comment. ( for lack of a better word)


PS.. Not trying to insult anyone . Just interested in the conversation.

Updated On: 3/23/14 at 01:50 PM

[Brick]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 2:00pm

I haven't seen it yet, but I would also add that return engagement or faithful recreations don't always necessarily have the same inspiration in them, though it sounds by and large like this production is doing that, mostly, and especially for 2 previews in.

An example of I can remember is that cardboard-heart revival of A CHORUS LINE. Not only did it not have the same impact because culture had moved on, but the production lacked a spark, and the cast felt like they were all understudies.

From the word so far on CABARET, this doesn't seem to be the case. Williams, Burstein, end Emond all sound like they are bringing some freshness. And Mendes gets credit for that, too, of course.

[quizking101]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 2:12pm

"I'm still curious how Emma Stone would have fared in the production"

Same with Anne Hathaway (although I think that was no more than a rumor)

[Kad]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 2:14pm

For what it's worth, I think Williams is a more natural fit for the role than either of them.

[StageStruckLad]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 2:21pm

I'm suddenly feeling very old here knowing that so many people here were in elementary school for the last Roundabout production of Cabaret!

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 2:21pm

DAME - to your point, it is indeed rather interesting to see Alan Cumming taking that mantle from Joel Grey in collective consciousness, but aside from Cumming's presence dominating the role on stage in NYC for the past near two-decades, I think the Mendes revival (with Cumming's performance as a center-point) has so influenced how CABARET is most often performed around the world these days as a sort of gritty, raunchy musical - that some people barely even remember what came before it. If people were to watch a recreation of that original 1966 production now, they'd probably be shocked - at how 'clean' it is.

But yes indeed the Mendes revival owes so much to the film -- I think its a huge testament to Joel Grey that he was able to mold his performance to fit two very different concepts for the material.

The person who I'd love to see as Sally is Lindsay Lohan. Well, maybe I don't actually want to see Lindsay play the role - but I think who she is in our pop culture - the somewhat talented, attention seeking, drug and sex addicted party girl who means well and keeps trying to make a come back despite her demons - is about the closest modern equivalent we have to the character.

That sex and party girl vibe is the only thing I kind of miss in Michelle Williams's portrayal. The lost little girl interpretation she's playing works too, but its not as delicious or exciting.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 2:28pm

"I am finding it curious as to how some are commenting as if the MC now has Alan Cummings stamp on it the way Carol Channing is identified with Dolly. Actually... I am a little appalled. This is just my opinion . JOEL GREY, JOEL GREY, JOEL GREY! He created it. He did the film. He toured with it. He revived it. A.C. Might have a different stamp on it......But he is by no means anywhere near being the definitive MC. As a matter of fact.. just by reading this thread.. I wonder if his presence is what is giving this remounting it's "stale" quality" that some have referred to ? Just wondering. "

I haven't seen this revival (though doubtless I will at some point), but DAME, I can tell you I felt that way about AC the first time around. I just don't get his appeal (blasphemy, I know). I find his style mannered and calculated - which isn't always a bad thing - but he just grates. It's a "Look at what a naughty boy I am" act to me, and I can't imagine it's improved with age.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 2:41pm

"so many people can't understand that while the film and show share the same genes.. they are two different things."

And that's exactly why I referred to Cumming as the definitive emcee. I see the film and stage version as two different things.

[darquegk]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 3:32pm

I think his performance is SUPPOSED to be "mannered" and "calculated," not really naughty or threatening. Remember, he drops the mask a few times, like the final moments of the show, or during "I Don't Care Much."

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 3:54pm

"I think his performance is SUPPOSED to be "mannered" and "calculated," not really naughty or threatening. Remember, he drops the mask a few times, like the final moments of the show, or during "I Don't Care Much." "

I should clarify that that to me, every AC performance is the same one to me. He always plays the same notes, the same character, in everything he does. He has no range. I don't think he's even really acting much. He always seems to be playing a version of himself. It's a great schtick, and it's worked for him. It just doesn't work for me.

I always laugh when someone refers to AC's MC as "menacing". He's about as menacing as a wet kitten.

[bundy5000]

Posted: 3/23/14 at 4:31pm

going this Thursday. any advice for stage dooring?