I thought Michael York was unfairly snubbed by the Oscars, he's great in that movie.
I agree, ray. Having watched the movie again recently, I was really in awe of how effortless Michael York is in the role. He's the observer ... the eyes of the audience. That's often the "thankless" role, because he offers so little as far as personal "opinion" or "perspective." He's the cypher. The pane of clear glass that allows us to experience this world through his eyes.
It's like Celie in "The Color Purple, except she has her moment later on to change course and take charge of her own story. Cliff never has that moment.
MissAnneThrop, will bad photos do? Updated On: 3/22/14 at 09:14 PM
I'm sorry, I don't know why I'm having such a problem posting images.
Stand-by Joined: 11/20/05
I second that question about the rear orchestra seats. I'm deciding between purchasing one in the center or one of the first seats on the sides.
Broadway Star Joined: 11/15/07
"So you guys think Michelle could win the Tony?"
If she gets a nomination, I think she'd have a one in five chance of taking it.
Assuming she's eligible... *duck*
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/5/09
"Maybe I missed it but nobody seems to be talking about the guy who plays Cliff. How is he?"
He is excellent.
I do so wish they hadn't cut Cliff's song, "Why Should I Wake Up?" After "Perfectly Marvelous," it's my favorite song in the score.
Why can't people just leave well enough alone?
As someone who has played Cliff a few times - I love this show. And I'm sad they couldn't find Cliff a suitable song. "Why Should I Wake Up" happens right around the time of "Maybe This Time," correct? And let's be honest, "Maybe This Time" is an awesome song, so it's hard to get rid of that.
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/5/09
^
It wasn't in the original production, which got along very well without it.
I understand the reason Cliff was eventually made to be a fairly non-musical role, as a way to set him apart as an outsider from everyone he meets (and he truly is- his worldview is so utterly different from all of the people he meets).
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/9/04
I just returned from seeing it. I was entertained and it brought back a ton of memories. And Emond is STUNNING. It was thrilling to finally see Cumming as I saw a replacement.
But as an aspiring director and playwright, I found myself struggling to ENJOY it. I couldn't get past the commercialism of it all. I would've loved to have seen a new spin.
Is it pretty flawless? Yeah. But it just sort of felt empty to me. Even the ending... Maybe it's because I didn't find it shocking like I did the first time I saw it. But I felt nothing at the end. And that doesn't sit right with me.
That's how I'm ultimately feeling, iluvtheatertrash.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/9/04
I don't want to say that it isn't a great production. Because it is. It was flawlessly done when first presented, and it's still wonderful. But it just feels all sort of sad. And vacant. And it broke my heart a little.
How my friends who have also seen it have described it sums it up best for me: it seems by rote.
The parts are all there, and put together, and everything is as it should be. But it's missing a spark.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/9/04
Yeah. That's a great way of putting it. I'm curious to hear more reactions of those who never saw the original production.
I was young and didn't think I'd remember it as well as I did.... But I found myself expecting moments and seeing them fulfilled as I watched.
Just got back from the second preview and wanted to add to the list of admirers of this show! It was amazing. I never saw the last revival so it was all brand new to me.
Also saw the show tonight, was fantastic. Had not seen the last revival so it was all new and it was my first exposure to Cabaret, and it was phenominal. I loved the ending, and thought the whole cast did well (shoutouts to Cumming and Emond). The stagedoor was not bad: All 4 leads came out, Michelle first, then Linda, then Alan, then Danny. Once Alan and Michelle had left the door dwindled with only a few waiting for Danny. The doorman made it clear no posed pictures with anyone, but I did get one with Danny. They were all lovely at the stage door. Additionally I should note only the 4 leads and one male ensemble member signed, Bill Heck did not.
Stand-by Joined: 12/19/10
Saw the show tonight. I did not see the last revival.
And, wow, I loved it.
I'm sensing a pattern here. It seems if you haven't seen the last revival, then the show is brilliant. But if you did see the last revival, it's still great, but not different.
I can only speak for myself here, so I'll just tell you my thoughts as a newbie.
Alan Cumming was wonderful. He is terrific. So wonderfully funny and dirty and dangerous. It's no wonder he won the Tony for this performance. Also wonderful are Burstein & Emond. Simple, honest and beautiful work. Their story is the real story, if you ask me. While I enjoyed Michelle Williams (and a little less, Bill Heck) their story was just not as interesting. The reason to see the show, especially if you haven't seen it before, are Cumming, Burstein and Emond. They're all terrific. Wonderful in their own way. Oh, and the talented ensemble boys and girls. All gorgeous. And it looks terrific in Studio 54. A gorgeous looking production.
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?
Broadway Star Joined: 11/15/07
"I'm sensing a pattern here. It seems if you haven't seen the last revival, then the show is brilliant. But if you did see the last revival, it's still great, but not different."
I saw it before and it was still brilliant. The disconnect seems to be if you are wondering what new approach Cumming was going to take after all these years, only to find he was going to do the same thing, right down to some of the same exact noises you now have memorized from listening to the cast recording; or, if you are somehow put off by Roundabout restaging this with high ticket prices despite having no desire to revisit any element of the show.
I went in expecting it to see him recreate his brilliant performance, and he did. It is a good position to be in, though, to have created something so indelible and magical that after more than a decade every line and move seemed familiar. But like any work of art, you can only discover it once.
In the viewing of The Sixth Sense, you know Bruce Willis is dead; in Citizen Kane, you look for details about the sled, etc., etc.
If you see something once and it is amazing, and you see the same thing again and it doesn't light you up in the same way, the thing that changes in the equation is you.
why is it that there is such a long preview span? it open April 24 and it is already an established production that open on broadway already.
Broadway Star Joined: 7/13/08
Huh? This cast didn't open on Broadway previously and it is previewing for a fairly standard four weeks, isn't it?
i mean it opened in 1998
Updated On: 3/23/14 at 08:08 AM
Featured Actor Joined: 5/2/13
"The disconnect seems to be if you are wondering what new approach Cumming was going to take after all these years, only to find he was going to do the same thing, right down to some of the same exact noises you now have memorized from listening to the cast recording"
This is such a double-edged sword for Alan Cumming. If he had done a completely new, reimagined performance of the Emcee, many would be upset because they wanted to see his original, Tony-winning performance.
Now that he has recreated his same performance, some are upset that he didn't do rework his performance.
Videos