Company Previews Thread- Page 22

[fosterfan2]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 12:36pm

I lol'd at this. Not at Bernadette,but at the question! Just try living in a red state,and working with a group of people who are Cardi B fans and know nothing about theater. Thank goodness for my BFF (outside of work) who is a fellow theater buff! And for this board,and a Facebook group that I'm in. We all need an outlet. :)

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 12:51pm

Auggie27 said: "Good memory, KFC1991. Funny, I just watched the wonderful Hepburn-Scofield Delicate Balance again last night, and got into the discussion about the play not working in an update. Tobias and Agnes were conceived as people born in1902-1904; all references to their one percenter life track, and brilliantly. Having them born in 1950-1954 -- my demographic -- is just not remotely possible. But I'm no fan of "timeless" productions of material tethered to the cultural norms of a specific era. Company was decidedly of the moment when it arrived. In its view of emotional resistance to sequential monogamy -- regardless of gender -- It may well prove to be of this moment, too, with a female protagonist. But to me that conceit doesn't rescue the era-straddling problems with Joanne.

Joannewas a brilliant armchair sociologist in 1971, able to zing her generation of women with laser-like accuracy. We welcomed her cynicism because as a trenchant witness, her observations were so spot on. Putting those reactions in her mouth today -- well, she still seems to be singing about her mother's generation, and thus her impromptu wisdom isn't as powerful. Clearly, it bothers few people. But I don't think Sondheim wrote "timeless" perceptions He wrote about an Upper East Side sophisticate who had endured WW II, the rigidity of the Eisenhower years, and post turbulent sixties was stranded, watching zombie-like women who had no careers, time on their hands, and floundered. It's almost misogynistic to characterize women of my generation thus, and again, the song is a critique of an entire sub-strata, not one coterie. In a show about a young woman with agency, it just feels bizarre to me. Others may disagree, but washing the show in timelessness doesn't easily accommodate very specific lyrics about a very specific demographic and their generational plight."

I see no pressing need to "update" A Delicate Balance.  But I know many midcentury born people, esp. of Tobias and Agnes's gen. demographic (color, income, education, class), who are quite like them.  

 

[PipingHotPiccolo]

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

ljay889 said: "

A picture of Britney Coleman and Anisha Nagarajan as Bobbie and Joanne at yesterday’s understudy rehearsal. I am surprised there’s not an age appropriate standby for Joanne, but with Patti’s reliability and the size of the role, I guess there’s not a need for a standby."

Anisha has the pipes for it, but I agree its kinda strange to only have one cover, 35ish years younger than Patti, especially with Simard teasing us by being in the dang cast.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 1:43pm

Might they have an unlisted standby for Joanne?

[binau]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 1:45pm

Is it common to rehearse understudies this early or is that a covid risk mitigation strategy? 

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 1:47pm

ACL2006 said: "Might they have an unlisted standby for Joanne?"

I’ve wondered this but I feel like the info would’ve leaked by now, especially given how active the entire cast is on Instagram.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 2:08pm

They might be doing understudy rehearsals sooner rather than later, maybe out of caution or because they knew they had scheduled absences. It looks like they did a put-in for all of the understudies, judging by other folks on social media.

[KFC1991]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 3:30pm

Auggie27 said: 

Joannewas a brilliant armchair sociologist in 1971, able to zing her generation of women with laser-like accuracy. We welcomed her cynicism because as a trenchant witness, her observations were so spot on. Putting those reactions in her mouth today -- well, she still seems to be singing about her mother's generation, and thus her impromptu wisdom isn't as powerful. Clearly, it bothers few people. But I don't think Sondheim wrote "timeless" perceptions He wrote about an Upper East Side sophisticate who had endured WW II, the rigidity of the Eisenhower years, and post turbulent sixties was stranded, watching zombie-like women who had no careers, time on their hands, and floundered. It's almost misogynistic to characterize women of my generation thus, and again, the song is a critique of an entire sub-strata, not one coterie. In a show about a young woman with agency, it just feels bizarre to me. Others may disagree, but washing the show in timelessness doesn't easily accommodate very specific lyrics about a very specific demographic and their generational plight."

I think you make some good points about this song in particular-- although it's my favorite part of the score the lyrics just situate it in 1970. 

My reference to having a "timeless" quality in Company means something like: "the need to connect is a timeless concept." It's like Shakespeare; his works are considered timeless but of course if you study them they are very much rooted in the attitudes of the Elizabethan era. But people do modern dress versions of those and most people don't think anything of it. I wonder why? Maybe because people have no living memory of that time whereas they do remember fifty years ago. 

My own take: an updated Company can work, I've seen it, but it's better served as a period piece because of some of the things you bring up. 

 

[ACL2006]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 4:27pm

HeyMrMusic said: "They might be doing understudy rehearsals sooner rather than later, maybe out of caution or because they knew they had scheduled absences. It looks like they did a put-in for all of the understudies, judging by other folks on social media."

Probably since Tally Sessions went on last night due to a scheduled absence.

[bwaylvsong1]

Posted: 11/21/21 at 4:37pm

binau said: "JasonC3 said: "I wonder how much the infrequent theatergoer or first-time visitor to Company will notice what those of us who have seen multiple productions might quibble about.

Honestly for me, unless the production is rally bad, I'm just grateful for every chance I get to see a Sondheim show with a great cast."

We should never underestimate how little casual theatre goers care about the details sometimes. Yesterday I met a New York gay at a party, of course my first question is always “have you seen Bernadette Peters on stage” and their response “yes I loved her in War Paint”."

It’s often shocking how even theatre BUFFS have large gaps of knowledge- I know someone who was a theatre major in college (and still loves theatre but very rarely gets to attend) and had never heard of Audra McDonald or Sutton Foster.

[temms]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 7:16am

Going back a couple pages, but I absolutely love the idea of "Company" set in India! You're totally right that the pressure to couple up would be a lot more intense and I could see a Bobby/Bobbi from an Indian family feeling pressure in a way that a single 30-something in NYC in 2021 wouldn't. 

I'm already 1000% more interested in that concept than I am the modern gender-swapped version. I'm someone who prefers my "Company" set in 1970 with the original orchestrations but a production set in Mumbai I would totally be there for. I'll see this revival eventually because I love the show/score but I haven't been as thrilled with this new concept as a lot of other people are. 

And I don't think I've ever seen anyone in live performance really nail "Another Hundred People" like Pamela Myers in the documentary. Even Anika Noni Rose didn't really do it for me. I'd love to see a production where I'm blown back in my seat by that song but it's never really happened. 

Updated On: 11/23/21 at 07:16 AM

[goldenboy]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 11:54am

Caught it last night and think this Company is a mixed bag.

Yes Sondheim's music and lyrics are brilliant but I maintain that Company is a somewhat problematic musical at its core.

Problems inherent in the piece whether played by a male or female is that Bobbie is not that interesting a character. Not a character you really care about. I saw the original back in the 70's and had trouble really caring for that Bobby too! I've seen other revivals and there too the character of Bobby is a problem.

So Katrina,  who plays Bobbie without warmth like her male predecessors left me  cold not really caring if she stayed single or got married.

Matt Doyle steals the evening as a "bride" petrified at the idea of getting married. His character you care about. That is what is missing for Bobby.  Clayborne Elder was wonderful as Andy. Katrina's eye  rolling at his stories made me care even less about Bobbie aka Bobby.

 

There are some really  creative directorial choices. The ides of being in prison in lit  claustrophobic panels of apartments. The number 35 not only in the balloons in the birthday but every townhouse having that number. Clever. The letters C O M P A N Y surrounding the actors like a crowded  claustrophobic New York City. 

Missing for me was the orgasmic Tic Toc of Donna McKechnie. I was looking forward to an orgasmic male dancer doing Tic Toc but it was  replaced by a misguided drone of unhappy housewives doing laundry and having babies during a clock that ticked away. 

But worst of all was the audience!  So in love with Sondheim (as I am) and so in love with Lupone (as I am) but they were on their feet and howling before anyone said or sung a word.  ("It's Company!!.... It's Lupone" To those people (and you know who you are) it didn't really matter what was on that stage as long it was Lupone and Company.  The people were having fangasms.

These overly enthusiastic hurrahs of fangasm often knocked me out of the proceedings.

Updated On: 11/23/21 at 11:54 AM

[JasonC3]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 12:41pm

Interesting.  Upon reflection, I'm not sure I've ever cared a great deal about any Bobby or Bobbie I've seen and I've seen quite a few. And I enjoyed all their performances.

The character leads a pretty charmed existence (well-dressed, decent apt, lots of sex) with the only major issue being the seeming inability to commit to a lifelong relationship.  That's an issue I'm just going to get worked up about.

Updated On: 11/23/21 at 12:41 PM

[fosterfan2]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 6:14pm

I keep hearing that the Tick Tock scene is making the show too long at nearly 3 hours' running time. Is this true,and does anyone think they'll end up cutting it in order to trim the show and tighten it up?

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 6:29pm

fosterfan2 said: "I keep hearing that the Tick Tock scene is making the show too long at nearly 3 hours' running time. Is this true,and does anyone think they'll end up cutting it in order to trim the show and tighten it up?"

The Tick Tock scene is maybe 3 minutes tops. Also, any production of COMPANY traditionally clocks in at around 2 hours and 45 minutes if I remember correctly. I am certain that this current revival will be at that 2 45 mark by opening night.

 

[joevitus]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 6:30pm

goldenboy said: "Missing for me was the orgasmic Tic Toc of Donnie McKechnie. I was looking forward to an orgasmic male dancer doing Tic Toc but it was replaced by a misguided drone of unhappy housewives doing laundry and having babies during a clock that ticked away."

I wondered what they were going to do with Tic Tock. I'd heard it would relate to the biological clock, but I was hoping it would be a more interesting (and abstract) take than what it sounds like they did. 

[fosterfan2]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 6:43pm

bwayphreak234 said: "fosterfan2 said: "I keep hearing that the Tick Tock scene is making the show too long at nearly 3 hours' running time. Is this true,and does anyone think they'll end up cutting it in order to trim the show and tighten it up?"

The Tick Tock scene is maybe 3 minutes tops. Also, any production of COMPANY traditionally clocks in at around 2 hours and 45 minutes if I remember correctly. I am certain that this current revival will be at that 2 45 mark by opening night.

"

Maybe 3 hours was an exaggeration from the people on the site that I was reading--All That Chat. Some of them were also brutal towards Katrina Lenk; one called her the "Weakest Lenk" which I found cruel. I realize people are entitled to their opinions and not everyone likes the same performers,but this rubbed me the wrong way. I like her and I wish so much that I could see Company.

 

Updated On: 11/23/21 at 06:43 PM

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 9:44pm

If Lenk keeps "singing" like she did the night I saw the show, I think the critics will destroy her. She has no "mix" between chest and head voice and she switches a lot. You can act your wig off but if you go flat a lot and can't sustain a musical note, you are in big trouble. One TONY year away and we might have gotten Stephanie Block who can sing. (I love Lenk in her 2 previous Broadway outings but this role is a bad match for her talents).

[SophiaPetrillo]

Posted: 11/23/21 at 11:38pm

Katrina’s voice is unique and clearly not everyone’s cup of tea, but to say she can’t sing the score is inaccurate. However, whether she can sing it consistently 8 times a week remains to be seen. Personally I’m rooting for her and the production as a whole. As people have pointed out it’s not without its flaws, but I think it’s something very special This is first time I’ve felt a connection with Bobby/Bobbie. I understand “Being Alive” in a way I never did before because Katrina took me on a journey that blew my mind. That said, I understand why her performance is divisive. Her Bobbie is unlike anything we’ve seen before and whether that’s a good or bad thing comes down to personal preference.

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/24/21 at 9:38pm

Was anybody at the show today? I’m seeing a tweet that seems to say that the rain is back in “Marry Me A Little.” I would love to know if it’s back. It was only used in the last few 2020 previews, I never got to see it. 

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 11/25/21 at 2:31pm

The rain was definitely in at the climax of Marry Me a Little when we saw the performance on Nov 22. Very effective, if you put aside memories of Katrina getting equally soaked at the final scene of INDECENT, her award winning play with music of a few years ago. 


Katrina Lenk could certainly sing the score nicely, and much more than nicely on the tear-inducing “Being Alive”. But I agree with the above posters that her Bobbie is charismatic but cold, and that’s a real problem for such an under-written character. 

Still, the show works beautifully 90% of the time, especially the Alice in Wonderland conceit. And that’s a pretty great reason to see this revival, misgivings be damned. 

Updated On: 11/25/21 at 02:31 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/25/21 at 3:08pm

Yay, glad to hear the rain is back! I can’t wait to see it. 
 

I think Lenk is charming in act 1, but it seems like a  conscious decision in act 2 to portray her Bobbie as anxious and disoriented as she gets more frustrated with her friend group, drinks more,  and gets closer to making a decision in “Being Alive.” Lenk isn’t the warmest performer in general and I think Elliot’s vision is adding to the “coldness.” 

As you mentioned her “Being Alive” is beautiful, and I think it plays best from the front orchestra. Watching her sing the “introspective” verse of the song on her knees in tears is really touching up close.  

Updated On: 11/25/21 at 03:08 PM

[PipingHotPiccolo]

Posted: 11/25/21 at 6:12pm

temms said: "

And I don't think I've ever seen anyone in live performance really nail "Another Hundred People" like Pamela Myers in the documentary. Even Anika Noni Rose didn't really do it for me. I'd love to see a production where I'm blown back in my seat by that song but it's never really happened."

Google Marcy Harriell's version.

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 11/25/21 at 6:35pm

Has anyone sat in the rear mezzanine and can tell me how good those seats are for this particular show? I'm currently trying to buy something from todaytix and wonder if I should get those rear mezz seats or something closer up.

[Scott Stephen]

Posted: 11/25/21 at 7:19pm

I sat in rear mezzanine and could see perfectly fine, and enjoyed every second of the show. It’s a relatively small theatre so I don’t think any of the seats are terrible.