Company Reviews (and beyond)- Page 4

[ashley0139]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 8:59am

CurtainPullDowner said: "I feel Green called this one on the nose in most cases, and he explains his reasoning also. There are many problems with the gender-switching and the tone of the original show. And you can't really argue with the fact that Lenk's singing is just not a good match for this show. I am surprised that they didn't notice this from the start. And there are plenty of Actress/Singers out there who could have acted and sung this role as written."

I know that people feel that way about her singing in the show, but I just can’t agree. I have listened to her Being Alive no less than 100 times since I saw the show on Saturday night. It’s beautiful and subtle and the end certainly has some belt to it. Her voice is unique and not traditional to be sure, but it is beautiful and acted so wonderfully. Probably my favorite version of Being Alive I have heard actually. 
 

Regarding the proposal to Jamie - that is the only part of the gender swapping that I thought did not work at all and as a gay woman I was also a little insulted by that. I can definitely agree on that. 

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:02am

Green's pretty consistent that he dislikes many of the changes Sondheim has made to his musicals. This review jibes with that POV.

I'm seeing this on Thursday -- can't wait.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:06am

I'm always a little taken aback when there is huge vitriol about one critic's negative review. Jessie Green's opinion is his - and it certainly isn't the only criticism I've heard about this production. To start throwing comments like - 'he has a problem with women directors' because you don't agree with his opinion seems a little reactionary.

Personally - I saw the production in NYC and in London and both incarnations felt to me like an interesting experiment that doesn't fully work. I might not have used the exact words that Green did in his critique but I understand and share many of his hesitations.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:13am

Also - for whatever it's worth -- they did play around with keys - both for Rosalie Craig and Katrina Lenk during their respective preview performances, and for my money never were able to find a place to make them soar in the satisfying way we imagine this music should sound with a female voice. And I think that is because the songs were written for a man.  The gender swap leads to interesting concepts, but it also means compromises in other ways. I think the impact vocally of Bob's music is one of those compromises.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:16am

I’m at the point, I don’t need the critics’ validation of something I enjoy. I will still love Lenk’s performance as many others have on this board.  
I hope we get a cast recording soon!

[fosterfan2]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:29am

ashley0139 said: "CurtainPullDowner said: "I feel Green called this one on the nose in most cases, and he explains his reasoning also. There are many problems with the gender-switching and the tone of the original show. And you can't really argue with the fact that Lenk's singing is just not a good match for this show. I am surprised that they didn't notice this from the start. And there are plenty of Actress/Singers out there who could have acted and sung this role as written."

I know that people feel that way about her singing in the show, but I just can’t agree. I have listened to her Being Alive no less than 100 times since I saw the show on Saturday night. It’s beautiful and subtle and the end certainly has some belt to it. Her voice is unique and not traditional to be sure, but it is beautiful and acted so wonderfully. Probably my favorite version of Being Alive I have heard actually.


Regarding the proposal to Jamie - that is the only part of the gender swapping that I thought did not work at all and as a gay woman I was also a little insulted by that. I can definitely agree on that."

How have you been able to hear Lenk's version of "Being Alive" 100 times? Do you have a bootleg? I'm also a fan of hers.

 

[Wick3]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:29am

A Director said: "Jesse Green has a problem with women directors and playwrights. His review stinks of male chauvinism."

Green recently gave Critic's Pick to Clyde's, written by Lynn Nottage and directed by Kate Whoriskey.

[JGPR2]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:30am

"Green is a jerk. Too bad Brantley is gone, as he raved over this production in London."

Kind of funny seeing people on this board missing Brantley after so many trashed him for years.

[ArtMan]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:31am

Critic's opinions don't affect my liking/disliking of anything.  For those who that matters.  From what I read earlier in this thread, there are 17 positive reviews to one negative.  Why not focus on all the favorable reviews?  Instead of dwelling on the one bad.

[fosterfan2]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:33am

^This 100%. Thank you.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:38am

QueenAlice said: "Also - for whatever it's worth -- they did play around with keys - both for Rosalie Craig and Katrina Lenk during their respective preview performances, and for my money never were able to find a place to make them soar in the satisfying way we imagine this music should sound with a female voice. And I think that is because the songs were written for a man. The gender swap leads to interesting concepts, but it also means compromises in other ways. I think the impact vocally of Bob's music is one of those compromises."

Guess you’ve never heard Patti’s ‘Being Alive.’

[BJR]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:45am

Who said Patti's "Being Alive" was one Sondheim liked?

Elliot and Sondheim twice cast this Bobbie with an actor with a lovely-but-not-powerful singing voice when, as some have said, it's 2021 and there are high belters everywhere. Clearly, it ain't what they wanted.

All that aside, as I read Isherwood's rave review for New York Stage, I thought, How must it feel being Elliot and weathering the many years of this projects, and of course the pandemic, and have the NYTimes reviewer there to greet you not be the one who raved in London, nor in a greater time travel leap, the former NYTimes critic Isherwood. Instead, you get this turd of a review. Oh this industry (and life) - all about timing.

I love the production, and I'm glad they're selling well. I hope Green didn't kill it.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 9:48am

I’m not talking about what anyone wanted. But I’ve heard Bobby’s songs sung by women in very thrilling ways.

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:06am

ljay889 said: "Am I the only one who doesn’t think the Facebook video sounds live? It sounds identical to the NY Times virtual performance they did of the number during lockdown."

Yeah I don’t think it’s live. They pull out towards the end when you can tell the audio doesn’t quite sync up with the video. Strange?

[ArtMan]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:09am

I love the production, and I'm glad they're selling well. I hope Green didn't kill it."

In less than a month, it will be 2022.  The days of ONE critic "killing" a show is long gone.  Social media is more influential than any critic.  Company will be just fine.

[BCfitasafiddle]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:10am

The Times being negative will have no consequences on this show's success, run, or awards next spring. At least, it won't for me. 

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:13am

By the way - the Sondheim Opening Night Playbill is back in stock on the Playbill website.

[Georgeanddot2]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:19am

Idk what some of you mean about the Bobbie/Jamie scene not working.  Significant Other was pretty much a whole play that shared the same idea of that scene.  I also jokingly had a pact with a straight girlfriend of mine that we would get married and joyfully live in a platonic marriage if neither of us were married by 45.  That scene didn't seem that ridiculous.  If anything it really showed Bobbie's desperation more than any other production has been able to.

Overall, my issue with Green's review is that he just simply doesn't seem to "get" the production, honestly.  It also seems a bit biased perhaps as well.  I actually think this production opened up and explored Company in a really fascinating way and made it feel super fresh.

(BTW Significant Other flopped as a play, but would make a great musical and would be a wonderful companion piece to Company)

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:40am

IdinaBellFoster said: "ljay889 said: "Am I the only one who doesn’t think the Facebook video sounds live? It sounds identical to the NY Times virtual performance they did of the number during lockdown."

Yeah I don’t think it’s live. They pull out towards the end when you can tell the audio doesn’t quite sync up with the video. Strange?"

Yes! I noticed that. It’s also identical to the London cast recording track. The orchestrations sound different and better on broadway. 

[TaffyDavenport]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:50am

Helen Shaw has issues with the show, and Lenk. Is she misogynistic, too?

Theater Review: ‘Company,’ With Katrina Lenk & Patti LuPone (vulture.com)

[RW3]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 10:55am

Based on the reviews, do we think Matt Doyle is the first potential nominee lock for Featured Actor in a Musical?

[MemorableUserName]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 11:34am

TaffyDavenport said: "Helen Shaw has issues with the show, and Lenk. Is she misogynistic, too?

Theater Review: ‘Company,’ With Katrina Lenk & Patti LuPone (vulture.com)"

There's discussion of it on the previous page. But it is interesting that none of the namecalling (and physical threats!) aimed Green's way have been directed Shaw's. Guess she's not as much of a "jerk" for having a different opinion than so many on here.

[TaffyDavenport]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 11:43am

Ah, I missed that, thanks for pointing it out. 

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 12:24pm

I get where some of the negative reviews were coming from. I love this show, it’s an amazing period piece, and one of the few that has moments that relate well regarding relationships today.

However, Lenek gave an amazing performance and I loved every moment of the show when I saw it last week. Despite some aspects not landing well due to the passing of time, it was still a great production of my favorite Sondheim work. I understand fully what they were going for when they changed the protagonists from male to female. However, despite loving it beyond words, the change did not impact me or I feel really change the material/ show that much overall. I get the idea, I saw where they were coming from. Yet, it didn’t impact me as much as it did others around me and others on this forum. I think it was a fun experiment, but to me, despite it being one of the best nights out at the theatre I have had in ages, it didn’t like I said earlier resonate with me in any sort of powerful way. That said, amazing production and one hell of a top notch cast where i saw no weak links.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 12/10/21 at 12:24pm

Green is right on the money re: the end of act one. The scene doesn't work, the "Jewish" lines are uncomfortable, we don't buy that Bobbie actually WANTS to marry openly gay Jamie (whereas we know Bobby is making a desperate attempt to marry Amy), and it messes up the setup of Marry Me A Little. It's a mess.

Wish Bobby had been the only gender-change. MAYBE make Paul a woman or non-binary (even making Amy nb would add a richer dimension). But that's it.

That this revival still works is a testament to Marianne Elliott's dynamite staging.

Updated On: 12/10/21 at 12:24 PM