#101
Posted: 8/30/11 at 11:37pm
And lo and behold, Isherwood trots up to Canada to review the show.
He doesn't seem to like it:
"Mr. McAnuff has had great success on Broadway with the rock-based musicals the Who’s “Tommy” and “Jersey Boys.” A composer himself... , he is clearly inspired by the challenge of marrying rock’s visceral intensity to the demands of theatrical narrative. His production is clean-lined, strongly sung and dramatically focused.
But it still failed to convince me of the show’s enduring merits, at least as anything other than a quasi-camp bit of 1970s pop-rock pageantry. Like the flop Broadway revival directed by Gale Edwards in 2000, Mr. McAnuff’s production dresses up the timeless story in mostly contemporary garb, an approach that somehow makes it seem even more dated in its throbbing earnestness."
His take on the three leads:
"Mr. Nolan, with the traditional blond curls of Renaissance portraiture, has a strong tenor that can stretch toward the screeching high notes of Jesus’ anguished night of doubt in the second-act climax, “Gethsemane.” But as in other productions I’ve seen, this revered figure remains a dramatic blank, storming through the temple or somberly admonishing the apostles without evincing much in the way of a real human personality, despite all the debates about whether he is “just a man” or the true son of God. (If being semi-divine means striding around looking tortured and noble, I’d be inclined to give Mr. Nolan’s Jesus the benefit of no doubt whatsoever.)
Mr. Young’s superbly sung Judas is much livelier, imbued with an embittered ferocity that seems to stem primarily from irritation at having his hot and heavy bromance with Jesus compromised by the comely Mary Magdalene, played with simple ardor and rich voice by Ms. Kennedy. "
Statford's JCS and Camelot (somewhat torturously) merged into one review
He doesn't seem to like it:
"Mr. McAnuff has had great success on Broadway with the rock-based musicals the Who’s “Tommy” and “Jersey Boys.” A composer himself... , he is clearly inspired by the challenge of marrying rock’s visceral intensity to the demands of theatrical narrative. His production is clean-lined, strongly sung and dramatically focused.
But it still failed to convince me of the show’s enduring merits, at least as anything other than a quasi-camp bit of 1970s pop-rock pageantry. Like the flop Broadway revival directed by Gale Edwards in 2000, Mr. McAnuff’s production dresses up the timeless story in mostly contemporary garb, an approach that somehow makes it seem even more dated in its throbbing earnestness."
His take on the three leads:
"Mr. Nolan, with the traditional blond curls of Renaissance portraiture, has a strong tenor that can stretch toward the screeching high notes of Jesus’ anguished night of doubt in the second-act climax, “Gethsemane.” But as in other productions I’ve seen, this revered figure remains a dramatic blank, storming through the temple or somberly admonishing the apostles without evincing much in the way of a real human personality, despite all the debates about whether he is “just a man” or the true son of God. (If being semi-divine means striding around looking tortured and noble, I’d be inclined to give Mr. Nolan’s Jesus the benefit of no doubt whatsoever.)
Mr. Young’s superbly sung Judas is much livelier, imbued with an embittered ferocity that seems to stem primarily from irritation at having his hot and heavy bromance with Jesus compromised by the comely Mary Magdalene, played with simple ardor and rich voice by Ms. Kennedy. "
Statford's JCS and Camelot (somewhat torturously) merged into one review
