DANCIN' Previews- Page 3

[cryan71]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 11:40am

He's dead.  You don't speak for him.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 11:45am

Unfortunately, I think unless Fosse personally worked on this production, there would have always been people unsatisfied with it and trashing it. I’m not defending the quality of the show or the choices made. I don’t remember, was this the sentiment when Fosse first opened?

[quizking101]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 12:59pm

HeyMrMusic said: "Unfortunately, I think unless Fosse personally worked on this production, there would have always been people unsatisfied with it and trashing it. I’m not defending the quality of the show or the choices made. I don’t remember, was this the sentiment whenFosse first opened?"

I think it's probably due to the fact that we're losing more and more people who were closest to the Fosse legacy and body of work have since passed on or retired. Fosse  had the benefit of involvement of Gwen Verdon, Ann Reinking (who also performed), Chet Walker, Valarie Pettiford, and Ben Vereen (who came into the show later in the run), Fosse had only been gone for about 12 years, and the revival of Chicago was still hot on the scene.

This production is choreographed and directed by one Fosse dancer (Wayne Cilento) and has "additional choreographic recreations" by another (Christine Colby Jacques) and the blessings of the Legacy (I don't think Nicole Fosse is heavily involved). I do see people having certain expectations that if you are going to throw such a heavyweight name on the marquee, they're going to have certain standards.

Chicago successfully subverts this pitfall because the choreography was technically by Ann Reinking "in the style of Bob Fosse" - and is thus more malleable and less beholden to the pure technical rigor and standards of the original creator.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 1:09pm

quizking101 said: "I don't think Nicole Fosse is heavily involved"

She is heavily involved, has approved everything here, and is essentially serving as a producer.

I'm getting so tired of this MAGA-style belief that a revival cannot surpass the original and any deviation is an insult to the authors and Broadway will never be better than it was in the past. (Also what's going on in the SWEENEY thread, and to some extent the CAMELOT thread.) You will never see the original again; it was a moment in time, and now we're in a new moment in time with new artists giving their interpretation. It's not a carbon copy. Hyper faithful re-creation just leads to boring, stale revivals. Adapt or die. This has always been the case with show "fans," but it seems to have gotten particularly bad in the last couple of years.

That's not saying that innovation is always successful! Sometimes revivals aren't as good as the original. But it's far more interesting to try something different than go through the exact motions of something created 45 years ago. The vast majority of people seeing this revival of DANCIN' will never have seen the original; same with SWEENEY and even more so with CAMELOT.

Those who are unwilling to embrace change should stay home, look at photos & listen to cast albums, and live life in their heads.

Updated On: 3/7/23 at 01:09 PM

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 1:13pm

Makes total sense. I understand that sentiment. For me, I think I’d rather have seen a more faithful recreation of the original show than a brand new version since I was personally not around for the original and don’t have any concept of what it was beyond the Tony number and the recreations in Fosse. I do think the performance I saw was more cleanly danced than others have been saying though (I counted one dropped hat in “Sing, Sing, Sing&rdquo. 

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 1:49pm

Having not seen this (or any other Fosse revue) yet, I think it just comes down to expectation.  Fosse had a very specific style on Broadway and it's unlikely that any new show would come close to replicating that style, so I think a lot of people were excited about seeing that style of dance again, as they remembered it.  But this version of Dancin' seems more to be in the vein of "inspired by", which to be fair, they do mention in the poster, so perhaps it's just not living up to the expectations that maybe shouldn't have been put on the production to start with. 

But then there's also the caliber of the dance itself.  When you see a Broadway show, especially a dance show, you do kind of expect the performers to be at the top of their game, and it sounds like that hasn't always been the case with this show, which I suppose is made worse by how demanding Fosse was known to be as a director/choreographer, where we'd expect a certain level of perfection.

[All So Ozmopolitan]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 1:53pm

Ermengarde hit the nail on the head! In my opinion, if you're going to revive a musical, let there be a reason to revive it. Adapt, reexamine, and redesign some element(s) of the show. Carbon-copy revivals, though nostalgic and sometimes profitable, usually end up mediocre because they cannot match the charm/sensation of the original. Regardless of your opinion on the quality, there's no denying that recent Broadway revivals of Spring Awakening, Oklahoma, Company, 1776, and West Side Story made for a reinvigorated experience. Creative ambition matters!

[Kimbo]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 10:10pm

I hesitate to ask since I see this show seems to be meeting with a largely uninterested or unenthusiastic response. That said, I’d be curious to see a list of musical numbers as the show currently stands (if one exists - I haven’t yet seen it posted anywhere.)

[quizking101]

Posted: 3/7/23 at 11:02pm

I’ll type one out later.

I went again tonight and there were far fewer (if any) errors. Whatever I thought needed tightening on the first night feels much tighter.

I still hate the “Big Noise From Winnetka” number because of the staging and how disorganized it feels, but other than that, I had a great time again!

Note: My rush ticket today was ORCHESTRA RIGHT H-14 - good view, so-so leg room. I moved up to ORCHESTRA RIGHT A-8 - leg room much better, but be prepared for some obstruction in missing a bit of footwork.

Also, Manny Herrera singing Mr. Bojangles and the “Sing Sing Sing” suite remain my favorite parts of the night.

[Iclick]

Posted: 3/8/23 at 2:36pm

MAGA beliefs????????? Huh?  
 

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 3/8/23 at 2:40pm

'I'm getting so tired of this MAGA-style belief that a revival cannot surpass the original and any deviation is an insult to the authors and Broadway will never be better than it was in the past' 

Erm, what? 

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 3/8/23 at 5:06pm

New interpretations are valid, but it does make me sad that modern interpretations of Fosse almost always strip away the psychological element, leaving movement that is, at best, precise. There's a lot of Fosse that's fun and inventive, but a lot of his work should make you feel almost antagonized, and scrubbing that is like reviving Pinter as straight comedy. Yes, you are technically saying all the lines as written, but to what end? The original Sing Sing Sing has the dancers looking like they're going to be pulled apart - it's not just a happy celebration of the song, but it moves past that and becomes almost grotesque. If that gets lost, then I don't really see what the point is.

[ddenoff2]

Posted: 3/8/23 at 7:37pm

Now available on TDF.org for this coming Friday, Saturday and Sunday performances.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 3/8/23 at 8:02pm

ddenoff2 said: "Now available on TDF.org for this coming Friday, Saturday and Sunday performances."

That's not good. No way this makes it past the Tony Awards.

[dan94]

Posted: 3/8/23 at 9:11pm

I think part of the problem is that everyone has a different memory of Fosse, what his style was, and what it meant. I mean look at this thread. "Fosse is about precision." "Fosse is about interpretation." "Fosse is about psychology." I think to an extent some people are looking more for a memory of what the work was than what the work actually was. (Not to say that this revival is exactly what the work actually was.)

As for it not being strictly a recreation of Dancin' as it existed in 1978, for me the point is moot. I'd like to see what the show was in 1978, but I wasn't even old enough to have seen the Fosse revue in 1999. Pretty much anyone under 30, this is our only chance to see actual Fosse numbers (other than Hot Honey Rag) in person. I'll take what I can get. I just hope it isn't a waste of an opportunity. Because while it's my first opportunity to see Fosse numbers in person, it's also probably my last. We've lost anything from Redhead or New Girl in Town. I can't imagine Dancin' gets revived after this. Send the numbers off well.

I'm excited even if there seem to be many mixed thoughts. I'm looking an entertaining evening of top rate dancers, and I might get a glimpse into what Fosse was about along the way. If Dancin' has changed, I won't notice. I just hope it's done well and not a (final) wasted opportunity.

[jewishboy]

Posted: 3/12/23 at 10:58pm

I just got out of tonight’s performance of Dancin’. I love this show. I have loved Fosse’s choreography ever since I was a little boy, and this just features his skill as a dance theatre director in such a fantastic way. This is such a magnificent ensemble to my eyes, not the eyes of a trained dancer, just a longtime theatre goer. And judging by the crowd’s uproarious reactions, many in the audience seemed very pleased. Many internal applause and loud cheers throughout. I hope it is received well for what it is and has a nice long run and future. I’m so glad it made it to Broadway, and I definitely hope to be able to see it again. What a unique dance experience in the musical theatre cannon. 
 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 3/14/23 at 11:29pm

I saw this tonight and thought it was…fine? Like everyone said, the cast is remarkably talented and I enjoyed it for what it was but I highly doubt I’ll ever spend more than 2 minutes thinking again about what I saw tonight. 

[Musical Master]

Posted: 3/15/23 at 2:52am

That's probably how I would feel if I saw it, a perfectly fine revival that is enjoyable for what it is. But considering the other big three musical revivals this season, this one is going to be eaten alive and sort of forgotten about.

[BETTY22]

Posted: 3/15/23 at 6:07pm

Opening night guests:

 

Nicole Fosse, Camille A. Brown, Graciela Daniele, Tovah Feldshuh, Adrianna Hicks, Robyn Hurder, Brittney Johnson, Jane Krakowski, Baayork Lee, Priscilla Lopez, Ralph Macchio, Abby Lee Miller, Audra McDonald, Donna McKechnie, Casey Nicholaw, Justin Peck, Tiler Peck, Bernadette Peters, Tonya Pinkins, Chita Rivera, David Rockwell, Krysta Rodriguez, Christopher Sieber, Jennifer Simard, Will Swenson, Ben Vereen

[CukorLover]

Posted: 3/18/23 at 8:51am

                                           Wayne Cilento's DANCIN'

... is very loosely based on choreographer Bob Fosse's ingenious body of work --minus the finesse, sensuality, and smarts of the original creator.

You'll certainly hear the "snaps," but this ill conceived and misguided dance revue rarely crackles or pops.

(Two hours and fifteen minutes, including intermission)

 

Updated On: 3/18/23 at 08:51 AM

[gordi_92]

Posted: 4/12/23 at 11:22am

Im from Germany visiting NYC next week and checking out what to see. I know nothing about this show. Does it have a storyline? Is there singing? acting? Or just one choreography after another? 

[All So Ozmopolitan]

Posted: 4/12/23 at 11:31am

There is hardly any plot, so do not expect a linear narrative with beginning, middle, and end. Dancin' is primarily back-to-back dance sequences with a handful of songs and book scenes (most of which are monologues to the audience). It's a revue that celebrates Fosse's choreography. 

[gordi_92]

Posted: 4/12/23 at 11:36am

Thank you :) 

[hayden6]

Posted: 4/12/23 at 11:45am

gordi_92 said: "Im from Germany visiting NYC next week and checking out what to see. I know nothing about this show. Does it have a storyline? Is there singing? acting? Or just one choreography after another?"

I didn't know anything either when I went in -- it doesn't have a storyline. There is plenty of singing from the cast (those that sing are wonderful), and there is "acting" in that there are a handful of monologues throughout (in between dance numbers), but it's definitely not the focus (or the highlight). It's largely dance numbers (in varying combinations -- some large group numbers, some small group numbers, some solo), almost cabaret-style. It's very entertaining, some really fun costumes and lighting. If you enjoy choreography, this is the best you'll find on Broadway right now.

[ChorusKitty]

Posted: 4/29/23 at 12:17am

Having seen the tour of the original production of "Dancin'" I'm curious as to why this show is being labeled as "Bob Fosse's Dancin'"? Sure many of the musical numbers are retained but the Bob Fosse vision of them is not there. The "Sing, Sing, Sing" section is the closest to the original version. "Homage to Bob Fosse" might be a more apt title.

I don't think every revival has to necessarily mirror the original, but anyone coming to see this current production would surely be flummoxed to understand how the original production could have lasted over 1700 performances. Everything is over thought and overyly altered to the point where Fosse's vision and Wayne Cilento's vision collide. Fosse's genius was in being able to edit both the choreography AND the staging and lighting in order to let the actors shine. This revival is like a "Project Runway" design where we desperately need Tim Gunn to come in and scream, "Edit! Edit! There's too much whickety whack!"

Overall the male dancers were far more polished and closer to capturing the Fosse aesthetic than the women in the cast. Peter John Chursin, especially, captures the Fosse style flawlessly. Not that these dancers aren't all very talented, but would Fosse have hired most of them? Color me dubious.