DAYS OF WINE AND ROSES Previews — Page 3

Broadway Flash said: "Saw this tonight. What is the purpose of this show? Is it to act as a cautionary tale? I found it to be a little preachy at times. I didn’t think it was as dark as people were saying. It feels like a less good staging of next to normal. Kelli’s scene when she’s vacuuming was the standout for me, and gave a fantastic performance. I always have mixed feeling about Adam guettel. He’s certainly no Richard Rodgers to say the least. I like much of the score though. Nobody can accuse this musical of dragging that’s for sure. But it felt like it was moving too fast at times. I thought they could have sat in some of those moments longer. Have we given up on 2 act musicals?"

Yeah, I had issues with the physical production, but as great as the writing is, I agree the last 30 become too much a morality or religious play: "Will this character find Jesus or go to hell?" And that's not an interesting question, frankly, if you aren't the character who chose Jesus.

"Hell yes I'm ready for the second act!"

And he crawls back out and she doesn't. And he was the one who changed her entire life. It's heartbreaking.

Totally hear that. But dramatically I feel like it stalls. You are on his side, he's given so much nuance and wisdom and she looks crazy and irrational. For me I was 20 minutes ahead of it. So, it played like a morality tale by the end. And not one I disagree with! But all the same, heavy handed.

In short, I don't feel like it brought me closer to addiction, but just reminded me addiction is harmful to everyone. Which is less interesting imho

Wished this ended on the scene where they sneak the booze into bed, making their drinking addiction almost like a sexual fetish for the two of them. Would've been such a dark, interesting note to end on. Mutually assured destruction.

Kelli and Brian are incredible in this show. Great performances from them. They try their best with the material they've been given. The songs don't seem to really do anything or go anywhere although they *sound* kind of pretty. Some of the worst staging I've seen in a Broadway musical in a really long time. In fact, the physical production is terrible all around. Also, what's the point of having an ensemble that doesn't do anything at all. At least work in some background singing for them or something.

Another big miss.

wish the rest of cast aren't underused....

Updated On: 1/13/24 at 12:05 PM

Saw the show today and boy was I not expecting it to be as good as it actually was! My god! Kelli O’Hara is a freaking musical goddess! Her and Brian have really outdone themselves with this piece! I was in tears by the end of the show and this score is very powerful! Definitely think this show is an underrated contender for Best Musical and Best Score! I think I also see Tony nods for O’Hara and James! With all that praise being said, like someone else mentioned on this thread, the rest of the cast are definitely underused. It’s almost if this show could’ve been written as a three-person musical. Other than that, I thought this was an excellent piece of theatre right here!

A lot of the initial reports I’ve been hearing about this one seem to echo the raves of Kimberly Akimbo throughout the preview process, which makes me believe this is the show to beat for best musical. It is certainly possible for a closed show to take home top honors!

smidge said: "TaffyDavenport said: "I don’t get the complaints about the supporting cast being underused. In my opinion, they’re used exactly the right amount to tell the story being told, and that keeps the show tight."

I can’t remember from off Broadway. Did Sharon Brown even get a song?"

No, and since she plays very minor characters, there's no reason for her to have one.

Updated On: 1/13/24 at 09:42 PM

ultimately i couldn't get past the lack of a good story to drive the piece--its a slow motion train wreck, rendered beautifully but, as one might expect, sloooowly-- but i was still very impressed with the overall production, and particularly the leads.

its a beautiful and well developed set, which the show doesnt need but was pleasant nonetheless. similarly, the show has a 6 person ensemble that feels totally unnecessary--i dont think any of them sing? did i miss it? so much movement in the background and prop-moving but it started to distract me since the show essentially has only 5 characters, and only 3 that are explored in any way. Yes, it seems a crime that Sharon Catherine Brown and Byron Jennings are given so little to do. There's a moment where I thought Brown might be allowed a moment but alas. Back to our two stars.

Stars they are. James is great--his voice!-- but this is O'Hara's show. WHAT A PERFORMANCE. From her bright perkiness to start, to her chaotic drunken banter, to her total breakdown (the scene in the hotel was simply perfect, start to finish, sheer perfection in staging, acting, etc). i could not imagine a better-rendered performance if i tried. she is worth the price of admission.

im not familiar with the source material, and assuming this was faithful to its story, it feels unfair to complain. the tale told was told well. but its depressing, and not funny/insightful enough to redeem itself, since thats really all it was. yes O'hara made her character heartbreaking, but the show doesnt really give us ANY insight into what makes Kiersten drink, it doesnt explore her demons or motivations in any meaningful way, and that stacked against her role as a mother- it was just tragic and not much more (while sort of letting her husband off the hook, though James' performance fills in that gap quite a bit). It reminded me of a much less interesting, much duller Next to Normal in many ways.

but like i said, o'hara o'hara o'hara.

Updated On: 1/14/24 at 01:19 AM

I think the score is exquisite. And I think the material is overall strong. Some of you are acting as if it is weak, which it is not. I also like how poetic and bizarre the show is. Her scatting while vacuuming drunk into the operatic Underdeath. Perfection!

The book closely follows the film. I think the issues some of you are having are with the source material.

Updated On: 1/14/24 at 10:31 AM

PipingHotPiccolo said: "Yes, it seems a crime that Sharon Catherine Brown and Byron Jennings are given so little to do."

I don't agree with this. Writers should add material only if it furthers the story or otherwise contributes to the meaning of the show, not to give specific performers more to do. I do think there's room in the show for both Kirsten's father and Joe's sponsor to have a song, but I understand why the creators wanted to keep the score so tight.