Daniel Evans as Bobby in Company??

I absolutely loved him in SUNDAY, but does anyone else think he is miscast as Bobby?


http://www.playbill.com/news/article/143530-Daniel-Evans-to-Star-in-Sondheims-Company-at-Britains-Crucible-Theatre

Evans will be hopelessly miscast as Bobby, unless he suddenly develops the ability to convincingly portray a heterosexual male, which he certainly didn't have as either of the Georges in that execrable revival of SUNDAY IN THE FRIDGE WITH GEORGE.

---

Algy, maybe not gay, but certainly far too chilly and definitely too prissy. I remember thinking he was acting like some headmaster from Hogwarts, I kept waiting for him to take ten points from Dot.

Bottom line -- he had zero chemistry with whatsername who played Dot, ZERO at all, to the point when her pregnancy seemed more like divine intervention than anything else.

---

Her name is Jenna Russell, madame.

The choice wouldn't have occurred to me personally, but I'd go see it.

---

He does, at least as New York has seen him via George, seem a bit too (sweetly) meek and gentle to be Bobby; but if he's really a great actor, I don't see why he can't portray a different sort of person. I don't see it as the most natural fit, but I'd still be optimistic about it. George and Bobby have a lot of similarities, I think (not to discount the major differences), and he's already proven that he can tap into those things beautifully.

---

There is a scene in act 2 when he admits to having sex multiple times with men.

That's not entirely true. Bobby admits he's had a homosexual experience. He never says "I've f*cked up tons of guys!"

Updated On: 10/2/10 at 12:08 AM

Beating them up?

You know what I meant. What a random typo on my part.

Um, yeah, nowhere in the text does it say he's slept with men multiple times, nor does it imply that it's a habit. All he says is that he's done it. I am personally in the camp that in a "traditional" production (i.e. not all male, or something), Bobby isn't gay. He may have had moments of confusion, but I don't think the crux of his problem is that he's questioning his sexuality. At all.

---

And just to take it a little farther, that scene was inserted to compensate for the people who were thinking, "Oh, maybe Bobby's gay; that's probably why he's not married." It was actually put in to negate that possibility, and show the audience explicitly that he isn't. Sondheim and Furth always insisted that Bobby was never, ever ever supposed to be gay. I've always interpreted it to be that if Bobby were gay, it would be too easy. It's too simple to say, well, he's not married because he doesn't like women, no big deal. I think it diminishes the severe emotional wallop, to use a favorite phrase, of a person who's fundamentally incapable of the kind of connection he's longing for. (Not to say that struggling with your sexuality isn't an extremely emotionally trying experience; I hope you all know that without my saying, but it warrants being said.) It's just to say that the writers wanted the answer to be something so dismissive. If you want to think that Bobby's gay, by all means, that's your interpretation. But it's not directly evidenced in the text.

---

This is horrible news... I think Daniel Evans is too old :/

I'd much rather see Julian Ovenden in the part.

It's Bobby's 35th birthday, Daniel Evans can play 35. And, although I didn't particulary like him in Sunday, I never thought he seemed gay, not for a moment.

---

In response to jewishboy --

I mean the lyrics in "Marry Me a Little" are almost written for a gay man who doesn't want to commit, or come out really, and wants to convince his woman friend that they can make it work.

Or just ANY man who doesn't want to commit, for any number of reasons. You could certainly read it that way, I'm not trying to take that away from you; I just don't think that's what it was meant to be.

I'm also not huge on interpreting lyrics (or any text, honestly) based on the writer's biography. Obviously writers write what they know, life influences art, and Company probably does have hints of Sondheim's life in it (he's talked about this, right?). But I don't necessarily believe that the biographical answer is always the best one. I think reading something by trying to match it up with in the writer's life takes away from the art. Particularly in literature but in drama, too. I'm not saying you can dismiss the writer's experience, or that it's worthless; just saying that that's not all there is.

My point about the sexuality thing "diminishing" what goes on with Bobby has nothing to do with his hypothetical love for a man being any less important or valuable than his hypothetical love for a woman -- please don't misinterpret me as saying that. I'm saying that if the audience can dismiss his problem by saying, "well, he's not married because he's gay, that's easy!" it kind of takes something away. If that's what they register in Bobby, many of them aren't going to see themselves in him as much as they would with an interpretation that's broader, and bigger than a question of sexuality. I think it lets the audience dismiss him in a way that Sondheim and Furth wouldn't want. What's that quote, about them wanting you to sit in the audience and laugh your ass off, and then go home and not be able to sleep?

And back on topic, I'd actually say Daniel Evans looks too young before I thought he was too old! But by chronological age, 37 is definitely not "too old" to play Bobby. Raul was 36 when they came to Broadway, and I think Daniel looks much younger!

---

Updated On: 10/2/10 at 01:06 PM