Dolly, Bette, Dolly

[his4his]

Posted: 4/3/17 at 3:12pm

Do whatever it takes (a second mortgage) to see Miss Midler in a great old school production of Hello Dolly. The Friday March 31 show was flawless front start to finish. Bette's comedic, vocal and acting talents are on full display and she takes your breath away at every turn; she has truly made this show her own. Hyde-Pierce makes a great Horace, compared to the stick in the mud Walter Matthau's movie version; "Penny in my Pocket" was a delight! The remaining cast is great and worthy of attention as well. If you, like me, have only seen the movie version you may miss some of the longer musical numbers, "Before the Parade Passes By" seemed to be cut way back, but if you have never seen the movie you may not notice the difference; I thought this was the ONLY missed opportunity in an otherwise perfect show. I need to see this again, and maybe again, before Bette leaves the show.

Updated On: 4/3/17 at 03:12 PM

[smidge]

Posted: 4/3/17 at 3:36pm

Existing threads are cool. You really don't need to start a new one every time you see a show.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 4/3/17 at 7:56pm

So glad you were enthralled by the show, Him4Him! This is the REAL "Hello, Dolly!"  That piece of garbage that 20th Century Fox produced was overblown, miscast and sluggish. Just remember, the 14th Street parade wasn't the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade.

[DAME]

Posted: 4/3/17 at 8:02pm

Dollypop said: " Just remember, the 14th Street parade wasn't the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade."

 

WORD!

 

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 4/3/17 at 8:27pm

...but, OMG, when you watch "Before the Parade Passes By" on Blu-ray, from the Streisand film version, your jaw just drops! I've shown a good number of friends this number from the film and they're all in awe. Pre-CGI, too!!

i think the number was great in the Channing and Bailey Broadway productions; but I love the way the movie hit it out of the park!

[Dollypop]

Posted: 4/3/17 at 9:09pm

...with That Streisand Woman vocalizing in a a way no "woman of a certain age" would do at the turn of the century.

Yes, there were impressive elements there but they weren't true to the material.

Updated On: 4/4/17 at 09:09 PM

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 4/3/17 at 9:11pm

Agreed, Dollypop...but it still impresses. ??

[bk]

Posted: 4/4/17 at 1:47am

So, they had 500 people plus on a set at Fox.  Size is impressive?  That's what it's about?  Gower made much more magic with thirty-five or however many were in the show.  Literally they got everyone in LA, put them in a costume, and made a parade on an outdoor set.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 4/4/17 at 7:51am

...and the results were mixed. Sometimes size doesn't impress.

Now don't get me started on how the hatshop of an Irish widow was made to look like a Viennese pastry shop in the film.

[Theater_Nerd]

Posted: 4/4/17 at 8:17am

Since the 1969 film version has been brought up I have to ask if anyone was reminded of that great Garland number from The Harvey Girls, "On the Atchison, Topeka and the Santa Fe" while watching the "Put on Your Sunday Clothes" number? 

[Dollypop]

Posted: 4/4/17 at 9:47am

I've always thought they were digging trenches for a new pipeline in that number.

[newintown]

Posted: 4/4/17 at 10:35am

"Just remember, the 14th Street parade wasn't the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade."

Well, it is a movie musical, not a documentary. One could also cavil at the lack of verisimilitude in other production numbers from films, such as Oliver! (poor Cockneys simply did not sing and dance in the hundreds about town, asking strangers to consider themselves one of us), Hairspray (Baltimore citizens in the 60s rarely gathered in groups to herald the morning in song and dance), Mary Poppins (would working class chimney sweeps really clump en masse in perfect terpsichorean unity?), Mame (how many people are at this fox hunt?), etc.

[nealb1]

Posted: 4/4/17 at 10:43am

Perfectly said, Newintown.  HD is one of my all time favorite musicals - on screen and on the stage.  And, I've done the show several times, including portraying Cornelius in 3 different productions.  So, it holds a very special place in my heart.  Comparing the stage & film version is apples and oranges - how can you compare something that is completely different?  That goes for pretty much every stage to screen film adaptation.  HD is no exception.  

As far the parade scene in the film - did anyone really think that it was going to be the same amount of people like in the stage version?  Really????

I have tickets for Saturday night, May 6th.  I'm so looking forward to seeing it.  

Updated On: 4/4/17 at 10:43 AM

[dank]

Posted: 4/4/17 at 10:45am

Im seeing it in May CAN'T WAIT>

[his4his]

Posted: 4/5/17 at 6:07pm

I only said the song itself was shortened, the cast on stage was fantastic.

All I'll say is that I went into the performance excited and with high hopes, the cast not only delivered but exceeded my expectations. This what musical theater really is!

[TNick926]

Posted: 4/5/17 at 6:29pm

I love some aspects of the movie (maybe just because I love the score and Thornton Wilder's strong underlying story), but there was nothing I've ever seen as thrilling as when I saw Pearl Bailey as Dolly when I was a kid in Pittsburgh...until I saw Bette last week! This production, this cast, these sets and costumes, orchestrations, lighting...sublime!

By the way, the Before the Parade Passes By number in Bette's production is pretty much exactly as it's been in previous productions. Gene Kelly evidently saw an opportunity for a massive parade number for the movie and bloated it way beyond anything that would have happened on 14th street in that  period! :)

still, I am also a huge Streisand fan and hearing her cut loose in the middle of that big parade WAS thrilling to my gay little heart, whether in style of the period or not! :)

Updated On: 4/5/17 at 06:29 PM

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 4/5/17 at 8:10pm

Streisand has always said (even recently) that she was miscast in the film adaptation of HELLO, DOLLY!  She agrees heavily she was much too young to play a mature and wise widow (she was 26-27 at the time).

In order for her to be permitted to make her film debut in the 1968 film adaptation of FUNNY GIRL, the show's producer (also the film's producer) Ray Stark made sure she signed a 5-picture deal if she wanted FUNNY GIRL the film.  Having always had total creative control of her career from the start, she obliged to sign that contract thus she was forced to sign onto HELLO, DOLLY! and ON A CLEAR DAY YOU CAN SEE FOREVER.  They were simply job assignments for her.  She was contractually obligated to make them.  

Though she found the idea of a musical sequel ridiculous, she agreed to do 1975's FUNNY LADY just to close out her 5-picture contract with Ray Stark.  On the last day of shooting, she gifted him a large vintage mirror which she wrote in lipstick: PAID IN FULL.  

 

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 12:37am

bk said: "So, they had 500 people plus on a set at Fox.  Size is impressive?  That's what it's about?  Gower made much more magic with thirty-five or however many were in the show.  Literally they got everyone in LA, put them in a costume, and made a parade on an outdoor set.

 

"

You know I love you (in a professional way), BK, but I can't help chuckling at this particular post, given that the famous title number on stage is little more than a 7-minute stroll by a crowd of dudes. Brilliantly conceived and executed, obviously, but still a case of using a crowd to great effect.

All of which brings to mind the famous Busby Berkeley quote to the effect that, "One woman doing a time step is boring; 100 women doing a time step is exhilarating!"

What's amazing about the film is that Kelly was able to top that enormous parade with 40 waiters and Louis Armstrong in the title number.

[bk]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 12:51am

But see, I found nothing thrilling about that enormous parade - it's a bunch of people walking in costumes.  I'm not sure what you mean by the title number on stage being a seven-minute "stroll" - the title song as Gower staged it is anything but a "stroll" which is why it stops the show cold at every performance.  

[Public User]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 2:05am

Many critics have given the movie version a second look and praise it on many levels.  I thought it was a lot of fun seeing Barbra camp it up doing Mae West and other impressions thrown in.  I also loved the inclusion of Louis Armstrong.  

[nealb1]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 11:24am

By the time the studio signed Gene on to direct, everyone else was pretty much in place.  Gene wanted to make the movie more intimate – like the original play, and stage musical.  But, 20th Century Fox wanted to go all out on the movie.  And, he did not agree with that.  But, he had no choice. 

[Zamedy154]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 6:19pm

OMG. OMG. OMG.

https://www.facebook.com/bootlegbetty/videos/vb.335020919921647/1307978475959215/?type=2&theater&notif_t=like&notif_id=1491501271686621

[nealb1]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 6:55pm

I'm unable to watch it as it's asking me to log into Facebook, and I'm not a member.

What is the video of?

[ACL2006]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 7:02pm

It's her entrance into the title song.

[Anshel2]

Posted: 4/6/17 at 7:09pm

BrodyFosse123 said: "Streisand has always said (even recently) that she was miscast in the film adaptation of HELLO, DOLLY!  She agrees heavily she was much too young to play a mature and wise widow (she was 26-27 at the time).

In order for her to be permitted to make her film debut in the 1968 film adaptation of FUNNY GIRL, the show's producer (also the film's producer) Ray Stark made sure she signed a 5-picture deal if she wanted FUNNY GIRL the film.  Having always had total creative control of her career from the start, she obliged to sign that contract thus she was forced to sign onto HELLO, DOLLY! and ON A CLEAR DAY YOU CAN SEE FOREVER.  They were simply job assignments for her.  She was contractually obligated to make them.  

Though she found the idea of a musical sequel ridiculous, she agreed to do 1975's FUNNY LADY just to close out her 5-picture contract with Ray Stark.  On the last day of shooting, she gifted him a large vintage mirror which she wrote in lipstick: PAID IN FULL.  

 

 

"

Hello Dolly and Clear Day had nothing to do with Ray Stark or satisfied any part of Streisand's contract with him.  In fact, he sued her when she was making other films for other producers.  Her Funny Girl contract with Stark led to The Owl & The Pussycat, The Way We Were, Funny Lady and For Pete's Sake. The original contract was a four picture deal and presumably, he got her to make Funny Lady (a fifth picture) in connection with the "settlement" of the lawsuit he felt he was forced to file.  She continually turned down scripts he sent her.  Hello Dolly allegedly was accepted because she wanted to make what Liz Taylor was making (1 million) and Fox accepted.  Clear Day was also a choice - she was not contractually obligated in connection with a Stark contract.

 

Updated On: 4/6/17 at 07:09 PM