Peter Pan is infused with magic. It can confer it as well. The one scene in Finding Neverland that captures this precious quality is the one that recreates moments from that work. The rest of the show, unfortunately, remains resolutely earthbound. It moves smoothly, but uneventfully, in what is frankly a somewhat doleful tale. It needs an infusion of both humor and vitality.
Matthew Morrison deserves much better than the character of Barrie as depicted here, who seems barely to register a pulse. Considering how few opportunities it affords him to shine, he does a very good job with it. His singing voice is strong.
Kelsey Grammer gets the majority of the laugh lines, and he makes the most of them. The show offers a few jokes of the anachronistic variety, and they should be removed: a reference to Cheers, a remark about being a child of the '60s, a joke about "fairies."
The score is painless enough to listen to, but none too memorable. Songs of the power ballad variety seem ill suited to the milieu and characters. There's a pleasant production number set in Kensington Gardens that provides a bit of cheer. A number evoking nursery rhymes also offers momentary brightness. The closing number of the first act creates a striking tableau.
There are a few effective visuals: a roiling sea, passing clouds, a shower of gold flecks. Otherwise, I found the set design neither imaginative, nor particularly attractive.
I was there tonight and loved the show!! I found it to be very emotional and had tears streaming down my face by the end. I think the show will appeal to the masses which should bring commercial success. The songs were great (spotted Gary Barlow in attendance) and thought it was interesting they were taking CD pre-orders for the pop artist version released in April.
Laura Michelle Kelly fared best among the leads. Although I liked Matthew Morrison, I did have an issue with his accept. I had to look up Barrie at intermission since Morrison made him sound like he was Irish (not Scottish). I preferred Kelsey Grammer when he was not singing.
The choreography was terrific, especially highlighted by Melanie Moore, wow, Mia Michaels has to get a Tony nomination if not win.
No major technical glitches that I noticed though I thought the orchestra was too loud for the vocals. The dog also seemed to be a bit uncooperative.
This was only my second time going to a first preview, but the audience seemed filled with friends and family given the excessive enthusiasm.
All in a great evening at the theater and this was easily the best show of my weekend trip (also saw Constellations, The King and I, and On the 20th Century).
I also much preferred Neverland over Fun Home at the Public.
Most of the responses here are pretty consistent with my experience when I saw the show in Cambridge. It is, above all, an enjoyable evening at the theater. I don't think it aspires to be much more than that. I agree that the Barrie character, even though he is on stage for virtually the entire show, does not have many big moments. It's just not the kind of role that invites a lot of recognition. My favorite performer at A.R.T was Michael McGrath, in part because it is a showier role. It sounds like Grammer has taken up where McGrath left off. I don't expect this show to be at the top of the critics' lists, but I do expect it to be commercially successful.
According to my previously mentioned friend, Mary doesn't sing at all. She didn't care for Morrison, specifically stating he didn't seem to have any connection to Sylvia.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
Mezz! You do not want to be too close for this one.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
So Porthos is now played by a real dog. I wonder when this decision was makde. Looking at the video of the number BELIEVE in rehearsal, it looked like they still had an actor playing the dog. Sounds like this may have been a last minute decision.
Butters, go buy World of Warcraft, install it on your computer, and join the online sensation before we all murder you.
--Cartman: South Park
ATTENTION FANS: I will be played by James Barbour in the upcoming musical, "BroadwayWorld: The Musical."
Seeing this next Saturday and very excited. It's weird that the dog is played by a real dog now. In the press preview they did a couple of weeks ago, the part was clearly played by an actor. I wonder why the sudden change.
"Mr Sondheim, look: I made a hat, where there never was a hat, it's a Latin hat at that!"
"Fame, I *highly* doubt we'll see Neverland on TDF ever. Harvey Weinstein is not a TDF kind of guy."
TRUE, but Harvey Weinstein also seems like the kind of guy who wants butts in seats, rather then reports of anything less then a full house. I would say it's likely this'll pop up on TDF.
Those who saw the show in Cambridge know that the relative success of the Porthos characterization was largely due to the charm and the clown skills of Thayne Jasperson. Without those skills, it ends up being just a man playing a dog. Perhaps the replacement could not summon enough charm in the character to make it worthwhile. However, replacing him with a dog is also making a choice to eliminate a number of moments of physical humor and alter some of the choreography, so I am surprised they waited so long to make such a significant change.