FOLLIES performed with no intermission tonight!

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:04am

http://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat/d.php?id=2004004

holy crap....

I wonder if they'll keep it this way?
Updated On: 8/24/11 at 01:04 AM

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:08am

I've seen it done both ways and IMO there is no appropriate place to take an intermission break. Better to do without one.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:10am

Interesting. In general I prefer shows to have an intermission, but it's nice to know that they're trying it as a one act again and actually taking advantage of the preview performances.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:10am

Where's a like button when you need it?

I'm so pleased to see a show using its preview period to actually fix problems and try new things. Taking an intermission after "Too Many Mornings" has always annoyed me. Hope it stays this way.

Updated On: 8/24/11 at 01:10 AM

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:10am

Woah definitely not expecting that, but after reading what the folks on ATC had to say, it does sound like a good thing. Two hours and 15 minutes is a long time for no intermission, but it sounds like it works for this show.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:16am

I think the steady build to Loveland (without a break) DOES work for this show.

But I also think they never wrote viable Act I ending. Making an intermission work would require rethinking the show.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:17am

Does anyone know how it plays without the intermission? I only have the Roundabout script. Do they they just skip the entr'acte and pick up with the dialogue between Sally and Ben immediately following the song?

[ljay889]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 1:23am

Yes, after the applause, it goes right into Ben's line - "Sally, I want you."

[PetitPoisson]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 2:01am

I was there tonight, and having also seen the D.C. production, I have to say that it works much better without the intermission. There were a lot of blue-hairs kvetching about it, but the intermission really just messes with the flow of the show.

[chewy5000]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 4:13am

Two hours and 15 minutes is a long time for no intermission

You obviously never saw Avatar.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 7:42am

...or one of the Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings movies.

Good for them! The intermission kills the motor that makes Follies unique: the unrelenting movement toward the boiling point when it explodes into Loveland.

Updated On: 8/24/11 at 07:42 AM

[binau]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 7:54am

I heard an argument and although I am not completely convinced I still think it's worth mentioning: the thought is that sitting in a theatre for 2 hours or whatever is more tiring than a cinema because you have to pay more attention than in the cinema.

I wouldn't have thought just attention (if at all) but also the seats could be smaller and less comfortable in theatres, and maybe there is a certain fatigue element of having to sit further away and try and view the action from a distance or whatever.

Or maybe we've just been socialised this way.

I don't know, I do find it interesting that people can't seem to sit as comfortably for as long in theatres compared to cinemas...including myself.

Will be so interesting to see the development of this change though...it must have been a long time ago when FOLLIES was last performed without an intermission.

Updated On: 8/24/11 at 07:54 AM

[aasjb4ever]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 8:33am

LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE THIS! I can't wait to see it next month EVEN MORE!

[Tigger]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 8:58am

I had never seen the show until last week at a preview and though I absolutely adored it, I was puzzled at the choice of interrupting it's flow right after Too Many Mornings with an intermission. The moment that we go into Loveland is still a "coup de theatre" however I would imagine it would be twice as potent had the show run at that point without an intermission.

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 8:59am

I'm going to consider this a birthday present to myself.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 9:28am

Audiences will rise to the occasion if you set the perimeters.

Two hours and 15 minutes isn't that long to sit if you're mentally prepared for it (i.e. if audiences know going in the show is performed with out an intermission).

I hope they keep the change - without the intermission serves the art better.

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 9:33am

I've never really understood the whole "there needs to be an intermission in the theatre" mindset. The current #1 movie in America--THE HELP--is 2:20 and people don't seem to be having any trouble sitting through that.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 9:45am

I think audiences are just conditioned by the tradition of intermission. And of course some like to go get their drinks and candy so they can make a lot of noise in the theatre during the second act.

But if you were to poll those same people, I think they'd probably tell you they'd rather get home earlier than take the 15 minutes to stand around.

If its listed on telecharge and at the box office and on a sign going into the theatre - people will be fine.

[Paul W. Thompson]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 9:54am

A CHORUS LINE was two hours and ten minutes, and it and the audience did just fine....

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 9:56am

How long was Drowsy Chaperone? That was a recent show on Broadway with no intermission.

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 9:59am

About 1:45.

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 10:06am

"About 1:45."

So pee first and ask questions later.

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 10:09am

Precisely.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 10:12am

Seeing FOLLIES again tonight and I am so thrilled to hear that it is now intermissionless!

[nealb1]

Posted: 8/24/11 at 10:18am

Enjoy the show tonight, WithoutATrace!