Flying Over Sunset - Previews Thread — Page 17

Bsmusicd said: "The show I would compare it to is, "War Paint." Lovely score, excellent performances, beautiful design. In both shows the authors were not fully successful at finding conflict and drama between their (real-life) subjects. I'd take a lovingly-crafted show with some book issues over the lastest jukebox musical any day of the week, however."

I disagree. War Paint at least had songs. Like actual musical theater songs. It's really hard for me to describe the music in this. It feels almost random? Like it was written 5 minutes ago. The songs seem to just kinda happen and they just kinda flop around on the stage until they end. They add practically nothing to the show or the characters. They almost seem to exist simply because they've billed this as a musical and must fulfill that obligation to the audience. The title song is a *great* song. It's beautiful and Carmen's voice is DIVINE.

The first act really didn't work for me. The show doesn't really have an opening number (although, like I said, the echoing shoes are really interesting) and the dialogue is unfortunately just as unremarkable as the score. It's surprisingly unfunny and I really feel like the order in which this show plays out is all wrong. I think the show gives us too much information up front, which really hurts the second act. There aren't really any revelations because we're told pretty much everything about these people right from the start.

I was extremely disappointed in the show by intermission as I really felt like the show was, if this makes sense, barely even written. The show does wake up briefly in the second act as the four characters meet poolside to take a trip together. It became abundantly clear to me that this is where the show should really start. All the information given in the first act should really be given in the second. Even better, this is begging to be a brisk 90 minute one act musical where the four of them trip together and divulge their deepest secrets to each other.

Basically I would cut the whole first act and distribute some of that material into the second.

I think the reviewers will hold more weight with their criticisms than a few people on this chat board. I doubt Lapine is reading our comments and he could probably care less what we are writing on this chat board. I think the same could be said for most playwrights and actors.


It is hard to put your blood, sweat and time into a project and then have it poorly received. But with new works, the play is the thing. And if the book is weak, every other element suffers. If the show had been a half hour shorter I think many comments would have been less visceral.


It does seem that no matter what has been written in this thread, there has been a consistent respect and affection for the lead actors. All 3 are well liked in the Broadway community.

Georgeanddot2 said: “Basically I would cut the whole first act and distribute some of that material into the second."

Absolutely agree. You don’t get to see these characters struggling with their issues before trying the drug — it basically begins with them each tripping. Everything brought up in Act 1 was just rehashed in Act 2 and it feels the same because they’re tripping both times. They don’t really grow. Also in Act 1 there’s so much just TALKING and not nearly enough singing. I swear that scene with Tony Yazbeck in the therapists office is 15 minutes of no singing and repeating same things again and again. I was going crazy.

Also re: no criticism. Just because I’m not a critic doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to have a strong opinion. I hold Broadway to a high standard. Shouldn’t we all? These tickets are so damn expensive.

I am not ashamed to say I have a foot fetish and seeing Tony barefoot also knowing how great of a dancer he is woke me up. I just can’t help myself wondering what he thinks dancing around as a penis head. Long live lifecafe.com!

raddersons said: "Georgeanddot2 said: “Basically I would cut the whole first act and distribute some of that material into the second."

Absolutely agree. You don’t get to see these characters struggling with their issues before trying the drug — it basically begins with them each tripping. Everything brought up in Act 1 was just rehashed in Act 2 and it feels the same because they’re tripping both times. They don’t really grow. Also in Act 1 there’s so much just TALKING and not nearly enough singing. I swear that scene with Tony Yazbeck in the therapists office is 15 minutes of no singing and repeating same things again and again. I was going crazy.

Also re: no criticism. Just because I’m not a critic doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to have a strong opinion. I hold Broadway to a high standard. Shouldn’t we all? These tickets are so damn expensive."

I said the same thing to someone as far as not getting to know the characters before they start tripping. Also their trips in act one are separate which could have been more exciting with a back and forth structure.

Seems like they are not cutting which is too bad.

Tony in the therapist office was a little claustrophobic. The staging was a little stale. When the dance started I wanted the desk to move out of the scene and then having the sense of a vaudevillian stage that took up the entire downstage space.

I saw this afternoon’s matinee through LincTix and boy am I thankful I didn’t pay anything more than that.

I found the show to be such a painful slog that lacked any sort of meaningful plot and I agree with the previous posters who asked why should I care about these characters all. Other than having famous names, there’s not much to care about other than pop-ups and throwaway lines of past traumas. There were also quite a few moments that made me audibly question what the hell was happening.

I nearly fell asleep during the first act because it just…dragged…on, that when we got to intermission, I was thankful. The other LincTix member who sat next to me felt the exact same way - though, in his words, “Life’s too short. I’m outta here. Enjoy Act II.” (I really didn’t)

Don't get me wrong, the cast sings and dances beautifully and the design is sometimes nice, but I couldn’t recommend sitting through this whole show as you slowly want to rip your hair out looking for a sensical plot

Saw it tonight. Lapine has been both writer and director on several successful projects, but this felt to me like something that needed a strong director to demand that the writer focus it up and cut it down. The first act was an hour and ten but felt twice as long.


Some nice moments, stage pictures, and melodies here and there and a solid cast, but a misfire.

I saw this today (last show of my trip!), and was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. While there is definitely some work to be done, there are plenty of really great things happening on that stage. The performances are great, especially Carmen Cusack who gets to sing the two best songs in the score - the title number and "How?'. The score is very lullaby-esque for the most part - it has a wistful, dreamy, and floating sound and feel that works well. The design elements are STUNNING. The vast stage of the Beaumont is bathed in gorgeous lighting and projections, and the set has some mammoth pieces that are just beautiful.

While I really enjoyed this, there is no question that the second act needs to be trimmed down. I think they could easily achieve this by cutting the godawful Sophia Loren sequence and the penis rocket ship song. That whole segment just took me out of the moment, and went on way too long.

I was sitting in row E of the 500s (LincTix), and the view was perfect. I always think it is exciting to have a completely new and original musical on Broadway. While Flying Over Sunset does need some tightening, I still found so many things to enjoy, and I am so happy I saw it.

Hairspray0901 said: "Caught the matinee today (LincTix). I found it to be extremely boring and long - even noticed at least 3 people who had fallen asleep.


Tony had a great tap number in the first act; that was a nice treat, and the three leads are really giving great performances but unfortunately, it wasn’t enough.

I believe I spotted Bartlett Sher in the audience, which was a nice surprise. Honestly thought he was directing as it’s at Lincoln Center but I learned that was not the case! Lol."

Bart is directing the show downstairs at the Newhouse.

I had really been looking forward to the promise of this show and am rethinking it. I have one, maybe two spots left for a short NYE/NYC trip.

For those who have called it boring--and there are quite a few--how would you compare its boringness quotient to other shows that some people have found boring but others loved?

For example, I absolutely loved The Band's Visit and The Light in the Piazza, while some of my friends found them totally soporific.

Is it more of a "not my cup of tea" boring because you prefer something splashier? Or is it just a "nothing can make me care about this show no matter how much I want to" kind of dull?

It's interesting to me that many seem to think the show has no point. I thought the plot was interesting, the characters had clear arcs and journeys, and the themes of love and loss were well explored and defined. I thought this show had way more of a point and payoff than The Band's Visit. Just my two cents!