"Follies" Questions

[djb]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 7:24pm

Okay, so I have two quick questions about Sondheim and Goldman's "Follies":

1) Did Sally try and kill herself at the party? If so, how?

2) Is it only one act? Or if it is two, where is the act break?

[commasplice]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 7:27pm

2) The original Broadway production was one act, but some productions that split it (including the OLC, 2001 revival, and recent Encores! production) put the act break after "Too Many Mornings."

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 7:28pm

No actual suicide attempt in any of the script versions.

Played in various stages out of town (one act, two acts, different placement of the acts after too many morninggs and after Who's That Woman) but for Broadway was all one act. The London revision and I believe current script cut the show right after Two Many Mornings and go into Intermission

[C is for Company]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 7:50pm

Sally remarks about how she should have died years ago, "that first time" I believe she even says. For some odd reason, it doesn't seem to appear anywhere after the original run in 1971.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 7:51pm

Yeah cuz the script has substantially changed for all versions (not just the London production)--shame as I think the current published libretto (based on the 2001 revival) is vastly inferior. But I know Goldman's widow is very anal about not allowing the others to be performed

[C is for Company]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 7:54pm

I still don't quite understand all the butchering of the revised scripts. Barely any two are the same, in fact I doubt any are identical versions. The original still had the most depth to the characters, interesting developments, classic lines, and ultimately a tighter, less dull book. Real shame, the show deserves better than the libretto lends it these days, but at least the music is intact and the show still shines.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:08pm

Part of it may be to play up the parts audiences loved (ie the current script has exit lines for most of the other showgirls after the whole Loveland breakdown--the original didn't even show them) but I agree. What i miss most was how much more haunting and ghostlike th ememory charactrs were in the original. I guess Goldman just wanted to keep writing it till it worked (then again I *almost* as strongly hate the much less complained about Company changes so...)

E

[jv92]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:09pm

I HATE the revised script. The original was perfect in my opinion. I was quite pleased to see some bits restored for the Encores! production, though there was still enough from the revised version. (Damn!)

[C is for Company]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:12pm

So many unnecessary cuts were made that there just didn't seem a point to making changes to. Like why cut one or two lines from someone's dialogue? Who chooses what specifically to cut? I know Goldman's wife is controlling over it or something like that, but who chooses precisely what to drop??

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:12pm

It's funny/sad how many people actually don't realize the current script IS still very revised--I think many casual fans know the London script was very different and then assumed it went back to the original script

[C is for Company]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:17pm

London was practically made a seperate show. I barely consider it Follies with all the changes in the numbers, dialogue, etc. I know there were certain constraints but honestly, why wasn't a line drawn somewhere to at least keep the show intact?

The OBC is still the definitive Follies to me, costumes, sets, libretto, all of it. The most satisfying and powerful production I think will ever be known of the show is the OBC. By now, people are settling on the butchered versions, but then again, how else would people see Follies anymore with how much is required to take on the finances and appeal so I should just stop and be grateful at least.

[djb]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:19pm

Thanks to everyone for responding to my comments, and also for beginning this discussion...

The resons I asked the questions were because I have always loved the music from "Follies" but did not really know the story, so I read the libretto of the originial Broadway production, and I thought it was incredible... I think people should just put the scissors and the white-out away and let musicals stay as they were (well, for good shows at least.)

I know so many people loved it, but that is the reason that I had a huge problem with Mendes' "Cabaret." Like Hal Prince, I thought he was ruining what was, to so many people, "Cabaret"...
Updated On: 6/1/07 at 08:19 PM

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:22pm

Did Prince say that about Cabaret?

The London Follies doesn't bug me--but I do consider it a very different beast from the original. I do think out of the major revivals it was the best staged--I have the souvenir program and Maria Bjornson's sets (while never eclipsing' Aronson's) and transformations are perfect, haunting and dead on, Avian's choreography looked great (including recreating Woman), I think the performances are good to great and it has a decadent, tragic oppulence missing in spades from the Broadway revival (and to a lesser extent the Papermill production)

[jv92]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:22pm

I liked Mendes' Cabaret. Was it as good as Hal's? Certainly not. But it was certainly interesting. To me the definative production will always be Hal Prince's though.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:30pm

What version of Hal's did you see jv?!

From the 87 revival (which did update and change a few elements including the sexuality) I think the directing is often stunning. but it is a schizo show as Hal himself admits--Mendes/Marshall's version (which is far better IMHo to the original London Mendes version as televised anyway) is much more organic between "show musical/concept musical"--with Prince you have some brilliant flashy bits (Ron Fields' choreography for Telephone Song needs ot be seen to be believed) but I don't think it holds up the same way his 70s directing does--it's much more of its time. (which doesn't take ANYTHING way from its importance)

E

[jv92]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 8:46pm

The '87 version. I missed the original, I was still a little too young. It was apparantly very similar to the '66 version. Updated On: 6/1/07 at 08:46 PM

[ahmelie]

Posted: 6/1/07 at 10:37pm

I tried to follow the soundboard recording of Follies with all the dialogue with the libretto.

It was all over the place and I just gave up. I prefer the original but the current published libretto gives me chills.

God, I love this show.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 12:04am

Ahmelie I really recommend tracking down the original publichsed libretto--I live in a small city and both our public library and college library have copies so it shouldn't be too hard. The stage directions alone are priceless

E

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 12:14am

Eric, did Phyllis and Ben end up together at the end of the original script?
The script from the Encores! version had Ben screaming out Phyllis' name (Victor Garber didn't fail to give me chills during the scream the two times I saw him), then Phyllis came up to him--though Sally tried to get there first--and helped him get up, they had a conversation about staying together (I don't remember the exact words but by the end Phyllis says "hope doesn't grow on trees, we make our own" and her final line is "you bet your ass!" before they walk out).

Updated On: 6/2/07 at 12:14 AM

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 12:17am

You mean ENCORE version right? (I'm not trying to pick on you--as I have worse typos than anyone, just trying to clarrify)

Yeah they end up together at the end. Actually despite Ben's breakdown I think you have much more hope for him and Phyllis, Buddy and especially Sally less so. But he does call out to her and she comes to him (ben and P)

I'm PRETTY sure the YoU bet Your Ass is at the end too. It is just those four tho with the mirror images watching them as they walk off--and staying behind (their memories finally, sort of, dealt with).

Have you read Chapin's book?

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 12:24am

Oops, thanks for correcting me, Eric. I just edited :)
I haven't read Chapin's book yet. I know, I know, I'm a shameful FOLLIES fan. Since I'm an English major, it has become hard to find the time for leisure reading (or the will). I'll get my hands on it though.
At Encores! they finished with the young ones doing the "Hi. Girls. Ben. Sally" exchange, then lights off. It was pretty powerful to me. I didn't feel much hope for Sally and Buddy, I thought it was a bit of a cop-out that Buddy just told Sally they'd go out on the town after all they went through during that night. Throughout the evening I felt Phyllis still loved Ben despite herself (if you listen to Donna Murphy's painful "Could I Leave You?" this is particularly clear) but it was always kind of obvious that Sally was never in love with Buddy.

[Tom148502]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 12:26am

Eric, it's ENCORES! Trust me.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 12:31am

I was an English major too and that was part of my excuse--I actually literally only read Chapin's book 1 week ago--Amazon marketplace had a perfect new copy of it for 2 bucks US (plus way too much shipping but considering it was 45 canadian when it came out...) so I felt I had to dive in finally. For some reason I thought I wouldn't liek it that much--I knew most of the anecdotes (I thought) I'd read everything on it and Sondheim I could, and from interviews Ted seemed a bit arrogant about his experiences which I found offputting.

i was completely wrong--it's the best book on theatre I think I've read *ever*--I rea all three hundred pages in one long night and afterwards lent it to my mom (who I've been pushing Sondheim on since I was a teen) and she emailed me back sayin git was "outstanding". Seriously--do yourself a favour--you can get copies of it VERY cheap now, used and even new.

I believe the young ones dialogue bit is the end of the original. I don't have the script here where I live so can't check--the ending still feels very devestating to Sally who seems shellshocked and devestated with the light of the sun seeping thru the empty wall of the theatre--that's the main impression.
I agree with your assessment of Phyllis and Ben.

I still think the London producion is underated despite it not really being the same Follies--if people are interested I can try posting some of the pictures from the program (the transformation into Loveland where Maria Bjornson's white plastic coverup to the scaffolding suddenly seems incandescent and magical is spectacular looking). Of course there's a connection since Prince reused aspects of his Loveland transformation for the Phantom of the Opera opening--which Maria designed.

E

[C is for Company]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 1:34am

That ending line with Phyllis and the younger ones at different ends of the stage(as can be seen in a picture towards the end of the "Everything Was Possible," washed out and positively chilling) and then doing the "Hi-girls-Ben-Sally" ending was indeed in the original production. Just THINKING about that moment and how well it can be pulled off make me tear. Those absolutely heartbreaking, chilling, historic pieces of dialogue and reflecting on the night, the 30 years leading up to it, etc. Can't take it, definitely one of the only shows I can think of to make me that emotional.

Updated On: 6/2/07 at 01:34 AM

[Kringas]

Posted: 6/2/07 at 4:12am

What's so weird is that I was going to bump an older Follies thread tonight to talk about something directly related to the revised ending. I wish I'd been around earlier when this one was jumping.

Eric and C is for Company have already touched on some of what I wanted to say, but I still wanted to add my two cents.

What drives me bonkers is that the conventional wisdom is that book was altered to make the story less "bleak" or whatever pejorative word that might fit. I have always maintained that the revised ending is way more depressing than the original, because there's very little hope for any of them, where in the original you really feel that Phyllis and Ben are not only going to survive, but they may actually be able to move forward and actually find some sort of happiness together.

That last scene is shred to bits. Removing those lines of Sally's ("I should have died that first time. I should have been dead all those years.") sucks so much out of not only the end, but of the entire show. I've always thought "that first time" she tried to kill herself was when she found out Phyllis and Ben were married and then tried again numerous times over the next thirty years. The Sally in the original script is so loosely wrapped that it seems at any moment she could completely become untethered. The Sally of the revised script just seems to be having a particularly tough midlife crisis.

Another grievous omission in that scene is an exchange between Phyllis and Ben thatmimplies their relationship is in very different places, depending on which version you have.

The way it goes now is:

Ben: I've always been afraid of you. You see straight through me. I've always thought, it can't be possible. It isn't me she loves.

Phyllis: Come on, let's get our coats.

The original exchange is -


Ben: I've always been afraid of you. You see straight through movie. I've always thought, it can't be possible. It isn't me she loves.


Phyllis: Well, think again!

Right there, Phyllis is saying that even after thirty years, she still loves Ben Stone and his bag of bullSH*T. I hate that she doesn't say that to him in the revised version. The revised version makes the ending for the Stone more bleak while the one for the Plummers winds up less bleak and it just makes it end in a lukewarm mess.

And - because I will complain about this each and every time it comes up - the end of the show also suffers by bringing the party guests back.

And the version done in England last fall (with Claire Moore) used the original script, which I just found out tonight. Only a piano and the theatre was teeny tiny, but they used projections for some of the ghost sequences.