Skip to main content
My Shows
News on your favorite shows, specials & more!
Home For You Chat My Shows Register/Login Games Grosses

Follies: Rewrites in London

New Post Search Report Abuse Rules

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.

#1

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 9:49am

In the other thread, many said that they did not like the London production of

Follies because they butchered and rewrote the show. Does anybody remember what

these changes were?
#2

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 10:09am

Two big ones I can cite, among several problems: "Live, Laugh, Love" was cut and replaced by a truly awful number. And they substituted "Ah, but Underneath!" for "Lucy and Jessie." Not a bad number, but it couldn't stop the show. The attempt to turn the show into Dark Lite failed. The finale was limp.

I do like "Country House," a number about the Ben-Phyllis childless marriage, but most people don't. And it actually works better in "Putting it Together."



"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling

Updated On: 2/21/15 at 10:09 AM

#3

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 10:16am

I read that it had an intermission, which seems to be something people don't like

when it happens in the show...

Also, I just found out they rewrote Loveland...was it for the better or worse?
#5

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 11:02am

The last revival had an intermission, but removed it for four previews (I saw one) and thought it helped to have it gone, as it did in the original (which I saw, and won't evoke because it makes people crazy when we all talk about how perfect it was). Apparently in London they moved the location. Someone can verify. I'll look at the CD.
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
#8

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 11:37am

Sidebar, but not off topic: Does anyone really prefer "Ah, But Underneath!" to "The Story of Lucy and Jessie"? I liked Vanessa Williams's take in the Sondheim compilation, but in the context of the show, "Lucy and Jessie" has a special 11 o'clock spot placement, and the way it stopped the original production added immensely to the overall shape of the evening. By the time we got to that point with Phyllis, the number exploded. I saw it twice, months apart, and both times (along with "Who's That Woman?" the number landed, big time.) It almost did in the revival (better in DC actually, but that's for another time) "Ah, but..." is just so restrained, it never lets loose, and one thing "Lucy and Jessie" did was kick the show up a notch. Michael Bennett's staging let Alexi Smith reveal something about ... Smith, performer, as well as about Phyllis, character. That seems irrelevant, but actually it was spot on. Alexis Smith turned the song into a personal triumph. It added to the show in mysterious ways. "Ah, but..." just does't.

"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling

Updated On: 2/21/15 at 11:37 AM

#9

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 11:50am

London Follies was a brilliant theatrical experience. The cast were superb and even the replacements were star turns eg Eartha Kitt for Dolores Gray, Millicent Martin for Diana Rigg. The evening had a more positive ending and overall the story wasn't as dark.

Ah But Underneath was a showstopper with Diana Rigg doing an amazing strip routine. I loved it but agree that Lucy and Jessie fits the bill better. Pity there's no show were the strip concept can be restaged for ABU.

The overall production was stunning and apart from the original production I don't personally believe FOLLIES has ever looked or sounded more glorious. The new LOVELAND number had a very Hollywood Zeigfield feel to it and the stage transformation was brilliant. I could GOn more about this but would get boring!

This production still remains in my top ten theatre experiences.
"Your eyes..... they shine like the pants on my blue serge suit"
#10

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 11:55am

Ah, But Underneath is very much so written for performers who can't do the dancing Lucy and Jessie requires, so at least there's that. I agree that the last quarter of the show gets a big boost from having that sizzling number but I also think Ah, But Underneath is an eerier, sadder song that better underlines the exact kind of hell Phyllis finds herself trapped in. It creeps me out, which I really like.

edit: I also think Lucy and Jessie is kind of confusing, especially if it's the first time you're hearing it. The dancing, though, was phenomenal, and I love the rhumba beat.

Updated On: 2/21/15 at 11:55 AM

#11

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 4:11pm

From what I understand, the London production from the late 1980's was James Goldman's attempt to heavily revise the book into a more lighter affair by taking a good chunk of the middle-aged drama and dark intrigue from the show. Of course I don't like it because it takes away the mystery and power that the 71 book had but I will say that the production looked stunning with a classic sense of magnificence thanks to the late Maria Bjornson whose designs for LOVELAND looked something like the golden era of MGM musicals.

But I prefer the 1971 book even IF the issues are there in glaringly bright Times Square signs which I'll bet that PalJoey knows much more than I do.
#14

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 4:36pm

Sondheim has said (and I've posted this before) that he used to stand at the back of the Winter Garden and say, "I love this show--why does everybody hate it?"

And then came the London production and he would stand in the back of the theater and say, "I hate this production--why does everybody love it?"
#15

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 4:40pm

^That's very funny!


I also found footage of Julia McKenzie's live performance of "Losing My Mind"...it seems many find she was the best thing about the production.

I would love a photo of Loveland, though. It sounds very extravagant! I would love to see how it compares to the original design...
#17

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 5:05pm

Thank you so much! Though the set isn't as spectacular and beautiful as the original, it still looks really nice (according to the quality of the video).

I found the dialogue at the beginning interesting, especially because they are actually talking *with* the ghosts...
#18

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 5:15pm

I saw the London show 5 times- still one of the best musicals to grace the London stage, with a cast nigh on perfection.

Ah But Underneath worked well in performance because the strip routine was very well handled and the final disappearance of Phyllis only to re-appear at the pros paid off and helped to emphasize the nature of her facade.

Overall, though, I can see how the text became more reassuring: the characters were on a journey to self-awareness and possibilities rather than self-destruction and defeat.
#19

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 5:43pm

Listening to my iPod on shuffle the other day in the car, "Who's That Woman" came on, and I started thinking about the Follies movie people have been talking about for years. The idea came to me that rather than try to translate the show as it exists into cinematic terms, it might be an interesting alternate plan to create something parallel, not equivalent, and use the music and the characters and the time-bending elements to finally craft the murder mystery Sondheim had originally intended.
#20

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 5:51pm

I've never bought what Ah But Underneath is supposed to be saying about Phyllis. I think Lucy and Jessie (actually, I prefer Uptown, Downton, but it's the same side of the coin as Lucy and Jessie) makes sense for Phyllis in a way that Ah But Underneath does not.

The 1987 London script was pretty much an entire rewrite of the 1971 script. Almost every line has been reshaped, rewritten, or reassigned.
#21

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 6:13pm

All that has to be said on this subject is said extremely well in the thread that NoName3 links.

It is possibly my favourite thread on this board, and the quality of debate and analysis in there is why I'm still here.
#22

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 6:14pm



actually, I prefer Uptown, Downton

Would that be the version sung by Cora or Lady Mary?

#24

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 6:40pm

Would that be the version sung by Cora or Lady Mary?

Heh
#25

Follies: Rewrites in London

Posted: 2/21/15 at 6:53pm

"God, that saran-wrap set."

^ Yeah, that's what I remember disliking the most too. The highly vaunted design by Bjornson was sort of a huge disappointment to me, chiefly for those giant pieces of rigid plastic, molded to look like swags of clear visquine to dress all the scaffolding. (Theater under renovation, don't cha see.) I have vague memories of the plastic all rising to reveal the first Loveland look.

And Loveland in general looked expensive and machine-heavy-- a giant revolving staircase of steps that resembled piano keys that lit up -- but not at all nostalgic or dreamily evocative as the Aronson designs had been. Wasn't there some bit where we rose from the ground floor to the top of a skyscraper for one song (could that have been part of "You're Gonna Love Tomorrow"?) Memories are cloudy here, which tells you how uninspired I found the look-- sets I saw 45 years ago that I loved I still remember every inch of today.

Updated On: 2/21/15 at 06:53 PM

← Back to Message Board

BroadwayWorld TV

View all Videos

Ticket Central
Ticket Central
Ticket Central
Hot Show
Tickets From $59
Hot Show
Tickets From $71
Hot Show
Tickets From $71
Hot Show
Tickets From $95
More Hot Shows Discounts
Recommended For You