GREY GARDENS LONDON — Page 2

I don't believe London will fare any better than it did in NY. Though the show and it's style are very "London", the story and context could only be appreciated by an American. The Kennedys were American royalty. That won't translate in London.

---

It's ashame it won't go over to London! I agree with AnnaK<3LMIP that the public of London would appreciate the artistic end of the show, however it maybe harder for them to understand some of the context.

I was in the city today to see a show ad a bus went by with the GG ad on it.

The show will be performed in London, across the U.S.
and around the world. The Bway producers are no longer
involved and word is that many other theatres & presenters
are angling to snare it.

This just did not do the trick.....

---

Updated On: 8/23/07 at 11:44 AM

"Also, GREY GARDENS isn't about the Kennedys nor Jackie Onassis, which upset quite the many audience members who thought the show was about them. I know a few people who are among these clueless ones.

GREY GARDENS is strictly about Big and Little Edie. Nothing more; nothing less. IF you were fortunate enough to see the documentary, then their story became even more interesting. If you never did, the show is simply about the relationship of a mother and daughter. That's it. It has NOTHING to do with the history of the Kennedys nor the life of Jackie O.

The fact that the GREY GARDENS documentary is pretty much just known thru the gay community and a few selected 'art world' aficionados speaks for itself as the show had a limited demographic. The rest was simply composed of theatre followers who went due to the word-of-mouth. My mom was interested in the show since she remembered the news/media coverage of the Beales during the early 70's and of course the documentary. I'm sure a short selected few were like her."


I agree with BrodyFosse, here. And I don't need a "reliable source" to tell me what any show's about, either. I saw it with my own eyes, and loved it dearly.

But it's not about the Kennedys, in the sense that you're going to see a biographical piece about Jackie O. She's in it as a supporting and peripheral character to the main goings-on. And I know (average) audience members who were disappointed in that, as well. It has to do with preconception.

Audiences today like to know what they're going to see before they see it. Particularly when the story has "real people" in it. Pretty pathetic actually, but true. There's too much money at stake to buy a ticket to a Broadway show, without an "escrow" pre-approval first. And if the average folks sit in their seats and don't get exactly what they expected, they're not thrilled, even if it's a good show.

They would have done better to make it fictional, because then there would be very little preconception going in (other than "I heard it was good").

I don't think it's a "New York thing" either. I had never seen the documentary before I heard about the musical. None of my friends (some in NY and some not) knew anything about it either. The ones (like me) who saw the doc first, got more out of the musical. The ones who didn't thought it was good, fascinating... and sadly forgettable.

Unfortunately, as much as we would like to think the musical stands on its own two legs without knowing the doc, it doesn't. If people aren't fully aware of the lines, scenes and situations from Act II (the doc), then the set-up of Act I becomes tedious and ordinary... instead of a fascinating, compelling prelude to the older Edies, with glimpses of what they will become. It's a wonderful study of human nature and life... but most bystanders who didn't do their homework aren't going to be as impacted by it.

I'm very glad and grateful that I was one of the ones deeply impacted by it.

---

Updated On: 8/23/07 at 12:53 PM

I have to agree that if one has seen the original documentary, the musical is much more meaningful. When I first heard that they were doing this, I thought "what a bad idea ! " The script and the music, however were unreal, but they did stretch the truth a bit, and maybe could have done a bit more of the same for "artistic sake". I have no idea what direction the movie will go. Al Maysles, the film maker said to me "I just hope they get it right"
MyGreyGardens

I think we know the same source uncageg.

My acquaintance had dinner with a key cast member for another project at about that time and was told that the London story was a NY Post plant, on the same order as the Reidel slam on the Gondas.

It was all PR.

Updated On: 8/23/07 at 03:52 PM

Are you saying the slam on the Gondas was PR? because Christine has since elaborated on this in a radio interview. (a link was posted here last week if you search) She was very clear and went on at length blaming the closing on the inexperience of the producers.

---

no, uncag--none of my comments are aimed at you.

london is a real possibility. it's not merely wishful thinking or a PR plant. is it possible it doesn't happen--of course.

---

On the website, it says "OPENING NEXT SEASON IN LONDON".

---

I was just letting everyone know.

And I would call that a pretty substantial piece of evidence... reason for hope.

---

Well, I would say it is the best evidence we've got at this point.

---