GYPSY Previews- Page 13

[Jvj24605]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 12:02am

seeseveryshow2 said: "So, are they using a real lamb or a stuffed animal?"

Stuffed lamb.

[kurtal]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 12:14am

Real Chowsy.  Fake lamb.

[kurtal]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 12:27am

I was at tonight's preview.  Overture started at 8:06 (while the house lights were still up and people were still being seated).  Final bows at 10:59.  Intermission was about 25 minutes.  

Most of my takes have already been shared in previous posts, so I'll keep it briefish...

The Good: Lesli Margherita, Jordan Tyson, Audra's Acting (especially in Everything's Coming Up Roses, which was just devastating), Baby June and Baby Louise (charming as all get out)

The Bad: All I Need is the Girl (I know Kevin Csolak is a super talented dancer, but this choreography was AWFUL...), the strip montage, the lighting

The Some People Will Like It and Others Won't: Audra's voice (I think it worked about 70% of the time)

The I Don't Know How I Feel But I'm Glad I'm Seeing It Again in Six Weeks: Danny Burstein (his Herbie was just...there...for most of the show), Joy Woods (she's so damn talented, but I just wasn't into her Louise until the veeeeery end...to me, the success of a Louise rests on Together Wherever We Go.  You have to be able to see her motivation to stick with Rose at this point.  And I didn't buy it tonight), Rose's Turn (acting: a+, vocal fit: b-, synchronicity with orchestra: d-)

I still think this is a must-see.  You might not like it.  But you shouldn't miss it.

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 12:27 AM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 12:38am

Is there entirety of “Rose’s Turn” still being done on the passerelle?

[StylishCynic]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 12:46am

Jordan Catalano said: "Is there entirety of “Rose’s Turn” still being done on the passerelle?"

Friday night, yes. Unsure about today  

Rose begins crossing the passerelle around “you either have it —or, you’ve had it!” (I believe) and is center-passerelle by “momma’s gonna show it to ya” where she stood for the remainder of the number. 

[Ensemble1732230750]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 1:06am

I was there tonight as well and loved it. The modulations in “Everything’s Coming Up Roses” and “Rose’s Turn” were so effective and allowed her to wail and the end the way the belters before her could - Audra’s voice just doesn’t wail on a b-natural! It took me a moment during “Some People” to adjust and then I bought in completely. Her embodiment of the role is total and devastating. 
 

Agree with the many takes about the strip sequence - it is not landing. The garden of eden section as the climax feels like a huge mistake, as does rushing through the other moments before it in order to get to it. Not that anyone is asking me but if they did, I would strongly urge to cut that section and restage the sections before, allowing Woods more time with all of that great text. 
 

Finally, is nobody talking about how awful the curtain call is?! Surely they will restage this?!

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 1:26am

Ensemble1732230750 said: "Finally, is nobody talking about how awful the curtain call is?! Surely they will restage this?!"

It was discussed after the first preview. I’m sure it is on a work list but not a #1 priority. 

[Skip23]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 3:49am

Another revival with a miscast lead.
 

Audra’s voice is just wrong for the role. And her take on the part just doesnt reach the level of obsession needed for this character.  and Joy is just mediocre.  And not at all the star required to be Gypsy. 
 

Lesli is remarkable. I would go back just to see her again. 
 

Sure things will get tighter and better.  But theres a lot to work on. 
 

The cool thing about the Robbins choreography was that it it still felt like it was in the period. This choreography is a newer style and edgy.  That Garden of Eden number looks like something out of So you think you can dance. and why is Gypsy dancing that number?  Her whole gimmick was “less is more”.  
 

So many missteps. 
 


 




 

 

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 03:49 AM

[TheOnlyOne2]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 7:29am

BewareTheUndertoad said: " the Tribute to the Garden of Eden was awful. But her physical transformation both design and acting wise was handled very well, with some subtle commentary on the roles of black women in the era (although I think it's reaching to bring up the mysogynoir topic-NOT SAYING it's not relevant but there's no space for it in the material). She looks STUNNING post transformation.

Umm bffr. I'm not sure what possessed you to say that I was reaching by bringing up misogynoir. Unless you're a black woman, I don't want to hear you saying when you think misogynoir discussion is appropriate. We're talking about a white passing woman's experiences compared to woman that has darker skin. Saying there's no space for it in a production about two black women who experience life differently based on proximity to whiteness is absurd. If you followed what I said, I point out the stark difference of the way in which June can achieve success as opposed to Louise. June's phenotypical traits allows her the privilege of being viewed as harmless and chaste. She doesn't have the same expectation to lead with her sexuality. The further away from whiteness you are in our society, the more you're expected to sexualize yourself. In this production, watching Louise be discarded, and only given the chance to find success through men leering at her while she strips should be extremely upsetting. Her rolling around, and being overtly sexual in the Garden of Eden, is exactly the representation of misogynoir. She's the snake that represents sin and seduction. That's what they expect us to be. 

The moment Louise takes the job to perform in a burlesque house is so key, especially in this production. This is the moment when Louise accepts the fact that this is her fate as a dark skin black woman and Rose desperately wants to avoid speaking it out loud because it's what she experienced, but without any sort of success. 

With all that said, what I really think there isn't space for is the ending of the show. Generational trauma that's heavily shaped by abuse doesn't play out that way without serious intervention. The time frame of the show makes zero sense for the ending. This isn't a happy story, especially not this production. 

🗣 Also lemme make this clear for the people complaining about Audra in this role. If you feel hit by this then you're the problem. Do not go into this production if you want to see a white woman belt her way through book and lyrics written in a time when segregation was in full swing. (Also learn what belting is. Yall think Patti is out her belting everything down, but even she corrects people and tells them its always a mixed voice.) In the "mixed voice", it can resemble full belting because of resonance. Classical training demands that you understand resonance. Remember, in an opera house you're goal is to sing over a large orchestra without mics. Audra's vocal style allows more emotions to be explored and constant belting doesn't lend itself to that. Hearing Audra sing this score is magical. To be frank, they should be leaning more her style instead of this strange negotiation of the shows typical presentation. One of the issues that could take a while is the relationship between Audra and the orchestra. The conductor was not following her at all, and if that continues she will never feel comfortable with the music. It's like deciding to stop vamping before the artist is ready to start a song. 

[OhHiii]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 7:44am

Jesus Christ here we go. No one is feeling “hit” by the production. Whatsoever. We’re providing critiques. Your inability to understand that art is subjective and people will respond to it differently is embarrassing, frankly. And you’re hurling accusations with no basis in fact. Step away from the keyboard and get some coffee. It’s too early for this nonsense to already be starting.

 

[Play Esq.]

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

I don’t even know how to be “hit by this”….is there a pill to take if you are 🤔

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 8:50am

TheOnlyOne2 said: "
🗣 Also lemme make this clear for the people complaining about Audra in this role. If you feel hit by this then you're the problem. Do not go into this production if you want to see a white woman belt her way through book and lyrics written in a time when segregation was in full swing."

Perhaps I could get behind this statement if the production actually explored segregation. One of the missed opportunities in casting actors of color in these roles is that they are not exploring the character's experience through the black experience lens. The show begins with essentially an all black cast, which is interesting given that at the time black performers would have been segregated from whites, but by the time the show transitions to the adult versions of Dainty June and Louise, what begins as color conscious casting pivots and becomes, more or less, color. blind casting.  And again for me this is a missed opportunity - There is no way black performers would have been allowed on stage in a white house of burlesque without comment.  The strippers are white and don't seem to have any issue sharing a dressing room with black actors, which is likely unrealistic.  Clearly, the creatives didn't want to change the script, but these very real tensions still could have been explored in other ways.  Frankly, I think if they wanted to explore the implications of one of Rose's children being bi-racial, it would have been more powerful if that daughter were Louise, and not June.  Trying to pass off Louise as white in an a White House of burlesque is heartbreaking and something that would absolutely have happened in that time.  And certainly a passing Louise with a black mother would change the implications of the line "The mother of Gypsy Rose Lee is not allowed in this theatre."

[QueenAlice]

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

In addition to what I write above, the production seems to consciously cast a white actor as Herbie (this based on casting breakdowns) but pretty much ignores the opportunity to explore how being a mixed race couple in 1935, would impact the Rose-Herbie dynamic.  I thought this would play into the subtext of Rose not wanting to marry him, but as directed it doesn't at all. 

To your point, one of the reasons it's going to be hard for many to accept Audra in this role is because this is more or less a very traditional production of GYPSY. When the production doesn't subvert the character in relationship to the script, than all we are left with is - does Audra deliver in the way the role traditionally "should," because we are being asked to see her in the same context as her predecessors in the part.  Clearly that is going to be divisive response.

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 09:28 AM

[Impeach2017]

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

Conceit is the word I was searching for.  And this one was created to feature a beloved star.  Social implications or historical accuracy really don't matter here.

[PipingHotPiccolo]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 9:49am

Havent seen this, but its fascinating to me (even setting aside the unhinged soap box posts) that people seem frustrated that the show doesnt address race more. It certainly would be cool if Wolfe and Co found ways to explore that subtext given the actresses playing these roles but

can we not accept that SOME works have room to bend and stretch and some do not? Oklahoma! was a revelation because the script didnt have to change one ounce for Fish to find such depth and newness within the text. But MANY shows are not capable of that--- you see the effort to rewrite Sunset Blvd happening at the St James, and we can disagree over whether that works or not, but its a choice, and it certainly isnt without its holes/flaws. WANTING this production to explore race is very nice but if the book and score don't offer room for it, lets be grateful theyre letting subtext do its thing. 

[QueenAlice]

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

Impeach2017 said: "Conceit is the word I was searching for. And this one was created to feature a beloved star. Social implications or historical accuracy really don't matter here."

They don't unless they do. What is the conceit of this production? Right now, I would say the concept is to allow one of our greatest musical theatre actresses, who happens to be black the chance to play a role in a production that kind of wants to explore what a black actress in the role means to the script, but not fully.

In other words - the conceit is murky. It probably would have been cleaner if they had either done complete color blind casting or done an all black cast. I understand GYPSY is a 'musical fable' but why set up conceptual devices (deliberate casting of a biracial June and a white actor as Herbie) if these choices aren't going to be fully explored in the direction?

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 09:54 AM

[theatergoer3]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 9:58am

Few more thoughts after last night - 

Act 2> Act 1

Woods comes into the role as it develops/deepens. 

Lesli Margherita is going to get nominated and may win the Tony for Featured. 

Audra probably won the Tony with Rose's Turn. Much more Bernadette than Patti which works will with how she plays the prior moments.

A huge standing ovation afterwards (seemed very genuine but after Sunset earlier this season, I wonder if there are plants/prompts and this is a new/renewed tactic.)

I'm curious to go back after/later on in previews. A very fitting two-show day with Hills of California. 

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 09:58 AM

[MemorableUserName]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 11:32am

Skip23 said: "Does no one care how miscast Audra and the Gypsy are?"

No. You're the only person who's voiced that opinion in the nine pages of this thread. No one else has said it, certainly not multiple people. The opinions on this production have been completely unanimous and not at all divided.

 

 

/s

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 11:32 AM

[FolliesCabaret]

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

Skip23 said: "Does no one care how miscast Audra and the Gypsy are?"

one of them is miscast, and it's surely not the one who has six Tony Awards. 

[JasonC3]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 12:55pm

I won't get to see this until January, but he earlier mention of Bernadette sent me to again watch her Tony performance of Rose's Turn.  It is IMHO one of the better sung and acted versions of the song exuding the sexiness that suggests Rose might indeed have been able to make it big. 

[corninthesky]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 1:01pm

Took me some time to gather my thoughts but I was blown away by what I saw last night. I have not been able to stop thinking about it. 

Now, to be sure, it wasn’t a polished performance and there are numerous things that need to be worked out. I personally found the sound design extremely lacking and frustrating. I was mid-center orchestra and thought everything sounded quiet, including the largest broadway orchestra that could barely be heard. And I certainly hope they figure out how to get people in the theatre faster as having people talk over the overture and entr’acte was not fun. 

I would also agree that Audra’s voice will either work for you or it won’t. If you go in expecting Patti, you won’t walk out happy, but this was my first live Gypsy and I thought she absolutely nailed it. The dressing room scene was devastating and, if only it was a little louder, her Rose’s Turn was worth the price of admission alone.

Joy, to me, was the other standout here. I think from the moment she sings Little Lamb I was sold on her Louise. I would agree that fleshing out the few middle strips would benefit her characterization into becoming Gypsy Rose Lee, but everything is there for something special. 

I wish I could come back to see this after it opens, but really loved what was there last night. 

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 2:01pm

I enjoyed it last night. I found it to be a surprisingly conservative take on the musical. The production is rather melancholy yet it builds to a quietly touching finish.

https://singleticket.substack.com/p/gypsy

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 02:01 PM

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 2:12pm

corninthesky said: "I would also agree that Audra’s voice will either work for you or it won’t. If you go in expecting Patti, you won’t walk out happy, but this was my first live Gypsy and I thought she absolutely nailed it."

I do tend to agree that Audra’s voice will either work for you or won’t, but I do think it warrants some conversation about this score in particular (and I’m not saying you disagree, cornerinthesky). For me, I certainly went in knowing the score and knowing Audra - I wasn’t expecting Patti LuPone, and I was curious how she would negotiate the score across her impressive, but certainly different, range. At the first preview, I didn’t walk away thinking it was a particularly successful way of delivering the score - it actually exacerbated the duality I felt from Audra’s performance: the lack of a fully integrated character that carried over to her singing different sections of different songs in different parts of her range. It felt scattershot.

I also think it’s hard to divorce the way the score was written from the way the score is being delivered in this production. Unlike Company, where the score has been written for a different gender with a different range and adapted for a female actress, Gypsy was written for a specific actress with a specific voice. The songs are modulated in a way to make use of that range, and climax in a certain register. Rose’s range is an extension of her character - a way to musicalize her determination, her rail-roading, unbending stubbornness that eclipses every other character. It comes across different with a soprano singing the songs in those ranges. It takes out some of the excitement and thrill.

I understand why so many people are happy with this portrayal - Audra is fantastic and seeing her in this role is an unexpected treat since she doesn’t fit our expectations of the kind of singer who should play Rose. But I wonder how everyone would be reacting if Kelli O’Hara was in this role. Or if Cynthia Erivo played Cunegande - I’m sure it would be fascinating, but that’s not the score as Bernstein intended.

I don’t think it’s just because everyone wants “a white woman belting” and can’t imagine a black woman as Rose. I thought of Tonya Pinkins multiple times during my performance - and in 15/20 years Cynthia would be thrilling! It’s more nuanced than that. 

And for the record, I think the liberties Audra and the orchestra seem to be taking with phrasing and rhythmic patterns is one of the more fascinating aspects of reworking the show from a different racial perspective. Not what Styne wrote, but very similar to what Pearl Bailey did in Dolly.

Updated On: 11/24/24 at 02:12 PM

[TheOnlyOne2]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 2:34pm

OhHiii said: "Jesus Christ here we go. No one is feeling “hit” by the production. Whatsoever. We’re providing critiques. Your inability to understand that art is subjective and people will respond to it differently is embarrassing, frankly. And you’re hurling accusations with no basis in fact. Step away from the keyboard and get some coffee. It’s too early for this nonsense to already be starting.

Lemme tap on the screen, and see if a cue will help you get it...

 


What thread are you reading?  If it didn't apply to you then why are you responding? I was there at the first preview, and I'm telling you what I saw as someone who can directly relate to these actors playing these characters. What's embarrassing is that you're unaware that this isn't hurling accusations. Do yourself a favor and brush up on history and then we can talk about facts. 

 

Let me be clearer. This was a call out heavily aimed at white people interacting with this production. It's also a call in for MY community. Don't play in my face when we all know what it's giving. We all know what this business is, and the demographics of this forum. This is not the first time I've raised these concerns and it won't be the last. When we have roles that are perceived as white given to POC actors, its always followed by the pettiest commentary, especially by non black people. In fact, I don't care that these are based on real people, because we already know if you go to this production you will see them played by black people. Look at this bull**** going on about Nico Parker in " How to train Your Dragon", or Halle in "The Little Mermaid", even Cynthia Erivo as Elphaba. In fact, ask yourself why it took so long for Wicked to give that role to a black woman onstage. Then they came around and cast Cynthia as Elphaba in a film where the character is covered head to toe in green paint. Those are deliberate choices. They continually try to placate us by casting black women with the fairest skin tones, or someone they can make digestible to audiences.  Art is subjective, you're completely right. But, I have personally experienced these issues in this specific business time and time again. I'm not telling anyone to step away from their commentary by sharing there feelings, with the exception of speaking on misogynoir. There is zero room for debating the history of how our country has treated black women, and how our bodily autonomy has consistenly been taken away. That's why I made that post because that's too far. If you are ignorant, willfully uneducated, or don't have first hand experience then yes, I'm gonna push back. If this poster comes and tells me they are a black woman then I'll still push back because frankly they still have work to do. Do we need lessons about chattel slavery in this country? How black women (and men too) were forced into breeding programs. Give Audra space to work on her production. She's well aware of the bull****, and these heavy criticisms directly affect the show and her performance. This is honestly one of the bravest and most exciting steps into what could be an amazing moment. The performances and the choices were getting are a direct result of all this. 

 

Anways, If you or anyone else feels the need to knock on my door again I'll be here to greet you. 

 

 

 

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 11/24/24 at 2:47pm

TheOnlyOne, I don’t disagree with the content of what you’re saying, but it does seem like you’re responding to criticism that isn’t there… 

Saying “I didn’t get misogynoir from xy scene” isn’t the same thing as saying “that scene does not & cannot facilitate a conversation on misogynoir.” And while I appreciate hearing other perspectives on how some DO see a conversation about misogynoir in that scene, it shouldn’t be treated as gospel that it’s 100% clear in the production. The fact that one had to describe & explain how & why that scene was a critique on misogynoir kind of goes to show that it’s not self-evident in the scene as of now. But it’s early previews! Things are still being worked out and that sequence in particular has been called out for being very messy.