GYPSY on PBS

[wolfwriter2]

Posted: 11/11/16 at 11:38pm

This is the single worst production of Gypsy, I have ever seen. I thought it was me and hadn't said anything, but my friend, with whom, I'm watching, finally started making fun of it. Imelda Staunton screams her way through the show. We thought her head would explode during Rose's Turn. The direction (maybe just the video direction) did not do the show any favors.

I looked for a thread on this but didn't see anything. I wonder if anyone who saw it live and saw the broadcast saw any differences. The acting is bad. The singing is bad. I've been trying to find something redeemable. The cast is way too old and, on video, looks it (maybe it would work in the theater, better), but it looks silly. The whole show seems a parody of the actual show.

I was so looking forward to this, after hearing how good it was. I'm so disappointed, as this is one of my favorite musicals, ever.

 

[JVJ93]

Posted: 11/11/16 at 11:42pm

I couldn't disagree with you more. Is her Rose perfect? No. Is her interpretation my favorite? No. But her Rose is damn compelling and I loved every minute. This production also just looks so good to the eye. She said in an interview she's reprising her performance in New York in 2018 and I couldn't be happier  

[wolfwriter2]

Posted: 11/11/16 at 11:52pm

Glad you enjoyed it. I heard numerous great things about it, but it just didn't work for me, on any level. But, that's why I love theater. Two people can watch the same show and see something totally different.

[Rick906]

Posted: 11/11/16 at 11:54pm

Couldn't agree with you more.

[Rick906]

Posted: 11/11/16 at 11:57pm

Have seen many many productions of Gypsy and this is without question the worst I have seen.  

[ChgoTheatreGuy]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 12:24am

I found her performance goosebump inducing. Her singing isn't necessarily the best, but she does bring good comic timing.  She is loads better than Rosalind Russell and she doesn't mug her way through it like Bette Midler.  She would be third after Tyne Daly and Patti Lupone.  I will agree with you that the taping of the show does not really do any favors, the cast does look too old, especially June.  I also didn't really get any chemistry between Rose and Herbie either.  Imelda Staunton is an amazing actress, I wish that I had seen this in the West End, I think a trip to NYC may be in the cards soon to see her when she comes to Broadway...

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 12:29am

I saw it on BroadwayHD months ago and was moved by Staunton and the production. It was certainly interesting to see the show played as high tragedy.

But as Act II progressed I began to wonder why was Herbie still sticking around amid all the screaming? And, later, I wondered why was Louise still there, mother or no mother?

And I recalled how charming Angela was, even as she bullied everyone who entered her circle. Oh, she was a monster, alright, but her Rose was smart enough to have more than one tool in her toolbox. And the fact that she was a monster at times was far more shocking BECAUSE she was otherwise so delightful.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 1:25am

My notes on the subject remain the same three notes as when it aired on the BBC previously:

* Who told them to perform it at such a breakneck pace? I understand that Rose is meant to have somewhat of a steamroller quality and the show sort of travels at her speed, but Jesus Christ, this thing flew like a bat out of hell. I was reaching intermission screaming, "Can we please slow down for a minute? I'm absolutely exhausted!"

* Where was Jerry's choreography? It is so much a part of the fabric of this show that even Arthur "Life's a bitch, and so am I" Laurents didn't get rid of it. I spotted its use in maybe two sequences, but the rest (the new steps) was pedestrian by comparison.

* Imelda's final scene was beautiful, but otherwise, if they still go through with the American transfer that they've been talking about for a while, she needs to heed this advice: when it comes to playing Rose, if you play the woman, they'll see the monster; if you play the monster, they'll see the actress.

Updated On: 11/12/16 at 01:25 AM

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 5:36am

It was discussed ad nauseam after the original BBC Broadcast.

I didn't rewatch tonight, but last time I enjoyed it. I don't hold the show as sacred as so many do tho.

[dank]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 7:14am

I totally agree with the top post- I was shocked at how bad this was compared to all the raves I was hearing- bad accents and it seemed to me that Imelda Staunton thought she was playing Mrs Lovett in Sweeney Todd. Probably better in a proper theatre and not televised.

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 8:56am

Yes that's what I thought. It probably worked better in the theater. Performances were much too big for tv. I remember reading an article with Elliott Hanna last year when they broadcast Billy Elliot..how he was taught to tone down his performances when they were filming the closeups. I think this broadcast was missing that.

June and Louise came across as much too old. Yes. I know it's supposed to be unbelievable that they are still kids in the act, but especially the June character just did not fit the part to be still controlled by your mother. 

And I wondered why the kids who play dainty June and Louise were not included in the curtain call. They certainly had parts equal or bigger than some of the adults who were there at the end. Weird. 

Otherwise im glad I saw it but it's nothing that I'm going to save on my DVR for future repeat  viewing. One of the mist enjoyable parts of the telecast to me was recognizing the Savoy theater where I just saw Funny Girl in September. It has such an odd stage -deep and narrow for such a substantial theater. Seeing it twice in a few minutes the for two diff shows was interesting. 

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 9:07am

I didn't enjoy it at all. Mainly because of Staunton. After a few minutes of watching her emoting, making frightening faces and spastic arm movements, I googled her and learned that she won awards for this performance. I wondered why. Her rendition of Rose was that of a person on the edge of insanity to be scared of.

Nothing else in the production was remarkable to me. I know the three ladies of vaudeville are supposed to be raw, but these were grotesque. 

In general, I thought the entire show was a little too much on the side of gritty and grotesque. Not sweet nor endearing in any way.

[imeldasturn]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 9:46am

KathyNYC2 said: "And I wondered why the kids who play dainty June and Louise were not included in the curtain call. They certainly had parts equal or bigger than some of the adults who were there at the end. Weird. "

The only time they took part in the curtain call was on closing night. I think it might have something to do with British laws about children on stage, especially when there is a 2 hour break between their last scene on stage and the curtain call. For example, in the London production of Les Miz Gavroche is the only kid included in the curtain call, Young Eponine and Young Cosette leave the theatre before the show is over.

I loved that revival and think Imelda delivered an outstanding performance in the theatre. I saw it three times and she was glorious every time. Still, I can't bear to watch that video because everything - including her performance - is terribly over the top: they were acting for the audience at the Savoy, not for close ups

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 10:03am

In response to my own post, at least one thing has emerged to answer a question of mine: according to the executive producer of the telecast, those two sequences where I still noticed Jerry's staging intact -- the "time change" transition in Act One, and "Gimmick" in Act Two -- are contractually required to be used in any revival. (While I'm here... why "Gimmick"? Why is that the deal-breaker? It's funny, but I don't find anything particularly remarkable or ingenious about it. Jerry Robbins, you were one weird cat.)

My new question is, why isn't the whole damn thing contractually required? Jerry's choreography is as much an essential cog in the wheel as anything in the show. (Or, if you think it's not, then at least you'll agree that if a show shouldn't be locked down as a museum piece, the choreography should at least be equally extraordinary to the original.)

Updated On: 11/12/16 at 10:03 AM

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 10:06am

imeldasturn said: "KathyNYC2 said: "And I wondered why the kids who play dainty June and Louise were not included in the curtain call. They certainly had parts equal or bigger than some of the adults who were there at the end. Weird. "

The only time they took part in the curtain call was on closing night. I think it might have something to do with British laws about children. 

 

"

Yes I assumed that for everyday shows but I think they could have made an exception for the telecast, as they did for closing night. 

Updated On: 11/12/16 at 10:06 AM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 10:40am

While it might understandably impress many as the worst Gypsy possible on video, it impressed a great many, including myself, as the definitive Gypsy in the theatre.  

They are very different media with very different demands.

[ComingUpRoses2]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 1:14pm

Imelda has her moments in the recoding, but she's far too angry and psychotic from the beginning. There's nowhere to build to. Even the hammy Bette Midler peaked at Everything's Coming Up Roses. I felt like Imelda peaked during the scene in Grantziger's office where she had that screaming breakdown. 

The pacing was also ridiculous. It's like they wanted to prove that this version didn't have the sluggish pacing of the '62 movie and just decided to rush everything like they had dinner reservations at 10. Only a few of the jokes land, because no one pauses and let's them sink in. 

I will say that I feel like Imelda is one of the first Roses to get the stuttering "Mama"s right on "Rose's Turn" and her final scene was quite good, but I just wish it had been built up to a bit more. 

[DAME]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 5:33pm

HATED IT.  She is awful in this.  

[dunebuddy]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 7:33pm

 I do think Gypsy has one of the best musical scores ever written, but I will admit that I am not enamored with the show overall.  This production made my head explode.  Not only did Imelda screech and scream her way through - everybody did.  The whole thing was a frantic exercise in frenzied family disfunction of the highest order.  There are so many spots where some gentle softness could have come through but it never did.  I felt like I needed blood pressure medication after it was over.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 7:35pm

I'm with those who did not care for this. I'm a huge fan of Imelda Staunton, and the show is one of my favorites, but it didn't work for me. It may play better in the theatre with some distance and not in your face like that, but it's clear that the performances were not adjusted for the camera. 

 

I'd still go see it if this production did transfer to see how it plays live, but based on this I'm not aching for it to do so.

[gangtey]

Posted: 11/13/16 at 12:50pm

The anemic sounding overture by that tiny orchestra made me sad.

[gypsy101]

Posted: 11/13/16 at 1:10pm

i also watched it when it was on BBC and one word comes to mind when i think of it: awful.

[Broadwayboy2631]

Posted: 11/13/16 at 1:35pm

I enjoyed myself because I love Gypsy, but count me in as disappointed. I thought that Imelda was fine, her Rose's Turn was the only part of her performance that I found to be extraordinary. I really felt her pain and regret in a new profound way. Otherwise, I thought that it was a pretty standard, somewhat boring production of Gypsy. I had hoped that this production was a fresher take on the material, like the controversial Mendes production. I don't understand why this  production would justify  a transfer.  Overall, I couldn't get the memory of the 2008 Broadway production out of my head.  Whenever me I return to Gypsy, I always look forward to the dressing room scene. I think that it's a good barometer to measure the emotional weight of the Gypsy at hand. This production's Louise didn't do it for me. Louise's new persona as Gypsy Rose Lee should be more of broad characterization, since it is so new and artificial. I just felt like this woman was playing a different character altogether, making her slips into young Louise less effective. I don't know if she really understood the weight of the words that she was saying in that scene. The stakes seems oddly low. Maybe this isn't fair, but nothing will ever compare to the fire that Patti LuPone and Laura Benanti brought to that scene. It's a damn shame that we have this production on PBS, and not the LuPone Gypsy. These great works are meant to be and should be done frequently, but I don't think that this production is going to excite people in New York the way that it did in London. We know better. 

[ArtMan]

Posted: 11/13/16 at 1:45pm

I watched about a half hour last night.  I thought it came across as a cheap production.

[wonkit]

Posted: 11/13/16 at 2:01pm

I liked Imelda's performance on the whole but did think she peaked a little early. She seems a little too angry early on when she should seem determined rather than psychotic. I thought the scene with her father, for example, should be pleading and frustration but it came across as angry retribution. But I also thought that she toned it down nicely in the scenes with Herbie, when her voice became warmer and seductive, and the "Together Wherever We Go" sequence also showed that she had a sense of humor. 

Lara Pulver was excellent although it is close to impossible to erase the memory of Laura Benanti in that part.

And the conductor was so handsome - they could have kept the camera on him all night, and I wouldn't have minded.