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.
wonkit said: ". I thought the scene with her father, for example, should be pleading and frustration but it came across as angry retribution."
Exactly. Patti LuPone sang "Some People" with a child-like gleam in her eyes, it was a brilliant choice. Patti made a point to never portray a monster, even during her act two screaming matches and breakdowns. I have so much appreciation for her performance, especially after seeing Imelda play a lunatic from start to finish.
If this transfers (which Imelda said it will in 201, I hope they start fresh. Just bring Imelda and maybe bring in some names for Herbie and Louise. I wasn't blown away by them very much in this production.
There were moments where Imelda was quite good and even chilling (as mentioned, her "Rose's Turn" was phenomenal and one of the few times I've really felt like that song has worked), but she has to turn down the anger, especially in act 1. If she built up to her "Rose's Turn", it would be unbelievable.
The acting from all was atrocious. None of the performances were grounded . The amount of "indicating" brought it down at times to community theater level.
I get that TV and theatre are different, but look at the impeccable broadcast of SHE LOVES ME as an example of how beautifully cameras are able to capture a piece of theatre. While some of the moments that played well on stage did not fully translate, the broadcast impeccably captured the beauty of what went on at Studio 54 every night, and they were playing to the audience there as much as they were playing to the audience at home. The performances and directorial choices in this are so horrendous, it is hard to imagine what could possibly make this production work. And if they were going to televise this, they should have at least worked at making sure the show performed equally well on both media. Or is it that GYPSY is such a genius piece of theatre that it is unfilmable? This is the third failed attempt to showcase it through cameras after all.
"Some people can thrive and bloom living life in a living room, that's perfect for some people of one hundred and five. But I at least gotta try, when I think of all the sights that I gotta see, all the places I gotta play, all the things that I gotta be at"
ray-andallthatjazz86, remember that everyone can't achieve such perfection in material, production AND reproduction on film!
It's just a matter of taste, clearly they took an approach that wasn't to everyone's liking. It was also poorly filmed IMO which gives it an odd feeling. I honestly think everyone just has the '09 revival seared too much into their minds.
I watched it last night. There were things I really liked and things I really hated. Yes, they were acting to the 11th balcony, but I also felt the same way with the filmed Miss Saigon, so I accept it. This was the most monstrous portrayal of Rose I've ever seen. I did not the see Miss Lupone in the part, but I did see the fantastic Miss Peters, who came off as more manipulative and cunning then what Ms. Staunton was doing. The monster thing really worked for me in the scene at grantzigers palace. Also, I thought she was gonna beat the **** out of louise when she tells her she has to strip. The relationship with herbie was pretty terrible, they really did lack chemistry. The highlight of the show for me was "If mamma was married" such a great chemistry between the girls, and you got a real sense of love between them that could have been.
Gypsy is one of my all time favorite shows. When I saw Tyne Daly and she sang the last note of "Everything's Coming Up Roses", l felt incredible fear inside of me, the hair on my arms stood up. Imelda Staunton did a very serviceable job as Rose, the actress that played the adult June was terrible. Her accent kept drifting and her performance was very grating. I think that any of the performance choices that were made, were approved by the director. The camerawork was very shoddy, focusing on the wrong things sometimes. I would have loved for them to have recorded Ms. Lupone's take on Rose. Tyne Daly should have done the last TV version instead of Bette Midler...
I agree that the recording was pretty terrible, but I saw the production live and it was just incredible. Staunton's performance worked so much better in front of an audience rather than a camera, the jokes actually landed, and both Rose and Louise were just captivating through the entire thing.
The production was in no way perfect, but it was still probably one of the best experiences I've had in a theatre!
Pretty good overall, but over-reached in that British way of adding a "Darker Vision" to material that doesn't really need it, most evident in the decision to costume and make-up the imperishable trio of strippers Mazeppa, Electra and Tessie as if they were White Walkers from Game Of Thrones. The total abject humorlessness of the production just became choking after a while. Ms. Staunton did quite well, I thought, but I couldn't help wondering, by time Rose finally said, "Herbie, how about marrying me?" why on earth he didn't respond, "Rose, let me get back to you on that..."
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." Thomas Pynchon, GRAVITY'S RAINBOW
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
My blog: http://www.roscoewrites.blogspot.com/
Even more reason for NETFLICK and BARWOOD to come to terms and let BARBRA direct and star in her vision of this story. Now, that NETFLICK has a distribution arm , their content can become OSCAR eligible, giving BARBRA the incentive to consider TV.
I do think the interpretation of Rose was just weird - conceived by either/ both actress and director. She came off as a psycho who was mentally deranged. Rose was a stage mother in the worst sense of the word..someone who puts her own wants and desires ahead of what her children want and need. But Rose to me came across as someone with mental problems so to me it took a little away from the actual story. "Bad" stage mothers do not as as rule have mental problems..
I am sure some qualities worked better in the theater than on stage but I just felt the whole production was just off (as was much of the casting). Toning down for TV would have helped but not solved the problems to me.
I was assuming they filmed this twice as they did last year with Billy Elliott...once as a whole performance in front of the audience. But also they filmed the dress rehearsal where cameras were on stage to get close ups and actors could tone down certain elements of their performance. The two performances were then blended together for the final result.
Does anyone know if this two show taping was done here?
I guess they couldn't afford any violins, or maybe it was poor sound mixing, but Tulsa's line, "Now we waltz, strings come in" was met with no strings at all...
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." Thomas Pynchon, GRAVITY'S RAINBOW
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
My blog: http://www.roscoewrites.blogspot.com/
There was only one double bass..no violin, no cello in this pit.
I remember checking because when I was at this theater in September for Funny Girl, I was chatting with the cellist and he was saying that in the UK, some individual productions hire their own musicians while others are hired by the theater and stay there from show to show. I didn't remember what he said they did at the Savoy so I was checking to see if it was the same guy - but in the credits, I noticed the lack of strings here.
I forgot to mention earlier that I also didn't care for the ending..when Rose says "Mama Rose and her daughter Gypsy Rose Lee" - giving herself the top billing, Louise usually gives her mother a somewhat fond but exasperated "she's never going to change" look and they leave together. This Louise just looked insulted and nauseous and walked out alone with her mother to follow. I didn't care for that interpretation at all.
KathyNYC2 said: "I forgot to mention earlier that I also didn't care for the ending..when Rose says "Mama Rose and her daughter Gypsy Rose Lee" - giving herself the top billing, Louise usually gives her mother a somewhat fond but exasperated "she's never going to change" look and they leave together. This Louise just looked insulted and nauseous and walked out alone with her mother to follow. I didn't care for that interpretation at all.
"
Also Staunton's hunched posture and her monster-like arms and hands looking like she wants to strangle her daughter to death. Your daughter finally made it and her name is in lights big as you wanted. Be happy or at least ok with it. Don't clomp off stage looking to kill or destroy someone or something. But I guess Mama Rose will always be Mama Rose.
I think the "darkness" was handled better by Mendes production-wise and LuPone acting wise. I adore Imelda and she fully committed to a bizarre performance. It almost reminded me of a kabuki like Faye Dunaway in Mommie Dearest. At times I wondered who she was acting opposite and if she was even working with them.
Rose was driven, but she wasn't deranged and she was very charming. The darkness plays just fine if you make the musical joyful where it naturally is. It's easily one of the best of all time, doesn't need much tinkering.
Also, the ways she grabs and smooshes Louise's face in "Everythings Coming Up Roses" irritates me every time I see it and them grabs her and clomps off like a troll.
This production didn't do it for me, but I realize I didn't see it live. I respect Imelda's choices-a very fine actress. It just didn't work for me. Also, Louise looked 45.
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello
Well, I just watched some of the YouTube clips that PBS put up...I agree that this wasn't meant for extreme close-up...Staunton's hand gestures are enthusiastic to say the least.
She was a cross between Fozzi Bear and Lewis Black. I'm sure direction was the problem. In Harry Potter she demonstrated that she could do both subtle, charming manipulation and the big finish drama. So we know it's possible for her to be small and work her way up to big. Granted that's film and this is theatre being filmed. But the filming director should have been able to reign her in for those two nights.
Art has a double face, of expression and illusion.
I think it's unfair to criticise her so heavily, you didn't see it live in the theatre.
Broadway is used to camp divas like Patti playing Rose, Imelda Staunton was SENSATIONAL in the theatre.
I agree that it doesn't come across so well on tv, as is often the case with musicals recorded live. What seems grotesque on the recording was much more nuanced in the theatre and her Roses Turn was one of the most spine tingling thing I've ever witness in a theatre. In London or on Broadway.
Overall I enjoyed the production, partly out of my interest in seeing live theater either in person or live. I’d love to see more of this, particularly since I can only get to NYC and see Broadway shows every few years.
My favorite scene in GYPSY is always “Gimmick” and I really liked this interpretation. Tessie is still in relatively good form, but Mazeppa and Electra have a “been around the block” look which nailed where these gals are in their lives and as burlesque was waning. They reminded me of my first and only visit to Fremont Street in Las Vegas. Fremont was the center of Vegas before the over-the-top glitz of the Strip took over. The cocktail servers and waitresses are generally older and bit rougher around the edges, all seem to have a raspy cigarette voice, and they are a contrast to the younger, more energetic women working on the Strip.