Posted: 3/2/23 at 2:33pm
I should also say, what is the point of casting a performer as talented and charismatic as Timothy Hughes in the ensemble if they are just going to totally waste him and not give him a thing to do?
Posted: 3/2/23 at 2:38pm
JasonC3 said: "Unless ticket purchases come with a clear disclaimer "During previews it is possible that some patrons may not be able to adequately hear some portions of the performance" I think anyone who spent hundreds of bucks for a seat and experienced exactly that have a right to be upset."
Exactly. Thank you. Only on Broadwayworld can you encounter a bunch of snide people who think it is an absolutely unreasonable expectation that you should actually be able to HEAR a show for which you paid well over over $200 per ticket.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 2:44pm
Obviously Timothy Hughes (for whom I yearn to see take on an actual role) doesn't think he's wasted, or he wouldn't take the role.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 2:45pm
dramamama611 said: "Obviously Timothy Hughes (for whom I yearn to see take on an actual role) doesn't think he's wasted, or he wouldn't take the role."
DUH!
Posted: 3/2/23 at 8:09pm
bk said:
I love that people think the original production had a minimalist set. They brought over an entire foundry from England, you know. It was a great set that did many things, but unfortunately the "film" as you call it was made in LA where the tour was a shadow of what that set had been on B'way, so let's not act like that represented the amazing set on B'way."
Yes, and even in the lesser tour set, I would still never call that production "minimalist." It is true that Prince and Lee made a point of people pushing the set pieces in place (at a time where other musicals, including Prince productions, had used automated ways of bringing design pieces on) to keep with the Victorian feel, but, minimalist?
Posted: 3/2/23 at 8:26pm
I don’t think Lee has ever been described as a minimalist designer.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 8:32pm
Someone in a Tree2 said: "Haven’t seen this SWEENEY yet, but I come from a set design background, and my dictum concerning sets is: a brilliant performance with a terrible set will be a disappointing night of theater for me. (The Ahmanson’s current SECRET GARDEN comes to mind.) But a brilliant set housing a substandard performance? (GRIND is a classic example.) There I’ll still leave the theater feeling I got my money’s worth."
I've never heard anyone say anything but positives about the actual actor performances in Grind. That wasn't the issue--was it?
Posted: 3/2/23 at 8:35pm
uncageg said: "
As for getting drunk at a theater bar. It happens, a lot. I have seen it happen."
Surely in most cases those people were already well on their way to getting drunk, pre-theatre (if not already drunk)
Posted: 3/2/23 at 8:50pm
EricMontreal22 said: "uncageg said: "
As for getting drunk at a theater bar. It happens, a lot. I have seen it happen."
Surely in most cases those people were already well on their way to getting drunk, pre-theatre (if not already drunk)"
How? The crowds, short timeframe, and the high prices would make it impossible. I'd assume they were drunk before entering the theater.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 9:28pm
EricMontreal22 said: "uncageg said: "
As for getting drunk at a theater bar. It happens, a lot. I have seen it happen."
Surely in most cases those people were already well on their way to getting drunk, pre-theatre (if not already drunk)"
My comment was about getting drunk AT the theater. Not already drunk. I have seen people walk in perfectly fine and after pre-show drinks and intermission drinks, be very drunk. My point was that it is possible to get drunk at a theater bar.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 9:48pm
uncageg said:
"My comment was about getting drunk AT the theater. Not already drunk. I have seen people walk in perfectly fine and after pre-show drinks and intermission drinks, be very drunk. My point was that it is possible to get drunk at a theater bar."
You’re monitoring people who get drinks at the theatre bar? Thank God. We need people telling us how it is possible to get drunk on $30.00 sippy cups of wine or weak-ass signature cocktails. Keep up the good work!
Updated On: 3/2/23 at 09:48 PM
Posted: 3/2/23 at 9:50pm
uncageg said: "Balcony2 said: "As one who believes this score to be far and away the greatest ever written for Broadway, or ever will be, it’s the musical performance of the singers and orchestra that is the main draw for me. It was generally spot-on last night and I’m ecstatic about the commitment to the Tunick original. I’m actually less interested in the actual staging, which I liked. Some fabulousness especially “City on Fire” and the immense oven at the end. But: why were some of the razor-killings bloodless, while others had blood?? The first bloodletting was quite fun and the audience laughed and applauded."
Just curious, were you sitting in the Orchestra or Mezz?
"
Posted: 3/2/23 at 9:58pm
Balcony2 said: "uncageg said: "Balcony2 said: "As one who believes this score to be far and away the greatest ever written for Broadway, or ever will be, it’s the musical performance of the singers and orchestra that is the main draw for me. It was generally spot-on last night and I’m ecstatic about the commitment to the Tunick original. I’m actually less interested in the actual staging, which I liked. Some fabulousness especially “City on Fire” and the immense oven at the end. But: why were some of the razor-killings bloodless, while others had blood?? The first bloodletting was quite fun and the audience laughed and applauded."
Just curious, were you sitting in the Orchestra or Mezz?
"
"
Did you forget to say where you were sitting? Or did you leave the comment blank referring to your screen name and I was to think Mezz! (There is no balcony at the Lunt)
I also meant to comment on your report about the first "blood letting". It just kind of makes me cringe that people laughed and applauded. It's not supposed to be funny.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 10:07pm
uncageg said: "Balcony2 said: "As one who believes this score to be far and away the greatest ever written for Broadway, or ever will be, it’s the musical performance of the singers and orchestra that is the main draw for me. It was generally spot-on last night and I’m ecstatic about the commitment to the Tunick original. I’m actually less interested in the actual staging, which I liked. Some fabulousness especially “City on Fire” and the immense oven at the end. But: why were some of the razor-killings bloodless, while others had blood?? The first bloodletting was quite fun and the audience laughed and applauded."
Just curious, were you sitting in the Orchestra or Mezz?
Front row Mezz. There are comments here about the lack of loudness. I dunno—this is symphonic score, not rock. Is amplification expected? I heard everything beautifully from the harp’s individual notes to the cello’s pizzicatos to the percussionist’s bell tree. I will say that Annaleigh Ashford’s voice is delicate, not strident. But isn’t that inherent to her new unique take on the role? In any event, Sweeney is a consummate masterpiece beyond its being a great B’way show. It’s simply one of the greatest works of art of the 20th century, period. Bravi to everyone involved in this revival.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 10:27pm
Here’s a new topic. The curtain call brings out the entire cast at once, except the two principals who later emerge together. There’s no chance to individually applaud anyone. It’s especially disappointing concerning Nicholas Christopher, who, because of an awkward moment of staging continuity, gets no chance to be applauded after his breathtakingly great Pirelli in the “Contest” number. This needs fixing.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 10:28pm
Balcony2 said: "uncageg said: "Balcony2 said: "As one who believes this score to be far and away the greatest ever written for Broadway, or ever will be, it’s the musical performance of the singers and orchestra that is the main draw for me. It was generally spot-on last night and I’m ecstatic about the commitment to the Tunick original. I’m actually less interested in the actual staging, which I liked. Some fabulousness especially “City on Fire” and the immense oven at the end. But: why were some of the razor-killings bloodless, while others had blood?? The first bloodletting was quite fun and the audience laughed and applauded."
Just curious, were you sitting in the Orchestra or Mezz?
Front row Mezz. There are comments here about the lack of loudness. I dunno—this is symphonic score, not rock. Is amplification expected? I heard everything beautifully from the harp’s individual notes to the cello’s pizzicatos to the percussionist’s bell tree. I will say that Annaleigh Ashford’s voice is delicate, not strident. But isn’t that inherent to her new unique take on the role? In any event, Sweeney is a consummate masterpiece beyond its being a great B’way show. It’s simply one of the greatest works of art of the 20th century, period. Bravi to everyone involved in this revival."
I am sure you probably heard the orchestra much better in the front row of the Mezz. I was row E in the rear mezz. Yes, we could hear the instruments and it sounded like there was a full orchestra down there, but the sound upstairs was not "full sounding". I saw the original production at the Uris Theater (Now The Gerswhin). I sat in the next to the last row up on house right. I can remember that music enveloping me. And it should. And yes, I agree it is one of the greatest works.
It's a masterpiece. And I agree that Annaleigh is not the biggest belter, but there were issues with the sound levels on her mic. That was quite obvious inherent or not to her new take on the role. We still need to hear her! A lot of the lyrics were lost to "worst Pies in London" where I was sitting. I am hoping that they do get the sound balance taken care of. And maybe they will not amplify it. But it seems they need to in this theater. JMO
Posted: 3/2/23 at 10:29pm
I'd imagine a formal curtain call is still to come.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 10:32pm
I'd think they'd have a curtain by previews. And hope all these sound issues get sorted. I get it, but it's also been a week.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 10:34pm
Tonight was only their fourth public performance. It's not a week yet, but I agree they need to get the sound issues fixed asap.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 10:41pm
RippedMan said: "I'd think they'd have a curtain by previews. And hope all these sound issues get sorted. I get it, but it's also been a week."
The curtain call was more organized at the second preview. This is a big show. It will take them a week, I'm sure, to sort things out. I have a thing for sound/sound design when I see a show. I will go to the sound board after a preview performance, sometimes at intermission, and give my thoughts. Many times I have ended up in great conversation with the sound designers. They literally sit in different areas each night and listen. That takes a number of performances. I was actually invited to stand at a sound board for a show. That was pretty cool to watch.
Posted: 3/2/23 at 11:34pm
Matt Rogers said: "Only on Broadwayworld can you encounter a bunch of snide people who think it is an absolutely unreasonable expectation that you should actually be able to HEAR a show for which you paid well over over $200 per ticket."
"Snide" means "derogatory or mocking in an indirect way."
I don't think anyone posting on the subject of preview expectations has said anything remotely meeting that definition. There has been nothing negative said indirectly. People have explained, quite directly, that previews are a period when shows are still a work in progress. You and a few others seem to want them to be something else. Yes we are critical of your idea because it is, in our opinion, wrongheaded. It appears that you have been here over 18 years and this is a topic that comes up fairly often. I don't think you are in a position to plead ignorance because you could not be ignorant of the nature of previews. And I don't think you are. What I think is that you are actually the one being indirect because what you are actually saying here is that you think preview prices should be lower. You might find more people in agreement with you if you had just said that instead of encumbering it with an idea that is unsupportable.
Just a thought.
Posted: 3/3/23 at 12:24am
I saw it tonight (March 2) from front/mid orchestra and the music was, expectedly, quite audible. But, front/mid orchestra.
I did have trouble hearing the opening lines to the opening song (and Sweneey's opening phrase as it was drowned out by entrance applause; ditto for Tobias's as people cheered for Gaten).
I did not have trouble hearing the men behind/next to me loudly messing with the crinkly plastic wrapper of the multiple bags of Twizzliers and pretzels they bought at the theater. At least they didn't talk or have their phones out? And they all left their sippy cups behind from their 2 drinks a-piece so yay, show cup for me!
As far as the show itself - I really loved it, and I didn't feel the set was lacking whatsoever. It felt huge and was creative in its execution/utilization when paired with lighting.
Ashford was stellar and the audience at up her cockney comedy. Groban was...Groban, but Act 2 felt a lot more like Sweeney than Groban.
All-in-all - a good night at the theater.
Updated On: 3/3/23 at 12:24 AM
Posted: 3/3/23 at 12:43am
Look, others have posted that they sat in the front row mezz and did not share your complaints. I have not been there yet. Just so you understand, I have not been addressing what's going on at this show, but have merely been discussing the expectations for previews, especially the very early ones. And TBC I am not discrediting your perception of what you heard. That's yours and you are entitled to it. But I have never said anything about what anyone is hear. To repeat, everything I have written about is about expectations, and there is nothing condescending in that. All I have said is that there is no expectation for a preview that you are entitled to perfection and if you think that is a reason not to spend $200, then don't. Patience actually is a virtue sometimes.
Posted: 3/3/23 at 12:51am
People aren't asking for perfection. They are asking to be able to hear the friggin' show, something one would think is among the minimum expectations that can be assumed when buying a ticket to ANY performance at any price point.
And while your posts are generally very helpful and well-informed, every once in awhile they cross over into a sanctimonious all-knowing tone that it is hard to not find somewhat offensive.
Updated On: 3/3/23 at 12:51 AM
Posted: 3/3/23 at 1:31am
Saw the show tonight. A few quick thoughts:
Josh Groban, Annaleigh Ashford and Ruthie Ann Miles were all excellent.
Josh’s voice suits Sweeney well and he played it straight and dark and slightly manic at times, maybe to match Annaleigh’s energy, but never over the top.
Annaleigh was charming and very funny. Her Mrs. Lovett is not too distant from her roles in Wicked and Kinky Boots for the first two thirds of the show. I thought she was stunning and heartbreaking for the final third, from Nothing’s Gonna Harm You on.
Ruthie Ann Miles’ Beggar Woman had so many layers I was honestly in awe. I would have handed her a Tony at curtain call if I could.
Gaten was great and I think will be knocking this role out of the park by end of previews. Pirelli and Judge Turpin were also well cast.
Jordan Fisher grew on me once I got over the many accents he tried out through act one.
Loved the set, the staging, and was pleasantly surprised by the choreography.
I have one gripe… the sound. My god. Center orch and I could hardly hear half the characters. Annaleigh was done a MAJOR disservice, as were Gaten and Jordan Fisher. I thought Groban’s volume was fine. But so many amazing Mrs. Lovett lines and lyrics were just washed out and muted, hard as Annaleigh tried. I really hope they get the issue fixed asap. It’s the worst sound I’ve heard in a Broadway preview, ever.
Updated On: 3/3/23 at 01:31 AM
