Gypsy question...

[Broadway_Bound_Star]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 6:24pm

Hey, I saw the show lsat night, and I was wondering. the 1st act was EXTREAMLY boring. and I though the only goof part was the 2nd act with Mayzeppa(SP??) Electra and Tessie came in and did their song, that upped the energy. Is this show usually THAT boring? or was I just seeing a bad cast?

[SuddenlyTrey]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 6:27pm

Probably a bad cast. The show is very long but I think it's wonderful. The Gimmick girls are wonderful beacuse they are used themselves as a gimmick in the show because they always get the crowd going!
I love Gypsy but I've seen it in the wrong hands too and it's dreadful!

[Broadway_Bound_Star]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 6:29pm

Yeah, I saw a summer professional group do and I thought it was terrible... the woman who was rose just cold not sing at ALL. The only reason why I stayed was because I got in for free, LOL

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 6:30pm

You saw a badly acted, badly directed production. Gypsy is one of the most consistently entertaining and thrilling shows ever written. If you were bored, it's the fault of a BAD production.

[nmartin]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 6:31pm

I have seen some productions of Gypsy that could make an audience member take the gas pipe; however, when it's done well, there is no better show.

[PJ]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 6:55pm

It could very well be that the production was subpar. However, I remember reading reviews from younger posters when the revival opened a few seasons back. Many of them thought the show was boring and only went ot see it a) because of Bernadette, or b) their parents picked the show. I think the show is genious, but many younger theatregoers don't appreciate the show because it's not a spectacle. It's an old-fashioned show. Perfection. But old-fashioned none-the-less.

[gymman]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 6:56pm

Some People
Small World
Everything's Comin' Up Roses
All in Act I

Why would anyone cast a Rose anywhere who can not sing? hy do the show at all?

??? How boring could it be???

[BwayBoy25]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 7:07pm

sorry to hear you didnt enjoy the production..when done well this show beats any other...try to make it to a better production some time down the road...everyone deserves a chance to see a good GYPSY...dont you all agree?

[Broadway_Bound_Star]

Posted: 7/2/05 at 7:11pm

I mean, some parts were good. I mean the girl who played roses daughter, can't remember her name, sorry. Who later because the stripper, she he an amazing voice and when she sang "Little Lamb" she sang it so well! ut the rest of the cast was..."ok". I know i'm young and stuff like that, but I think if it was casted better and if the pit orcastra was better, I think the show would have gone over a lot better.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 12:32am

Could it be that we've gotten to the point where a show that has an absolutely perfect book and a drop dead incredible score is "boring"? I don't want to impugn the taste of our young poster, and indeed it could be that the show was porly produced, but I am trying to imagine a production of Gypsy where the high point is Louise singing "Little Lamb."

Maybe if Rose levitated during "Everything's Coming Up Roses"?

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 12:34am

I am having a difficult time imagining how bad a production would have to be for GYPSY to be boring.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 12:51am

I agree. That book is SO tight and perfect and action-packed that as long as the actors credibly delivered the lines and the direction got you from scene to scene, I can't imagine being bored with even a high school production of it, let alone a professional production. "Little Lamb" -- the only number that really should have been cut from the whole show -- is the highlight??????

We've all seen Roses who couldn't vocally handle the score (few actresses can -- Lansbury, Daly and Peters all struggled mightily with it night after night), but if the actress is decent, how can this show ever be less than AT LEAST interesting, if not thrilling and heart-stopping?

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 1:02am

1st act was EXTREAMLY boring

This coming from a poster whose avatar is CATS. (Sorry, I couldn't help myself. CATS never fails to put me to sleep!)

For those interested, I recently saw my first production of GYPSY at the Shaw Festival in Niagara-on-the-Lake, and I loved every minute of it. I caught the alternate Rose, Kate Hennig, and she was fantastic (her able voice reminded me of Ethel Merman).

I'm sure the original poster saw an achingly bad production, because there's no way anyone could be bored by this fascinating character study of a stage mother.

[buffyactsing]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 1:11am

aww that's sad. When I was 9 Gypsy was my favorite movie. I'd hope kids today would have a better appreciation of musicals...especially if they didn't involve showy effects.

[alterego]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 2:38am

This is a concern. I only hope what you saw Broadway_Bound_Star was a truly bad production. I too noted that your avatar was Cats, now if you think Cats is exciting theatre and think the same of, say Mamma Mia and Grease(as it's presented these days) then I think that it really is a generational thing. Most younger musical going theatre patrons are used to minimal dialogue and lots of 'colour and movement' and don't have the patience to sit through the dialogue. So, it may not be your fault you didn't enjoy Gypsy, it's just not what you're used to.

[teh_pretty]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 1:56pm

"For those interested, I recently saw my first production of GYPSY at the Shaw Festival in Niagara-on-the-Lake, and I loved every minute of it. I caught the alternate Rose, Kate Hennig, and she was fantastic (her able voice reminded me of Ethel Merman)."


I saw this production last week, as well. I was really impressed. I did catch the regular for Rose (her name escapes me and I am too lazy to go get my program...), and I think that they could have cast that role better, but I still enjoyed every minute of it. What interested me was that Julie Martell, Louise, was the Louise understudy/a Hollywood blonde in the Broadway revival.

[BwayBoy25]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 2:55pm

with all do respect alterego...i am a 17 year old and i fully appreciate the beauty that is GYPSY...dont berate all adolescents despite many of their jaded views of current broadway spectacles

Updated On: 7/3/05 at 02:55 PM

[SuddenlyTrey]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 3:06pm

true

[grizzabella]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 8:05pm

I, too, hope Broadway Bound Star saw a sub-standard production of Gypsy, which may very well have been the case. I grew up on "the Classics" if you will: R&H, R&Hart,Lionel Bart and a dozen others. They, and the shows of the 60's & 70's were "my" generation's fare. Some I loved; some I didn't. I still appreciate a decent book and a solid score. That said, I also enjoyed POTO, Rent, and Piazza, all for different reasons. We all have our own personal "golden ages" of musicals, and I've noticed it's often what we grew up with and is familiar to us. For me, the on-going fascination of theatre is that it is "live." And I mean that in the literal sense, of watching living, breathing actors make magic, and also in that it is "alive"; something that has the potential to explore new ideas and open minds and hearts. I agree, some experiences are far more successful than others, and many are simply a matter of personal taste. Truthfully, as long as anyone, young or not-so-young keeps an open mind, it is a positive thing. I hope Broadway Bound Star keeps searching, and stays willing to experience the older shows. I'm sure he/she will find something to appeal.
(Also, before I get flamed for my username, and lack of taste, yes, while I enjoyed CATS in its time, I chose the name for entirely other and more personal reasons.)Sorry about the long post.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 10:07pm

The production of GYPSY at Shaw Festival that Blue Wizard saw last Wednesday was VERY VERY GOOD (I was there with BW) but the production only pushes it over the top in a few moments, and when exceedingly well done, GYPSY is like a series of fireworks each one more pleasing and spectacular than the one that preceeded it. We did see the alternate Rose, Kate Henig (this was a deliberate choice on my part as I had alredy seen Nora McLellan in the role) and while Nora offered a more subtle shading to the role, Kate's performance was more forceful in a way the role requires.

That said, having just returned from 4 days at the Shaw festival in Niagara-on-the-Lake, and having talked with many theatre-goers there no one expressed any disatisfaction with Nora's performance. My tiny reservations about here are probably coloured by having grown up listening to the Merman cast album and that - for me - sets the gold standard on Rose.

If a person does not appreciate sharply written characters, literate lyrics that to which attention MUST be paid, and a score cleverly constructed that reprises key musical motifs in new and effective ways then yes, that person may find GYPSY boring. In fact most great musicals will bore this person and they will be happier with theme park extravganzas, juke box musicals and special effects movie blockbusters.

[sassypanz]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 10:08pm

Gypsy da Bomb!

[alterego]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 10:17pm

I didn't mean to offend BroadwayBoy25, it was merely an observation on my part that in more recent times most musicals have relied on spectacle over substance and if that's what you are used to then then a more wordy show might bore.

That said, I do have to agree with frontrowcentre2's comments.

[billygoatgirl300]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 10:22pm

I saw the revival a few weeks before it closed. I thought I wasn't going to like it but I ended up loving it. We saw Julie Martell go on for Lousie and I thought she did a great job. It's good to hear that she is working again. Hopfully she'll come back to Broadway soon.

[CastAlbumFan]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 10:35pm

Just got through performing in a local production of GYPSY. Trusy me, Broadway_Bound_Star, you saw a dud production. We had a great Rose who was almost a dead ringer for Ethel Merman and had a powerful voice. an excellent ensemble cast (everyone from young Louise and June, Pop, the Farmboys, Tulsa, Granzinger's secretary, etc..). Even Mr Goldstone was great, and he didn't even SAY anything! The farm scene when Caroline the Cow came on stage had the audience rolling! Plus Act I ends with "Everything's Coming Up Roses", one of the best Act I enders in musical history! If you were bored, you must have seen a really, REALLY bad production of the show!

[broadwaystar2b]

Posted: 7/3/05 at 10:50pm

Gypsy is musical theatre at it's highest level, a perfectly woven show with a great book, great score that had great original choreography

However, one of the worst performances I've ever seen was a local JCC production of this show which contained weak direction and a weak Mama Rose