"HAIR" cast in VOGUE

[ToplessCocoWantsFame]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 8:09pm

The new July VOGUE with Nicole Kidman on the cover.
Johnathan Groff looks GREAT!
They have a full page article in the front of the magazine,
Then a huge photo spread of the cast in the middle,
THEN photos of them performing at the costume gala in the back.

It made me SUPER excited to see this full production!

GRAB A COPY!

[winter_sky]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 8:20pm

Haha, I just got my copy in the mail. Um, lolz to Groff's hair. I can't get over it. It's so odd to see some of those actors modeling with Agyness Deyn.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 8:30pm

There's something just so intrinsically wrong about "Hair" being in Vogue.

[Trekkie2]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 8:50pm

can anyone put it up?

[gonepishing]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 8:53pm

I really agree with best12bars.

[EugLoven]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 9:04pm

Scan?

[SDav 10495]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 9:07pm

There's something just so intrinsically wrong about "Hair" being in Vogue.

Hey, if Rent can launch a Bloomingdale's collection...

[Select a Member Name]

Posted: 6/20/08 at 9:08pm

Hair (AND Title of Show!) are also in the July issue of Elle magazine.

[ToplessCocoWantsFame]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 1:57am

Don't get the wrong idea guys!
Y'all are judging it before you saw it!

There are Vogue models in central park that the 'hippies' are attacking and mocking. Its really cute... as if they're "mocking the establishment"

[tazber]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 2:04am

anything with Groff is worth the price, but mocking the establishment in an establishment magazine is rather amusing.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 2:07am

" as if they're "mocking the establishment""

The characters may be "mocking the establishment" in the photo.

But the cast is certainly not "mocking the establishment," or staying true to the show, by posing for pictures for a magazine owned by a corporation, a magazine which serves primarily as one big monthly advertisement for consumerism, commercialism and materialism.

ETA: Taz beat me to it. And I don't hate VOGUE like my post makes it seems. But it is like the anti-HAIR in magazine form.

Updated On: 6/21/08 at 02:07 AM

[Antisocialite]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 7:45am

They cast Jonathan "LOOK AT MY SHOCKED FACE" Groff. The casting of a face with no impressive talent to speak of breaks any promise of being true to the show. HAiR should be an intense show with intense performers. Groff's lukewarm mugging is not right for it.

They can all dress like stockbrokers and promote AOL Time Warner for all I care. This production's ruined for me.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 9:48am

I'm glad the photos are fun, but it already sounds like this is going to be a sanitized show, if their PR group is putting them in Vogue.

I did "Hair" years ago with the original Broadway choreographer who was flown in for it. It's a "concept" musical that is as much about a feeling and a frame of mind as it is about singing, dancing, etc.

I realize they have to publicize the production, but I would have come up with some innovative, viral campaign to help launch it. Something that infiltrated buses, subways, websites, news broadcasts, newspapers, etc., not arrange some "cute shoot" for the readers of Vogue magazine. We're in our own politically-charged era right now. It's an election year. Infiltrate it, and use it to launch the show. Tell audiences that things haven't changed all that much since Hair first opened. Show them how relevant the sentiments behind it still are.

It's hard enough for the actors and audiences of today to understand what that show meant and was really about. But with this kind of banal publicity, they might as well do it with pre-programmed robots like "It's a Small World."

[NYNYBroadwaybaby]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 11:05am

Seriously? They are actors, in a SHOW being produced by a not for profit theater. They're not "real" hippies promoting a cause, they're doing a SHOW. If you were a theater (read:business) trying to make money and you had an opportunity to advertise in Vogue, a magazine that will reach an audience that probably doesn't typically see your shows, would you pass it up? No you wouldn't, unless you have some strange, naive, uninformed view of how showBUSINESS works.

Seems like some of you guys would be shocked to find out that actors actually get paid to perform. It's nice to have views consistent with a show, but it's also nice to have not for profit theater right? Well not for profit means not a huge budget for advertising, so when you have an opportunity to advertise in one of the world's top magazines, you take it.

[SDav 10495]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 12:19pm

http://fashionista.com/2008/06/post_1189.php#more

There's the link to the whole Fashionista post...the photos take a while to load (or they did for me, at least).

Maybe I'm just not demanding enough as an audience member, but this production looks pretty damn great to me. I can see how an appearance in Vogue might seem to violate the principles of the show, but HAIR was never just a bitter, subversive anti-war piece...I think this spread captures the show's all-important sense of fun, and is a pretty cool modernization of the "hippies vs. squares" theme.

If some still lament the "selling out" of HAIR, well...to paraphrase the show: this is 2008, dearies, not 1968, and everything is up for grabs. HAIR has jumped the shark a thousand times before ("Hippie Life"? Oof), and the fact that the cast did a shoot for Vogue certainly doesn't indicate the thematic death of this summer's production. I still believe it will be a powerful show that will resonate strongly.

[carolineorchange]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 12:37pm

The fact that Hair opened on Broadway to begin with is suspect. Broadway is such a commercial institution and very much a part of the "establishment."

And the creators never created any more "anti-establishment" or socially provoking theatre after they made their millions on Hair, so it makes sense that Hair now ends up in Vogue.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 3:13pm

"And the creators never created any more "anti-establishment" or socially provoking theatre after they made their millions on Hair, so it makes sense that Hair now ends up in Vogue."

Caroline, what the hell are you talking about? Which of the creators of Hair sold out and became "the establishment" with all their dirty dirty Broaway money? Please, fill us in on what the creators of Hair did after the smashing success of their musical?

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 3:33pm

I agree with the above statement about Groff. He poses and winks for the camera more that Cheyenne Jackson, if that's possible.

I wonder how many male Broadway stars would be out of work if they didn't have the face they were born with...

[tazber]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 3:55pm

Obviously it's a business NYNYBWB, but there can still be a marketing strategy that is more appropriate to the product being sold.

[Lavieboheme3090]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 4:39pm

"I wonder how many male Broadway stars would be out of work if they didn't have the face they were born with..."

I think that applies to every profession.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 4:42pm

Updated On: 5/3/09 at 04:42 PM

[stageishome]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 5:40pm

HAIR is featured in Vogue because it grabbed Anna Wintour's (Editor in Chief) attention when the cast performed at the Met's Costume Institute gala last month. There's a fantastic photo of the cast's performance in the magazine as well.

[Craww]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 6:59pm

Groff is LOL. I think I'm gonna pick this up and scan it for real real.

[crushgroove]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 7:51pm

I think Groff looks great. It's a much better wig than last summer's production. The old one was much thicker and looked less natural. This one makes him look quite sexy.

I am a friend of Ato Blankson-Wood who is in the chorus. He told me about the shoot when he got the e-mail about it. I think it was way before the Met Gala. I believe he told me at the beginning of April about it.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/21/08 at 11:40pm

thanks for the link! Pictures look very interesting :)