Hands on a Hardbody previews thread- Page 5

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/27/13 at 2:40pm

I'm not the subject of these threads and shouldn't be made to be.

Just discuss the shows themselves and there will be no problem.

[DustyC]

Posted: 2/27/13 at 2:46pm

I am very new to this message board, and I just wish we could all just get along!

[newintown]

Posted: 2/27/13 at 3:30pm

Personally (and I'm aware that no one cares), I'd rather read After Eight's curmudgeonly critiques than five pages of offended and uninteresting bitchery about them.

[Matt Rogers]

Posted: 2/27/13 at 7:51pm

I don't understand. What was the big problem with AfterEight's review? It had some okay things to say about the show,even though it wasn't completely positive. I give those types of reviews more credence than gushing, shilly sounding raves from people who may be a cast member's boyfriend, brother, mother, or the cast members themselves. If you think people connected to shows do not post biased reviews, you are kidding yourself. And if you work in a producer's office, don't be surprised if you are asked to see the show they are producing and post positive comments on the internet. In other words, who cares if AfterEight's post is mixed. Give him a break. At least it is a real unbiased review.

[JoeMaMa2]

Posted: 2/28/13 at 12:05am

Really liked the music and the staging ... the book might need some work. Didn't really care for the 'dealership is in trouble' subplot. But nonetheless a good show!

[Patash]

Posted: 2/28/13 at 9:23am

Maybe someone should start a thread about Hands on a Hardbody -- so that we could actually discuss and/or learn about the show?

Oh, wait a minute. Was that the original intent of THIS thread -- hard to tell?

[WestVillage]

Posted: 2/28/13 at 10:16am

Saw this last night, knowing next to nothing about it, so went in with a completely clean slate and very excited to see a new musical (I didn't know it was based on a documentary, so thought initially that it was completely original). Have to say I agree with Mercedes and AfterEight on this one. I was so unengaged in what was happening. I didn't care about the characters, I didn't care who won the truck. It never brought me into their world; I sat there bored and looking at my watch. It is way too long, and probably would work much better as a one-act. Way too many songs. I found myself rolling my eyes every time there was an intro for yet another song, thinking "didn't they just finish one, oh lord here we go again". I just didn't find it interesting at all. To each his own, but this was definitely not my cup of tea.

[macnyc]

Posted: 2/28/13 at 10:30am

My assessment: I enjoyed Hardbody, but I would rate it overall as just so-so.

I saw the show Tuesday night and was seated in the mid mezzanine (TDF tickets). That's a good location for this show, but I find the mezz seating at the Brooks Atkinson even tighter and more uncomfortable than at other theaters. But it was fun being up there because, as other posters have said, that's where the industry folk (most likely on comps) are seated. Kate Baldwin was a few rows ahead of me, and there was a preponderance of good-looking young people throughout the mezzanine. My theater partner is an actress/singer, and she was busy at intermission catching up with various friends.

Anyway, on to the show. I was pleasantly surprised that Hardbody held my interest more than I thought it would, considering the static nature of its premise. I had no problem with the fantasy elements, during which everyone takes his or her hand off the truck. In fact, I would have liked MORE dancing and active staging. I am fine suspending my disbelief. I love shows with movement, and I wish there was more in Hardbody. However, I do feel that the choreography, however limited, did serve the storytelling. I think the audience needs to feel the stationary nature of the contest and the ennui that sets in.

And I agree with other posters that the number Joy to the Lord is a showstopper. It built up to a wonderful crescendo, with everyone pounding on the truck and making a wild percussive sound that was thrilling. However, other than this song, the music just wasn't memorable to me.

I think this will be a hard sell to a New York audience, and even considering the tourist crowd. Coming to NYC to visit, this just isn't the type of show you want to see, with its Texas theme and continual religious elements. (There was a bit too much religion for my taste.) The performances in general were excellent, including Hunter Foster, who is an able leading man yet able to take a back seat when other characters are in the spotlight.

Bottom line: I enjoyed the show, it held my interest, but I wouldn't be too happy if someone told me I had to sit through it again.

Edited to correct Hunter's name.


Updated On: 2/28/13 at 10:30 AM

[round2]

Posted: 2/28/13 at 10:36am

So thrilled to hear that Hunter Thompson has been revived to appear in this show!

If there's whiskey, blow, or guns involved, I especially see it being his kind of show. Updated On: 2/28/13 at 10:36 AM

[goldenboy]

Posted: 2/28/13 at 9:33pm

Again.. I have not seen it. I am commenting on audience appeal.
Unless this show gets rave reviews almost across the board it is in trouble.
I love musicals. I love new musicals. But the way this is described makes me feel like I'd rather do laundry. " A musical about a documentary where everyone is competing for a truck." That is a hard sell.

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 2/28/13 at 11:51pm

I saw this tonight on a TDF ticket (which btw is getting borderline too expensive for me to afford at all) and overall was left with a sort of "meh" feeling. They're already fighting an uphill battle as far as the subject matter, and the first 30-40 minutes of the show really drag. It picks up a little towards the end of the act, but it was too little too late for me. I have patience for something to take time to develop when it feels, in the end, like it's worth the time it's taking, but for me this really doesn't.

I think one of their bigger mistakes was giving each contestant a "big number" to themselves (in some cases, the contestant got more than one). The comparisons to A Chorus Line are apt as far as basic format (and I think that show certainly is the blueprint for shows like this one and Spelling Bee, as others have mentioned), but A Chorus Line in its final version does not give every character a big "step-out" number. In spite of that, we (or at least I) feel like we get to know what we need to know about each of the characters, and there are specific choices made about which characters in that show we get to see more of, which completely works and makes what could be very tedious really exciting. Hands on a Hardbody kind of does the opposite: each character gets their big "step-out" moment (in the second act, it happens right before they take their hands off the truck, which got to be annoying for me). It feels like what the first draft of A Chorus Line was, with each character stepping out and telling their story in turn. And in spite of the fact that most of the characters in A Chorus Line don't get a whole song all to themselves, I feel I know more about those characters than I ever learned about the people in Hands on a Hardbody.

I am completely in favor of writers taking a risk on material that is non-traditional fodder for a musical, because it can give us things like Next to Normal and Grey Gardens. But it can also give us things like this. The material needed a defter hand, someone who was more willing to slice and cut and trim. This should be a one-act musical; there is no reason for it to run for 2 hours and 40 minutes, especially when you walk away feeling like you know nothing about the characters and aren't given any real reason to care about any of them. The social/political parts of the story felt heavy-handed and not very insightful to me, and they didn't really add anything or make me care any more about the characters.

The performers are good, particularly Keala Settle and Hunter Foster, who are given the most to work with. I really wish someone would write a role for Hunter Foster that is worthy of his talents, though, he was magnificent in Urinetown and while this shows off some of what he is capable of, it's still less than what he deserves to be working with as a performer.

I was pretty disappointed by this, all told. I walked in really wanting to like it and walked out not feeling much of anything at all.

[kdogg36]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 5:48am

After Eight wrote:

Just discuss the shows themselves and there will be no problem.

I'm mostly an observer here, so my input might be unwelcome, but I think the reason so many people have trouble with After Eight is precisely because he doesn't merely discuss the shows, but also passes judgment on those whose opinions differ from his. He may not even realize he's doing it. Here's a case in point:

It's not you, and you're not missing anything. You're just an astute theatreoer. I'd vote for you as mayor of BWW.

This was a reply, of course, to someone who agreed with his take on Hands on a Hardbody. There is a clear suggestion here that those who really did like the show are not "astute theatregoers." This conclusion may not be entailed by After Eight's statement, but it's surely an implicature. The fact that these sorts of negative judgments are so very well masked, I'm sure, only makes them all the more annoying to their targets.

It's certainly okay to dislike shows, to argue that most modern shows are bad, and to argue that Sondheim's shows don't deserve the praise they're often given. It's more than okay; it's fun and interesting to read such debates. But it takes some of the fun out of it, I imagine, when your debate partner is subtly but continuously questioning your intellect (and maybe even your morals) for disagreeing with him.

[indytallguy]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 6:24am

I'm wondering how it would feel to the audience if each contestant doesn't get a solo number given that this seems to be a point raised repeatedly in the comments here. Would it be weaving some of their stories into ensemble numbers like At the Ballet or Hello Twelve, Hello Thirteen, Hello Love? Reduce the # of contestants so it plays more like Spelling Bee? Approach this differently than either of these two shows' example?

It does seem like "the truck competition show" holds potentially limited marketing appeal. Since the competition is really just the vehicle for the story, I would hope they find a compelling way to market the meaning and not just the competition. The title already hints at the latter.

[After Eight]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 7:56am

I think one problem of the show that hasn't been much addressed here is how ugly it looks. It's hard on an audience to look at the same dispiriting set for 2 1/2 hours.

The visual appeal of a show is nowadays given short shrift-- mistakenly, I would say-- and definitely to the show's detriment. Look how visually unappealing, if not offputting, recent musicals have been: Chaplin, all black and white, Scandalous, a huge, antiseptic staircase taking up the stage, Bonnie and Clyde, Leap of Faith, Catch Me If You Can, Baby, It's You. People say they snooze at Once. Well, the dark, ugly set contributes to that, to be sure. Hell, even Cinderella couldn't get it right.

As for Hardbody, one can say that that's what a Texas car dealership looks like. Well, then perhaps a more metaphorical approach to the set design could have helped.

But here's another thought. How about setting some of these musicals in attractive locales to begin with, say, perhaps, the French Riviera, King Arthur's court, or the Austrian Alps?

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 9:25am

Saw it last night and hated it. Walked in thinking I would love it, walked out wishing I hadn't wasted my evening.

Seattle and Foster are doing wonderful work. And there is obviously a lot of talent in the ensemble. But the songs are dreadful and the lyrics are even worse. Sad to think that the lyricist is the daughter of the late, great Adolph Green... "Joy of the Lord" is certainly the best number in the show. But that is only because of the staging and it's not enough to carry the rest of the score

But sadly the whole "suspend your disbelief" and go along with it thing does not work. Let's spend days trying to win a truck that we've walked all over, jumped on, sat on, scuffed up with our boots. And then when the dealership manager says "Who wants to win a truck with handprints on it?" you can't help but think about the 100+ boot-prints covering it.

Long. Dull. Disappointing. But Christ, that score is dreadful.

I really WANTED to like it. But nope.

[mamaleh]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 9:27am

I had the opposite experience last night.

The Brooks Atkinson was packed full of cheering people who seemed to be having a great time. Not a big country music fan, I wasn't quite sure what to expect, but I found myself liking it more than I thought I would have. With about a dozen characters vying for time, character development necessarily couldn't be too deep, but I did feel I got to "know" them during the course of the evening.

Keith Carradine was quietly effective and touching as an older (to those kids, anyway) man in a relationship crisis and out of a job. Hunter Foster made an impression as a lout who undergoes something of a transformation during 3 solid days of "hands on" that red truck.

Each character has a sort of "this is me" song explaining background, why they're in the contest, or their problems. As country-ish songs go, they're not bad. The standout song performance, though, has got to be that headed by Keala Settle. If the show performs on the Tonys, her number, "Joy of the Lord," is the obvious choice. I'm not very partial to gospel music, but this number was staged so creatively--think STOMP meets LEAP OF FAITH (but in a good way)--and with such zeal that I found myself going with it. Settle deserves a Tony nomination.

In their ruminations on humanity and how tough life is, some of the characters border on cliche. But their stories are told and sung, for the most part, in an engaging way. It's not high art but worth catching, especially for Ms. Settle's standout number.

[Sauja]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 9:41am

Lots of folks from here at the show last night, appearently. I was also there and thought it was 85% wonderful and that with a bit of tweaking could be truly spectacular. I found the score really rich and nicely varied, even if Amanda Green still isn't the greatest lyricist in the world.

But what I found more than anything was that I was just tremendously moved. The intensity of these characters' desire for something as simple as a truck is heartbreaking and beautiful. I was in tears more than once. And what's been said about Keala Settle is true. She's stunning in this show, and "Joy to the Lord" is one of the best numbers I've seen in a long, long time.

I do think Act 2 could be trimmed a touch. Hunter Foster gets maybe one more number than he needs. Although I couldn't tell how much I felt that because of the material and how much it was that he was the one actor who left me a bit cold. I'm not suggesting he's bad, but there was this feeling I got from him that he was playing a CHARACTER while everyone else was playing a person. His performance just didn't feel honest to me, not as lived in as the other folks on stage.

I'd disagree with After Eight on the set (don't worry folks, I'm responding to a single point, not turning this back into a page of criticism of people on here). I didn't find it hard to look at or dispiriting. It's very straightforward, but I found it starkly beautiful, especially under Kevin Adams' fantastic lighting. I tend to respond well to a minimal approach, though, so perhaps it's just a question of personal aesthetics. I'd agree wholeheartedly that Leap of Faith, Catch Me If You Can, and Chaplin were eyesores, but this set, in all its simplicity, seemed masterful to me.

It's a beautiful show that I found earnest and uplifting.

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 12:22pm

I, like many others, was skeptical of how this would work as a musical, but these reviews have made me extremely excited for it. Hoping that it gets great word of mouth and builds momentum (as it already seems to be doing on here) and gets some recognition from the Tony’s. Coming to NYC in July and very much hoping it will still be running.

Another reason I was unsure of the show is I generally find Amanda Green’s lyrics to be simple, typical, and obvious (sometimes distractingly so, especially when there are beautiful melodies and orchestrations that seem in such contrast with the lyrics), but, from what it sounds like, that is exactly what this show (and these characters) call for.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/1/13 at 1:24pm

I'm mostly an observer here, so my input might be unwelcome, but I think the reason so many people have trouble with After Eight is precisely because he doesn't merely discuss the shows, but also passes judgment on those whose opinions differ from his. He may not even realize he's doing it.

Of course he does. It's intentional. It's not as if this were an isolated incident or just one person with some sort of grudge against After Eight. He's been called out on his ridiculous behavior numerous times by numerous people.

[bwaybri2]

Posted: 3/2/13 at 12:16pm

Saw this Thursday night - I purposely didn't read anything about it before hand -

Left at intermission - couldn't believe that this is even going to open on Broadway -there were times it felt like Midwestern community theatre at best -

I really wanted to like this but didn't - several people from front mezz followed me out at intermission by the way

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 3/2/13 at 6:26pm

I saw the show this afternoon and was very underwhelmed. My biggest issue with the show (in a nutshell) is this: for a musical with such a unique conceit and unorthodox subject, it is incredibly banal and mundane. The music all sounds the same, the characters never really pop, and quite frankly, I just didn't find myself invested in the contest or the people involved. The one number in the show that takes a creative risk is the standout, far and away; and that is "Joy Of The Lord." I have to give Neil Pepe and Sergio Trujillo credit for keeping the action moving for the most part, even though there are hardly any set or costume changes. It's certainly got some inventively-staged moments and sequences. But on the whole, I thought the book and score were very mediocre. The opening and finale are nice, "Joy Of The Lord" is rousing, but everything else registered as pretty bland to me. If you asked me to hum you a few bars from the show, I couldn't. And I got out less than two hours ago.

The cast is pretty good, but nothing spectacular. Keala Settle certainly fares the best, but you have to wonder if it's because she's given the one moment in the show that really sticks. I was not a fan of Keith Carradine at all. He seemed to be phoning it in the entire time and none of his more emotional moments rang true for me on any level. Hunter Foster is Hunter Foster. I'm not sure why people get on Sutton's case so much for "giving the same performance in every show she's in," when her brother is ten times more guilty of doing so.

I give the creative team a lot of credit for doing something original, but I just wish the execution was more precise and original in itself. I thought the score sounded far from "fresh" or "new" for a Broadway musical. I wished they would've taken more risks, because when they did, it really payed off and worked wonderfully. Sadly, those moments are a bit too few and far between. It just didn't do it for me. Updated On: 3/12/13 at 06:26 PM

[dtzumbrunnen]

Posted: 3/3/13 at 12:16am

Just home from tonight's performance. Picked up rush tickets this morning and was Center Mezz (ack, so tight!), but a great view for the show. I can't imagine seeing this from the Orchestra. The elevated view lets you take in all the action very well.

This was a slow start, but once they had made it to the 12 hour mark or so, I began to get into things. Keala Settle's act one number stood out as the highlight of the entire evening, and cemented her as the person I wanted to win the truck. It did feel like there could have been fewer than 10 people vying for the vehicle - it was hard to really feel for some of the first-out characters - since they didn't have time to develop, it just felt like a waste for them to be there in the end. I'd have rather seen Keala Settle or Jon Rua get another number.

Hunter Foster played smarmy jerk well, and I'll leave it at that. I enjoyed all the banter related to old Keith Carradine movies. There can only be one Highlander.

Enjoyable evening - I think the show has continued to tighten up based on previous reports. Started ~8:05 finished ~10:40 with at least 20 minutes at intermission.

Updated On: 3/3/13 at 12:16 AM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 3/3/13 at 2:18am

These types of shows are tough. It could end up like A Chorus Line and be genious, or it could up like Happiness at Lincoln Center. The one major mistake people make these day is giving every character a solo. Just look at Ghost or Addams Family.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 3/3/13 at 10:16am

^ My sentiments EXACTLY. This show reminded me a lot of HAPPINESS (I actually said that in my "review" but deleted it last minute, just because it was hard to explain why.) Not in terms of plot or characters obviously, but in terms of the whole "each character, tell your story" theme and "barely skimming the surface of character development" execution. HAPPINESS was worse than HARDBODY though.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 3/3/13 at 10:25am

The 12 hour mark? Do you mean within the contest? (or is this an expression with which I am unfamiliar?) If you do, how long does it take to get there?