Hugh in "Oklahoma"
Hugh in "Oklahoma"
Joined: 12/31/69
#0Hugh in "Oklahoma"
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:06pmAs a warm-up for the Tony evening we watched a tape of the London revival of "Oklahoma." If you don't like the show, then I suppose there's no reason to see it. But, it is a really committed presentation of classic musical theatre - and Shuler's Jud is something to behold (and be afraid of!) It also gives a fairly complete answer to the question of whether or not Hugh can act in musical theatre. Very different from his work in "Boy . . ." On a more purient level, the sight of a beefier Hugh in chaps gives rise to very different fantasy scenarios - so to speak.
#1re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:12pm
What's with the elipses? It takes the same amount of typing to say "Boy . . ." than it does BOY FROM OZ. Why not just say BOY FROM OZ?
Rant over. Just peeved me.
"The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet."
--Aristotle
--Aristotle
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
#2re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:21pmHmmm - sorry - I guess - no reason for it, I just did.
#3re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:29pmLOL, no reason to apologize. Just seemed silly. Twas good laugh (can you tell I'm high?).
"The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet."
--Aristotle
--Aristotle
#4re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:44pmHugh sang "Oh what a beautiful morning" during a commercial break at the Tonys last night. Got Sean Combs to try sing with him too!
#5re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:44pmI don't think I would have liked that production any better even with Hugh in the lead - it was one of the worst, most boring stagings of a popular American musical to ever smear its way across Broadway. Though I will agree that Schuler was fantastic as Judd - he was the only thing I liked about that production other than a few moments from Andrea Martin.
"I don't really get the ending,all i can go with is when after several months,Judith saw Pat sang,and later she kissed him on the toilet,after that the story back to where Pat went down from the stage after he'd sung,and he went to the italian lady.I just don't get it,what Judith exatcly meant when he kissed Pat that she had seen,and did Pat end up together with The Italian Lady?Please help me,thank u very much!"
Quote from someone on IMDB in reference to a movie he/she didn't understand. Such grammar!
#6re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:48pm
Hugh is the only good thing in that version of Oklahoma (and I suppose the Judd as well), in my opinion...I tried to watch it, but I HATED the Laurie, and it just became too difficult to deal with. Hugh did do a fabulous job though, he's just a great performer.
But if you haven't seen the video, I can't in good conscience recommend it.
-Anyone want to turn anarchist with me?"Bless you and all who know you, oh wise and penguined one." ~YouWantItWhen????
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
#7re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 3:53pmDifferent perspectives are always good. We, on the other hand, really liked Laurie, as she didn't fall into the normal casting of young blond - I really believed she could be living a life out there in the middle of nowhere. And we really liked Aunt Eller, as well. Our appreciation was very enhanced by the 2nd DVD on the making of the piece - really felt they were passionately committed to the work. But, obviously, if you don't like something, you just don't like it - and there's nothing wrong with that.
#8re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 5:04pm
"and Shuler's Jud is something to behold (and be afraid of!)"
I agree with you. This Jud Fry really made me uncomfortable as I watched his tirade against Laurey in the farm yard. The creepiness factor was really in play for me.
I bought Oklahoma in London before it came out in the U.S. on DVD for Hugh...I got a real bonus in "discovering" Shuler Hensley. His Oliver and Tony awards were well deserved.
thirdrowcenter
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/16/03
#9re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 8:24pmHugh Jackman's Curly was so commanding, I watched it on PBS over and over. Schuler Hensley was excellent also and he made the Broadway Oklahoma tolerable for me. Patrick Wilson just couldn't carry that role.
#10re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 8:38pmI actually really enjoyed it. I fell in love with the production that came from London to Broadway, but thought I would never love anyone else as Curly like I loved Patrick Wilson. I finally got over that and watched Hugh, and loved him!
beacon1
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/31/04
#11re: Hugh in 'Oklahoma'
Posted: 6/7/04 at 10:14pmI'd love to have a chance to see Hugh singing "Surrey with a fringe on the top"--the second part of it is so tender with Laurey's head on his knee...
Where are we going, and why am I in this handbasket?
Patrick Wilson Fans --New "UnOfficial Fan Site". Come check us out!
Videos