darquegk said: "Which ending did Sutton’s production use?"
This 2016 revival did some glorious revisions. It was gritty and more realistic in its interpretation. At the end, Oscar informs her he can’t “save” her and to move on and he pushes her in the lake, as Charlie did at the start of the musical. Abandoned again, she sings “Where Am I Going?”. As the number builds, the setting merges into the Fandango Ballroom with the ladies joining in the song as the song slowly turns into a soft version of “You Should See Yourself.” As she stands alone on stage she softly sings (repeats) “you should see yourself”, then blackout.
That sounds amazing! And like there’s finally a really “good” ending to the show. I liked the Applegate ending, but the classic “wink and a shrug” and the fairy godmother ending both seemed like a little too much “this amused Fosse so it’s good enough for you.”
BrodyFosse123 said: "darquegk said: "Which ending did Sutton’s production use?"
This 2016 revival did some glorious revisions. It was gritty and more realistic in its interpretation. At the end, Oscar informs her he can’t “save” her and to move on and he pushes her in the lake, as Charlie did at the start of the musical. Abandoned again, she sings “Where Am I Going?”. As the number builds, the setting merges into the Fandango Ballroom with the ladies joining in the song as the song slowly turns into a soft version of “You Should See Yourself.” As she stands alone on stage she softly sings (repeats) “you should see yourself”, then blackout."
I though this revival was pretty dreadful. The pop arrangement of "Where Am I Going?" was out of place. The anemic orchestrations (with no brass) didn't help anything. Sutton deserved a better production.
No revision can seem to get the ending right. At this point, I'd like to see the original fairy godmother ending, although most say that didn't work either.
I wouldn’t be interesting in seeing this version unless Bob Fosse’s original choreography was used.The Christina Applegate version really suffered because of this. It would also need a strong director. I personally thought Ariana Debose’s turn as a host of the Tony awards was preening and self-satisfied, two qualities I don’t associate with Charity Valentine.
Behind the fake tinsel of Broadway is real tinsel.
With DeBose in the starring role and the right producer (yes - bring back Fosse's choreography) , this could be the BIG fun revival musical for next year, or '24. I think she can carry the show.
I think Ariana has such strength in her presence. A million great roles for her, but the fragile, hopeful naivete of Charity doesn't seem like a great fit...
31 is an awfully young and romantically vital Charity, already burnt out and getting her last shot at love? She’s hot, gorgeous, at the top of her game. Wait a decade. We have actors over 40 who bring twenty years of life and lost opportunity to the characterization. It’s like casting Michelle Pfeiffer as Frankie.
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
babyjunegem said: "Call me crazy, but I think Vanessa Hudgens might make a good Charity."
This isn't the worst idea I've ever heard, but didn't Gigi have trouble selling with her? Although her career is in a much different place than it was in 2015.
SouthernCakes said: "I don’t think she’s the “name” the show would need. If Sutton couldn’t get her version moved to Broadway I’m not sure DeBose is quite there."
I am not understanding why some are making a non-existent revival of Sweet Charity rest on Ariana DeBose’s shoulders.
SouthernCakes said: "I don’t think she’s the “name” the show would need. If Sutton couldn’t get her version moved to Broadway I’m not sure DeBose is quite there."
Sutton wasn’t trying to bring her SWEET CHARITY to Broadway. She only did it because it was a limited engagement - she literally started filming Season 4 of YOUNGER a week after CHARITY ended its extended run. Audiences wanted it to transfer but the creators never saw it as a production suitable for a Broadway level run. Even as a limited engagement.
BJR said: "I think Ariana has such strength in her presence. A million great roles for her, but the fragile, hopeful naivete of Charity doesn't seem like a great fit..."
Yes, she's everything Charity is not. I think it would be an awful role for her, horribly miscast.
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
Ke3 said: "babyjunegem said: "Call me crazy, but I think Vanessa Hudgens might make a good Charity."
This isn't the worst idea I've ever heard, but didn't Gigi have trouble selling with her? Although her career is in a much different place than it was in 2015."
Yes. To be fair, Gigi was DOA no matter who the lead was. The music and story are bad. The original production was also a flop. I believe the Kennedy Center run did well.
Hudgens is a strong dancer with charisma. I'd love to see her work with a great vocal coach because the potential is there.
babyjunegem said: "Yes. To be fair, Gigi was DOA no matter who the lead was. The music and story are bad. The original production was also a flop. I believe the Kennedy Center run did well.."
The original run most likely suffered because actress Agnes Moorehead (playing Aunt Alicia) had to leave the production shortly after it opened due to illness (cancer). Eve Arden took over the role, but I don't think the audience wanted to see her after buying tickets for Moorehead.