It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival- Page 3
It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
#50It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 6:19pm
kingfan011 said: "Did anybody ever see the Angela Lansbury revival from the 70s. I hear that was amazing.
"
I not only saw it, I was the production coordinator when the production was recreated in South Florida the following year:
One of the best musicals I have ever worked on. Nobody cared if Angela sang in lower keys. Her "Rose's Turn" got its own standing ovation at every performance--and then the audience stood again for Angela's curtain call. And that was before standing became a common thing.
While watching Imelda Staunton (whom I found marvelous at some points and not at all a bad singer) on my computer, I was reminded of how Angela understood that Rose keeps her kids and their act going not just through sheer will, but with great humor and charm. It's also why Herbie sticks around for 20 years! This isn't to say Angela wasn't horrifying in the scenes where she decides to turn talentless Louise into a star and later shoves her daughter into burlesque--she was! (Staunton, on the other hand, was so relentlessly ferocious, it was hard to understand why anyone but Louise put up with her for even a day.)
#51It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 6:25pm
It's been about 8 years since I suggested Donna Murphy:
https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.php?thread=1002938
I can't imagine it happening for a Broadway revival to be honest (maybe regional/concert), but I'd love to see it.
AnnieBlack
Leading Actor Joined: 4/3/14
#52It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 6:35pm
I'd love to see a revival where the Rose actually feels like she starts the first act as an early 30 something woman, and a early 40 something woman in the second act, which she historically would be.
Laura Benanti is kind of the right age right now for that conception
#53It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 6:38pm
BTW, I don't think you'll find many women who say it's easy "to get into show business" in their 30s or 40s, even today. Sure, there are actresses we don't notice until that age, but almost of all of them have been networking, taking classes, working off-off-Broadway for decades before they become "overnight successes" at 38.
In fact, most actresses begin to find it very difficult to get any roles after the age of 35.
***
As for Angela Lansbury, she was 50 when she did the show for us, but I don't remember ever thinking about her age, not even relative to June and Louise. Angela was so charismatic and energetic that I didn't really think of her as "middle-aged" until June began to seem 20.
#54It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 6:39pm
AnnieBlack said: "I'd love to see a revival where the Rose actually feels like she starts the first act as an early 30 something woman, and a early 40 something woman in the second act, which she historically would be.
Laura Benanti is kind of the right age right now for that conception "
I think Idina Menzel would be more appropriate if we wanted someone younger than normal. Benanti is also the first to admit that she's not a belter. Granted Laura would sound better than Tyne Daly, Idina has a better vocal type for the role.
#55It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 6:58pm
Pinkins and Testa are the only reason a revival should even be mentioned.
#56It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 7:16pm
Ljay- I'm curious about why you think Idina Menzel would be a good Rose. To my immediate mind, she seems completely at odds with the demands of the role-- it's not a style of music (or a score with the vocal range) that would really show off her strengths as a singer and as an actress she isn't exactly a powerhouse either. But maybe you are thinking in a way I'm not seeing.
Jane Krakowsj would be interesting. She would be funny and warm; whether she could be the monster that Rose is would be the big question mark.
Donna Murphy would be fabulous.
AnnieBlack
Leading Actor Joined: 4/3/14
#57It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 7:20pm
I kind of really like the idea of Idina, but LOVE the idea of Jane Krakowski, especially since she was a child actor- i think she would bring something very special to the role
#58It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 7:22pm
Krakowski played a very heightened version of a monster on 30 ROCK. Of course this would have to be a lot more grounded but I can see her Rose being absolutely hysterical during the comedy scenes, sexy as hell with Herby, and then surprisingly dark at the end of botch acts. I think we have yet to see Krakowski's best work, her dramatic chops have yet to be fully tapped into and I hope she gets the chance to show that side of her talent in an incredible role like this one.
#59It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 7:27pm
I think it's safe to say we can all agree we should call Jane Krakowski when the next revival comes.
#60It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 7:56pm
Annaleigh Ashford's first ever voice teacher made her do a character analysis on Rose when she was eight. While she's never mentioned wanting to take on the role, I think Annaleigh would be a thrilling Rose when she's age-appropriate. I want to say, paired with Sydney Lucas as Louise, maybe. Or June!
#61It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 8:17pm
I want to speak on Imelda Staunton's performance for just a moment. When I saw Staunton play the role at the Chichester Festival, I agreed with Michael Billington in the London Guardian that it was one of the greatest performances I'd seen in a musical. I still do. Her Rose, at that point, was alternately charming and ferocious - and I think likely the closest we have yet seen to what the 'real Rose Hovick' was probably like - somewhere between a gold medal lady next door schemer and a crazy woman. Physically, she is also undoubtedly the closest in appearance to the real Rose and that also made it (for me) an added interesting perk.
I didn't see the production when it transferred to the West End, but I'm sad to say that the live broadcast made towards the end of the run doesn't really reflect the performance I saw Staunton give a year earlier. Maybe her director needed to keep her on tap and reined in; surely the fact that the performance was in no way modulated to a film camera didn't help, but I think its slightly unfortunate that this is the record most people are left to judge her performance by.
I would love for her to get a chance to do the show again in the states; because I think, if brought back to what she was doing when she first began the show, most of you would be stunned ---but for the fun discourse of this thread, its more fun to dreamcast women who haven't played the role yet.
#62It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 8:18pm
gypsy101 said: "I think it's safe to say we can all agree we should call Jane Krakowski when the next revival comes.
"
I just watched Krakowski in the "Broadway Karaoke" clip that is floating around. Maybe she could play Rose 10 to 15 years from now, when her usual coquette might seem sad (yet appealing to Herbie).
But she looks so good right now, I'd wonder why she didn't do the strip herself in Act II, instead of sending gawky Louise out with her gloves.
#63It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 9:48pm
Maybe regionally, but I'm ready for Mary Testa as Rose!
#64It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 10:12pm
I'm surprised that everyone is overlooking the "actress of her generation," someone who has won every acting award except the Tony multiple times, someone who deserves that automatic Tony nomination that comes with the role of Rose, and of course someone who has shown mastery of the musical with her triumphant role in the successful film version of a very successful Broadway musical.
She never fails to grab any role and make it her own, to the cheers of the critics.
#65It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 10:16pm
Meryl Streep? Would she really do a 5th revival of Gypsy?
#66It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 10:30pm
I don't think I could hear Streep singing Rose. Granted, she fared faaaaaaar better in Into the Woods than she did in Mamma Mia singing wise, but I just can't picture her as Rose. I feel like she'd be too...normal? Sedate? I do remember Mike Nichols had her audition for a potential film version in front of Arthur Laurents and he was not pleased at all.
Jane is the most inspired suggestion. God knows she'd kill act 1 with all the comedy. She'd be very funny and sexy and give everyone a good reason for staying around. Granted, I've never seen her do anything quite like what act II requires, but I'd love to be surprised.
The thing I hated about Imelda was that she wasn't charming in the least bit. She started the show angry and ended it angry. There was no nuance, which shocked me given how great of an actress she is. With a better director, she'd have been a brilliant Rose.
Tyne Daly is still my favorite because, despite her vocal limitations, she made Rose a real woman. Not some diva. She was earthy, sexy, funny, charming, and terrifyingly delusional.
#67It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 11:16pm
Just a weird thought. She is a great actress and it is a great role. And if singing is not a prerequisite?
A great actress would not be sedate in a role that did not call for her being sedate. She slipped so effortlessly into the role of the devil in The Devil Wears Prada.
Are you saying that Mike Nichols auditioned her for a film remake of Gypsy? Whatever happened to that project?
#68It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/7/16 at 11:58pm
I'm not sure what happened with the Gypsy movie. There was a rumor that, after Laurents saw Meryl's audition, he said "not a chance, Dolly Levi." For a time, it was said to be in the hands of Rob Marshall post-Chicago who wanted Catherine Zeta Jones (whom Laurents referred to as "a second banana"
. I guess the film version died until Streisand brought it back up 5/6 years ago.
I love Streep, but I simply can't see her in this role. However, if she went to all the trouble of auditioning for Laurents himself, she must know it's a great role that she could play. Let's face it, any actor with half a brain would kill to play Rose. It's probably THE most interesting role in the musical theatre.
#69It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/8/16 at 12:10am
GavestonPS said: "Maybe she could play Rose 10 to 15 years from now, when her usual coquette might seem sad (yet appealing to Herbie). But she looks so good right now, I'd wonder why she didn't do the strip herself in Act II, instead of sending gawky Louise out with her gloves."
yes! maybe you didn't see earlier in this thread, but I mentioned that I think Jane would be perfect in a decade or so. I think she really has the drama inside her that it required.
#70It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/8/16 at 12:21am
Well Arthur Laurents is dead now so now I assume the women he vetoed for the role are now in the clear.
#71It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/8/16 at 7:13am
There is no way Meryl Streep would return to Broadway in what is a mammoth of a role vocally. She is not used to singing 8 times a week, let alone sing one of the most notoriously vocally taxing roles in the musical theatre canon. I also have given up on seeing her on Broadway. She used to say she would return when her children finished school, and obviously that didn't happen. Her film career now is arguably even bigger than it was in the 80s--she is certainly more of a box office star now, and she has not expressed any interest in doing 8 shows a week. The only hope we have of seeing her play Rose is if someone convinced her to do it at one of those galas that she likes to do once in a while. The only theatre she does nowadays is Shakespeare in the Park and they're not gonna be mounting GYPSY. She would be a fabulous Rose with a great director who can rein her in, who gives a fvck what Arthur Laurents thought of her? The man was a rotten person with an ax to grind.
I object to the idea that Rose's sexual appeal should somehow be played as pathetic or sad just because she's over 40 or 50 or whatever. I don't think the story that GYPSY tells is the story of a woman who thinks she's sexy but isn't. Really, there's a lot in the text to justify that Rose is, in fact, a very sexy woman who men can't resist (most of the people who say no to Rose in the show are women, or her father). Her moment at the end is not about "I used to be sexy and I'm not," but rather "I didn't live my life." Her tragedy is that she believes she's competing with Louise (a running joke on 30 ROCK was that Jenna Maroney thought she was competing with actresses 20 years her junior like Lindsay Lohan and Blake Lively). That's what makes her pathetic, but I don't think as an audience we're supposed to think she is sad because she's not acting like a sweet old lady.
#72It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/8/16 at 8:46am
QueenAlice said: "Well Arthur Laurents is dead now so now I assume the women he vetoed for the role are now in the clear."
You think Arthur Laurents wouldn't make his opinion known from the great beyond?
Callum_brown1
Stand-by Joined: 4/20/16
#73It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/9/16 at 4:23pm
Definitely wait until Jane K has aged a few more years - she hardly looks a day over 40 considering she's not far off 50. Would love to see it as Meryl's return to Broadway if only for a mini-run. Hell, I'd have thought that the movie version had her name on it if it wasn't for Babs producing the film itself.
Mr Roxy
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/17/03
#74It's been 8 years since a GYPSY revival
Posted: 6/9/16 at 5:00pm
Laurent isn't dead. He just has been keeping a low profile.
Videos