It's time for Chicago to go — Page 2

#26

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 5:24pm

Sharon was in Cabaret and Fiddler before Chicago. And Cabaret was ensemble work.

So to many, that isn't typical stunt castign.

#27

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 5:35pm

ljay . . . I KNEW I would hear from you!!! LOL!!! You are right, though. I didn't know her theatre background, just her TV one. I just didn't think she was a very good Velma.

Chicago ROCKS, though!

---

". . . POP . . ."

#28

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 5:37pm

"There are many times where the cast is led by all Broadway talents, and complete unknowns in the mainstream world. And the show is still amazing that way. "

I had the fortune of seeing it in September with Charlotte D'Ambrious and Eric Jordan Young. Such a fabulous show when they just have broadway talent. I wouldn't see it agian until all the stunt casting is gone.

---

Happy...Everything! Kaye Thompson

#29

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 5:41pm

I saw Chicago without any stunt cast members. It was Charlotte d'Amboise and Luba Mason. I thought it was a wonderful production. I don't think the production should close, especially if it's still selling well.

I have no problem with stunt casting unless the person in question is not fit for the role. For instance, if a celebrity looks the part but can't sing the part and they are still cast, then I have a problem with that. But if they can do the role well, more power to them.

#30

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:28pm

I've seen Chicago 17 times over the years, and I've rarely been disappointed in the stunt leads, and only once with the ensemble.

I do wonder what impact losing Charlotte for good will do to the show...because I tell you, the entire shows feels to rest on the energy and charisma of whoever is playing Roxie, because especiall the Roxie monologue sets the energy of the rest of the show, the one chance for the audience to get emotionally connected to the story. Personally, I think the show would not have lasted without Charlltte, because few could pull it off so many times.

PS 49th Street is my new fave street, between my two faves - Chicago and Sweeney Todd! Vive le diference!

---

"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008

#31

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:32pm

What show, in recent memory, can say the revival ran longer than the original production ?

---

Poster Emeritus

#32

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:33pm

The sick bastard that started this thread is out of his mind.
This show is more timeless than "The Music Man" or "Oklahoma!" It is also one of the best written, if not the best written show of all time. The staging is perfect. And yeah, it's been running for years, the cast is gonna change.

#33

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:35pm

See, I do not understand what some of the shows producers are thinking. Okay so first they have John O Hurley as Billy Flinn (excellent choice I am a big fan) and now they replace him with-Smokey Robinson? What the hell are they thinking.


It must DIE.

---

-------------------------
Light in the Piazza with Megan and Emi
"Girl you got money runnin' in yo bloodline."-Carl the Bartender

#34

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:39pm

Well, it's the Weisslers, the people who thought Brittney Spears would be an excellent replacement for the mediocre Christina Applegate in the medicore revival ofn "Sweet Chairty." Their casting is off the wall and sometimes odd. But "Chicago" is one of their better productions.

#35

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:42pm

I may be in the minority but Chicago should have won Best Musical over A Chorus Line.

I saw the original (of both ) & was blown away by Chicago

---

Poster Emeritus

#36

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:48pm

Let's face it, Chorus Line is inferior to Chicago as good as Chorus Line is. Now that we're on the topic of the Tony's, here's what it should have looked like in '76.
Musical: Chicago
Book: Chicago
Score: Chicago
Actress: Verdon
Featured Actress: McKechnie
Actor: Orbach
Featured Actor: Williams
Direction: Fosse
Choregraphy: Fosse
Scenery: Chicago
Costumes: Pacific Overtures
Lighting: Chorus Line

#37

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:49pm

You know I saw this show a little less than a year ago with Brenda Braxton and Charlotte D'Amboisse and I thought that the show was in the best shape it has ever been in. Its just such a strong piece of work and I dont think there is any reason to close it, It has become such a staple of New York theater, I don't think its going anywhere soon, and rightfully so.

---

"The hallmark of aristocracy is responsibility. Oh brother, that got me, that did me in!"

#38

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 9:51pm

Chorus Line had great choregraphy & 1 or 2 songs but Chicago's score was so much better as was the rest of the show

---

Poster Emeritus

#39

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 11:38pm

Oh my poor show....

*hangs head in shame*

I havent been back to the Ambassador since Roxane left almost a year ago. I will, however, be seeing the tour in Newark on my birthday.

Gypsy1527, you sure it was this past September you saw Chicago with Eric Jordan Young? He hasnt been in the cast in years, let alone playing Billy.

And because it's a Weissler production, the stunt casting will never be gone, sad to say.

I miss the days at the Shubert when the rush was front row, the doorman was hot as hell (and a sweetheart, to boot!), the cast was top notch and I, as a fan, wasn't over it.

---

"You're every gay man's wet dream!" ~ MA

If in Heaven you don't excel, you can always party down in hell...

#40

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 11:46pm

I would sooner see WICKED close...

CHICAGO solely relies on the talent of those on stage, and in my opinion, is one of the ONLY shows that does so.

What you see is what you get, but I think that is worth so much more than bright green sets and costumes and a useless dragon...

It will stay open at least through 2007-2008, if not longer...

#41

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/15/06 at 11:51pm

Eric Jordan Young was in it when I saw it in August 2005.

#42

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 12:14am

Curious, did anyone see the amazingly sung train wreck that was Patti LaBelle as Mama? I still tell stories of that lovely night in LA.

#43

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 12:58am

This thread upsets me greatly.

#44

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 1:30am

I was wondering how long it would take before CJR posted about how over "Chicago" she is!

(no offense meant, CJR!)

---

"My dreams, watching me said, one to the other...this life has let us down."

#45

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 1:30am

I would LOVE to have seem my girl Patti LaBelle as Mama!! And, I'd love to see my girl RuPaul as Mary Sunshine too, although I would love to see RuPaul as Velma as well (Why not?) - and, Haven't they ever asked Dame Edna in as Mama? (Or Mary Sunshine??) She is a HOOT!

---

"It is bad enough that people are dying of AIDS, but no one should die of ignorance." - Elizabeth Taylor

#46

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 1:46am

Patti would sing and she'd be great and then when the dialogue parts came you couldn't hear her. She also looked kind of uncomfortable.. but she was still a hoot. Now Jennifer Holidays Mamma was a hoot and a holler. She elongated the end of ..mamas good to you. and did those weird uhh.. uhh grunts.. to the delight of every show queen in the house.

---

HUSSY POWER! ------ HUSSY POWER!

Updated On: 2/16/06 at 01:46 AM

#47

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 7:57am

Eric came back for like, 2 months and I missed this? How is this possible?

... Wait.... I think I did know this..... and I think as much as I LOVE Eric, I couldnt bring myself to set foot back in that theatre.

It would take a LOT.

As for being over Chicago, I've been posting about that for a while lol As you can see, a lot of times I have NO idea what's going on in the Broadway company.

---

"You're every gay man's wet dream!" ~ MA

If in Heaven you don't excel, you can always party down in hell...

#48

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 8:03am

I have to correct myself:
I did see Luba Mason and thought she was great.

When I referred to stunt casting, I'm referring to the bad kind. Brooke Shields ect...

---

Happy...Everything! Kaye Thompson

#49

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 8:25am

Is Brooke Shields stunt casting? I wouldn't think so, she has handled herself well in GREASE, WONDERFUL TOWN and CHICAGO. She at least deserves some respect for coming back to NY to work on Broadway, she isn't someone who comes in(once), grabs the money and never comes back.

No CHICAGO shouldn't close it is still one of the better shows on Broadway. (I'd much rather see PHANTOM or RENT close). Stunt casting or not, if it brings people into the theatre let it live on!

#50

re: It's time for Chicago to go

Posted: 2/16/06 at 9:11am

I saw CHICAGO with Brooke Shields, and she blew me away. I thought her singing and dancing were good, but it was her acting which really got me. She played the character of Roxie on so many levels, she was fantastic. Shes the one who made CHICAGO one of my favorite shows I've seen.
But yeah, I think CHICAGO should at least last until the 10th anniversary mark. I dont think the Weisslers would close it until then, either.
So yeah, CHICAGO is an unbelievable show, and should surpass PHANTOM :)
but i do agree, there is A LOT of stunt casting...