JCS gets only raves in SD... Tonys next?

[BroadwayNorth2]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 9:28pm

Unanimous raves:

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Review-Roundup-Broadway-Bound-JESUS-CHRIST-SUPERSTAR-at-La-Jolla-Playhouse-20111202#


Updated On: 12/2/11 at 09:28 PM

[blaxx]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 9:32pm

Broadway is not as generous as regional theaters. The competition for revival of a musical is not easy this year.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 9:38pm

And I think the New York Times already reviewed unfavorably the original Stratford Staging. Nice to see it coming into town a hit with local Southern California audiences, but NYC is an entirely different ball game.

[BroadwayNorth2]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 9:42pm

I haven't been on these boards in a while. Is "Follies" the leading contender at this point for best revival?
What are the other possibilities?
JCS
Follies
On A Clear Day
Porgy And Bess
Evita
Godspell
??

[blaxx]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 9:46pm

Follies would be a guarantee if it wasn't for the fact that it might close months before the awards.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 9:52pm

New York obviously, as we've seen countless times, takes to shows that have been successes elsewhere (be it California, Seattle, Canada or London) very differently. I'm not sure I'd say Isherwood's Times review was unfavourable as opposed to mixed (yes, I know, everyone on here has different definitions of what a mixed review is). His main problems with the show seemed to be that he doesn't think it works in any production, and this production's strengths didn't make up for that.

"Mr. Nolan, with the traditional blond curls of Renaissance portraiture, has a strong tenor that can stretch toward the screeching high notes of Jesus anguished night of doubt in the second-act climax, Gethsemane. But as in other productions Ive seen, this revered figure remains a dramatic blank, storming through the temple or somberly admonishing the apostles without evincing much in the way of a real human personality, despite all the debates about whether he is just a man or the true son of God. (If being semi-divine means striding around looking tortured and noble, Id be inclined to give Mr. Nolans Jesus the benefit of no doubt whatsoever.)

Mr. Youngs superbly sung Judas is much livelier, imbued with an embittered ferocity that seems to stem primarily from irritation at having his hot and heavy bromance with Jesus compromised by the comely Mary Magdalene, played with simple ardor and rich voice by Ms. Kennedy. "

"In this context it might be tempting to view Jesus Christ Superstar  that title alone!  as a South Park-flavored send-up of itself. But the show doesnt really support such treatment, and Mr. McAnuff tries to walk a line between respect and subversive flash that doesnt quite solve the problem. As Jesus stretches his arms out wide, striking the famous pose that has come to symbolize human suffering and the extremity of his sacrifice, a glowing cross made of golden light bulbs descends from above to light him from behind. Its the Crucifixion as a big finish, but its not meant to be a gag. "

"Mr. McAnuff has had great success on Broadway with the rock-based musicals the Whos Tommy and Jersey Boys. A composer himself (he also wrote the incidental music for his concurrent production of Twelfth Night at the festival), he is clearly inspired by the challenge of marrying rocks visceral intensity to the demands of theatrical narrative. His production is clean-lined, strongly sung and dramatically focused. "

(I won't bother quoting his praise for Brent Carver as it's now a non issue)



http://theater.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/theater/jesus-christ-superstar-and-camelot-at-stratford.html

[ChenoKahn]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 10:05pm

Only Jesus Christ Superstar and Evita seem like they will make it to the Tonys but depends on how they are reviewed. Evita didn't even make it a year in London where it is a more popular show. If Jesus Christ Superstar gets panned by the New York Times it might not make it till the Tonys.

[gvendo2005]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 11:36pm

Well, considering the fact that in Stratford the show got a love letter from everybody but the Times, and that every paper that has reviewed it in its La Jolla run so far has continued this trend, I can only predict that this may be a show the NY Times won't be able to kill. But it's too early to say for sure.

[gvendo2005]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 11:41pm

And the Times pan was really more "I HATE this show... but the production is really good and full of talent... but I HATE this show" from Isherwood. In spite of his not being able to like the show even in a good production, he pointed out the production's strengths. Don't get me wrong, the review was mostly negative, but he left pull quotes. If he doesn't like something and is out to kill it, he'll write the review carefully enough that they can just barely use anything (like, say, Godspell -- JUST AN EXAMPLE, DON'T DELETE THE THREAD).

[ACL2006]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 11:42pm

The nominees will likely be Follies, Evita(unless it bombs), JCS & Porgy & Bess(based on names). No way On A Clear Day gets nominated and Godspell will only get nominated if Evita bombs.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/2/11 at 11:46pm

EVITA won't bomb - I didn't think (Elena Roger's great performance aside) the revival in London was especially inspired but it was good enough for a Tony nomination. Hopefully in the six years since it played London the creative team will revisit some of the things that didn't work in that staging. Nominees will likely be EVITA, PORGY, FOLLIES and JCS

[dented146]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 1:23am

Having just seen the La Jolla production let me say first that not everything in the San Diego Union review was a rave. But it is a very impressive production.

It is wonderfully creative and paced. It is very slick. I can see critics liking it a little more than the public. I think that some people did not appreciate the new look and approach.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 1:45am

I'm excited for JCS, but while Young's voice is beautiful I don't think it's the right kind of voice for Judas. There's no ferocity or anything.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 3:01am

And the Times pan was really more "I HATE this show... but the production is really good and full of talent... but I HATE this show" from Isherwood. In spite of his not being able to like the show even in a good production, he pointed out the production's strengths. Don't get me wrong, the review was mostly negative, but he left pull quotes. If he doesn't like something and is out to kill it, he'll write the review carefully enough that they can just barely use anything (like, say, Godspell -- JUST AN EXAMPLE, DON'T DELETE THE THREAD)."

I'm not touching the Godspell bit But, exactly. I think it'll do well enough with New York critics overall. (I've never compared Isherwood to Brantley but when they review the same show, do they tend to agree or not?)

[B3TA07]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 3:44am

Sure, why not

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 11:56am

'I can only predict that this may be a show the NY Times won't be able to kill.'

Brantley done a pretty good job 11 years ago.

http://theater.nytimes.com/mem/theater/treview.html?_r=1&html_title=&tols_title=JESUS%20CHRIST%20SUPERSTAR%20(PLAY)&pdate=20000417&byline=By%20BEN%20BRANTLEY&id=1077011430430&&scp=1&sq=jesus%20christ%20superstar%20review&st=cse

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 12:07pm

Yeah but...that production sucked...hard.

[gvendo2005]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 2:06pm

Part of the problem with the 2000 revival was that it was a stylistic mixed bag. Design-wise, the priests were straight out of The Matrix, the Roman guards wearing modern riot gear looked more like Darth Vader, Jesus and the apostles appeared to have escaped from Rent (or a GAP outlet, take your pick), and Herod was the Emcee from Cabaret with less gay and more chorus boys. You could see they were trying to tie it to today and make it an "edgy," "passionate" production with "impact." Instead, they tried to appeal to too many common denominators, and fell on their ass.

Casting was also a major problem. As my colleague Danny Zolli, who's done this show way more often than the next man (unless the next man happens to be Ted Neeley), puts it, "It was misconceived from the get-go [...] On the whole, I didn't care for that production. Not even close. [...] The Broadway production was, in my opinion, a very English style production of the show. American audiences don't tend to respond to that very well. American audiences want their Jesus' and Judas' to be willing to cough up a lung for them in the course of the show. It's called 'the Passion' for a reason. There has to be passion within the actors and actresses performing the roles in order to give the story its justice." I couldn't put it better myself.

[gvendo2005]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 2:08pm

Oops... while mentioning the stylistic mixed bag, I forgot to mention the one choice that would have worked in the right production: Pilate as an SS officer, in full Gestapo uniform. (HINT TO MODS: If I got the ability to edit my posts back, maybe I wouldn't have to do this in every thread I post in if I think of something else.)

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 12/3/11 at 2:41pm

Are they still playing the show ridiculously under tempo like at Stratford? Do any of the reviews mention it?

[dented146]

Posted: 12/4/11 at 2:08am

I didn't feel the tempo was wrong. The show moves wonderfully. and Ripped Man, Josh Young is incredible--both singing and acting. If there is to be a Tony performance from this production, his would be the one.

In my opinion, the only weakness in the show is simply the weakness that the original material brings to the stage.

I saw the original production in London when I was pretty young and unfamiliar with the music. It didn't do much for me at that time. This production is far more memorable and exciting. If you don't particularly like JCS, you might still not like this one. But with this one, you have a shot.

[BroadwayNorth2]

Posted: 12/4/11 at 9:29pm

Another rave (with only a couple small quibbles):

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117946688
Updated On: 12/4/11 at 09:29 PM

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/4/11 at 9:38pm

The TIMES has a strange history of having the same reviewer review the show when it comes in. I think it's silly cause a second opinion would alsways be welcomed. But if they stick to this policy they will get Isherwood again.