Jekyll & Hyde (Broadway Previews!) — Page 4

'IF'? You are going to come here and post the way you've been posting, criticizing people for their opinions and you may not even see it in New York?

I have not criticized anyone for their opinion on here. I don't know what I ever did to you to have you personally attack every comment I have made on the boards on pretty much any thread. I have agreed with you on lots of other stuff. We don't agree on this show. I really don't know what I ever did to you.

---

"While I wish more had seen the original version to have a qualified comparision, I am still happy that it is getting a second go round on Broadway. We sure did enjoy the first round! Please, see it for yourself...Enjoy the experience."

I wish that I saw the original yet I don't really feel the need to compare. I wish the two could just stand on their own and be appreciated for each one individually. I can't say that I've ever gone to a show and not found something that I enjoyed about it, whether it was a particular performer, the musical score or the story. I can't remember ever going to a show and coming out saying that I didn't like the show and that I was sorry that I went. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I absolutely love the theater, music and particularly musicals. I appreciate that you encourage all to go see it and enjoy it.

With that being said, I was at Jekyll & Hyde last night. The place was packed. If there were any empty seats in the orchestra, I didn't see them. I admit that I could not see the whole mezz but what I could see was pretty packed too.

I loved the performance and the music. I cried, I giggled, I held my breath. The performers made me care about them and their plight and I think the singing was off the charts good. I absolutely love, love, love, the musical score. I heard a lot of people around me commenting on how great the voices are and how good the performers are.

Although I did not see the original on BW I talked to a person that did see it multiple times. She absolutely loved the show last night and thought all of the performers were perfect for the roles. She particularly loved Deborah Cox.

I just feel, love it or hate it, everyone is entitled to their opinion but I hate to hear anyone discouraging people from seeing a show for themselves to decide. It just makes me sad. I support live theater and there is something for everyone. I think Broadway is the best of the best and I'm never disappointed. I want to see Broadway grow and prosper and continue to be the amazing experience that it has always been for me.

My opinion is that this show is well worth going to see. It's not an uplifting, feel good kind of show and if that is what people are looking for they will be disappointed. I do think the performances are excellent, the music is breath taking and the singers have amazing voices, which is well worth spending my money on.

I hate when revivals are compared to the originals. It's totes unfair and way harsh, Ty.

"... if a few posts on a message board are enough to deter someone from seeing a show, I can't imagine they wanted to see it particularly much anyway."

I agree. Well said!

I too wasn't sure about Deborah Cox but she has a power house voice and I thought she acted the part very well. I didn't hear any glitches in her voice as was stated earlier in this thread. I really like her voice.

I also agree that Constantine gave 100% to the role. It's interesting that it was hard to understand the words when he was singing early on. I wonder if it was the sound system or acoustics because I thought last night that he was really good at enunciating the words and how important it was due to most of the contents of the story being sung. I do know the music and the words to the songs so I didn't have any problem following the story line but I did notice during the show how good he was at enunciating.

As far as the songs being more of a concert and the performers just standing there and grand standing, I thought there was a lot of movement and action during the songs. That being said, Constantine & Deborah both end their big songs with big notes, center stage, arms up. Great applause each time and I didn't think it hurt or detracted from the story or the flow of the show. If it does, I guess the blame would have to go on the director for that.

Most revivals have entirely differnet creative teams and typically have not been mounted on any major professional stages for a long period of time. J&H has been running in this county and around the world before it closed on Broadway in 2001. I believe the Bremen, Germany production was the first European production that was playing during the Broadway run. I had friends who saw it and they said it was very bold, sexy and bloody.

Frank has always been a vital part of this new version and it was in the wind at least 4 years ago that he was bringing it back to Broadway for a fresh new audience. This may not be public knowledge but those are the facts. So technically this is not a revival. It's just another version. Hey, we had SP the original, SP2, SP3. So maybe we should consider this J&H 2 for a new generation.

It will be interesting to see how it is received by the critics in a few weeks.

---

One more comment. I don't know if anyone else noticed this when they saw this show but Jekyll's spoken voice seemed to have more of a Scottish pronunciation of words than an English one. Maybe I'm a little crazy but this bugged me a bit too. :)

I saw this version on tour. Not only did Constantine have an accent, he had two. One for Jekyll and one for Hyde. You can clearly tell the difference between the two. I had no problem understanding what was being said. Some of the other characters also speak with accents. In fact it made a lot of sense when you think about the setting of the show. The accents were not a problem for me.

Saw the show tonight. Absolutely loved it. Went in not knowing a single thing about the show, and came out a huge fan. Constantine and Deborah were phenomenal and gave incredible vocal performances. Both gave decent acting performances, but nothing noteworthy. For a 3rd preview in a new space, the show ran mostly smooth, with only minor bumps like scenery getting stuck for a second or a few sound problems.

For people wondering -
- Got a 2 student rush tickets at 6pm. $32, right orchestra. Didnt ask for an ID.
- The orchestra was 85% full I would say. Center section was sold out, and the far sides were the parts open. The Mezzanine, on the other hand, was about 20% full. Only a handful of people up there.
- The deck itself is VERY far back from the front row. Unlike EVITA, the stage is actually about 10 ft behind the conductor. Because of the small proscenium in the big theatre, it sometimes made me feel I was sitting farther away then I was.

News flash. Cuccioni and Eder are not in this show . The show is different and the sets are different and if you can't live with that, then I suggest you go see something else.

I also fully expect the critics to hate this, since Wildhorn can't seem to please them no matter what he does. I read reviews while this show was on tour. One critic said Maroulis couldn't act or sing and the next person said he was so good he is sure to win a Tony. Bottom line is, they don't know anymore than you or I do.

I saw this last night and tonight. I loved it. I liked the accents and I could understand everything. I thought the vocals were amazing and I think Maroulis is a remarkably good actor. He and Cox give it everything they've got.

I saw this while it was on tour, and it seems like it is running smoother. Seems like there are always some set problems, usually in the laboratory.

Why does every seat have to be filled? There were good crowds both nights. Maybe a little moe the first night, but certainly a decent showing. Some of you act like it is a failure if it isn't sold out. I'd say they're doing pretty well.

Everybody in our group loved the show, and those around us all seemed to be enjoying it. Applause was pretty darned enthusiastic.

So, for what it's worth, it's a good show. Don't compare it to the old show and you might just have a good time.

>>>>It is all part of the job. We work in a business that critiques your work.
True but- Most people go to the theater to be entertained. We are not there to dissect & critique each aspect of the production but to immerse ourselves in the total experience. To be inspired, intrigued, amused, to stimulate our emotions. We are looking at it differently than a critic or maybe anyone involved in theater. Perhaps the accents aren't authentic; what it tells me is the story takes place in another country- simple. It is suppose to be fun, a night out, and an escape from daily life.
As long as the audiences love the show, I don't care what the critics think. I was there on Friday. Everyone at intermission and after the show was talking about how wonderful it was. & yes I was eavesdropping.
To quote Walt Disney: We are not trying to entertain the critics. I'll take my chances with the public.

---

I've never seen the show and never will, but agree it is great to see comments from new posters. They have just as much right to their opinions as the regulars do, and a fresh take on theatre should always be welcome.

I think everyone should be able to have an opinion without getting slammed. I liked the show, but if you don't that is okay. I just don't like how nasty some people are with their comments and trying to bring down a show because they are anonymous on the Internet. I'd be ashamed to be so mean. Like someone else said, it's entertainment.