Kinky Boots previews — Page 3

I didn't think Lola's first two cabaret numbers were that specific to her. Just because the say her name over and over again doesn't mean they give much insight to her character. Even though I compared them to Don't Tell Mama and Mein Herr earlier they are far from being as witty and clever. Sally is performing songs in an act, but they brilliant establish atmosphere and are an extension of her character. Lola's numbers are songs you could hear any drag queen sing.

How are Stark's songs tied to plot, or another way to ask, how do they propel the plot forward? (I do plan on giving the score another listen, but if you typed up the lyrics to his songs and printed them here I don't think you'd find much specific that develops his character or his plot.)

I don't think songs have to always advance plot, but I prefer that they at least give real insight into character in specific ways. We gain so much wonderful knowledge about Will Parker through "Kansas City." We understand him by the way he relates the tale of his trip to the "big city." Through exquisite detail we feel every longing and yearning Little Edie feels in "Around the World." Could Carl Magnus be any more well-drawn than in "In Praise of Women?" What about the introspective nature of Amalia's "Will He Like Me?" The lyrics are natural and perhaps simple, but so specific to Amalia that you feel no other character in the canon could sing them.

Personally I think really amazing lyrics are the hardest piece of show writing to get right. Unfortunately I didn't find much evidence that the lyrics in Kinky Boots were very good.

---

The website eperkins posted a link to does have two songs--the non Cyndi remix of Sex is in the Heel and Everybody Say Yeah performed by, I assume (it doesn't say) the actual cast. Taken out of context they're--ok. Not too specific except for both talk about shoes (and Say Yeah has a few story related lyrics)--I assume Sex is in the Heel is a drag number?
Kinky Boots Media

***POSSIBLE SPOILERS***

Sadly, it doesn't sound like much has changed since the end of the Chicago run. Loved Annaleigh's solo, but it was the only high point in a show full of middle points. Porter sang well (though his big number sounded like only half a song, not allowing the audience to fully grasp the melody), but all his scenes in drag were so affected and forced, there was simply no range, nuance or depth. He just spoke all his lines in CAPITALIZED ITALICS because ALL DRAG QUEENS only have TWO DIMENSIONS, DARLING: DIVA AND BITCH. Which may be true on stage, but full-time drag queens (which this show implies Lola to be) often speak conversationally off-stage.

Have they fixed the ending or does the relationship still just sort of happen out of nowhere just in time for the finale?

Also, I really wanted the mouthy female factory worker to develop into a bigger character. That was a real missed opportunity, not giving her more comedy material as well as a number with the other factory women commenting on the situation and the evolution of the mindset of the workers.

I honestly don't see a Tony for Porter unless it is a particularly weak category this season. I thought Gregory Haney did it better in Bring It On.

---

"The best part is the creatives give the audience what they want while keeping true to the "true story" I see comments above about plot devices - does not everyone remember that this is a true story? "

That's a fair point, but remember more accurately this is one more step removed from the "true story"--it's a musical based on a film that was fictionalized from a true story. I can't say whether the plot element works or not (I felt it seemed arbitrary in the so-so movie, though), but if it doesn't work for someone, you can't discount that by simply saying "well, it really happened, kinda, at least somewhat, in real life, so!"

I was also there for the Sunday preview, and heartily agree with Whizzer's less than glowing review. At one point Charlie leaves a phone message to Lola basically saying "When you leave the room, you take all the air out of the room with you." Boy, was that true of the show as a whole. It seemed the star of the piece was clearly Lola/Simon and all the time Charlie was taking up center stage with his own problems was time spent treading water waiting for the star to return.

The unavoidable fact is the show was grabbing cliches from better shows, one after the other, from song setups to costume gags to choreography the whole night long. (That lovely piece of treadmill staging that ends Act I is simply an abridged steal from the OK-GO video, amiright?)

Most frustrating for me was the mind-numbing repetitiveness of so much of the score. After the endless wall of sound, it was great to have a quiet moment like "I'm Not My Father's Son", even if the lyrics never developed the song idea past the banal.

HOWEVER (and this is the confounding thing--) Was the audience having the time of their life? You betcha, they were! And don't believe the house was only full of comps for friends and family. I was up in the rear mezz surrounded by paying tourists from East Podunk on all sides who just LOVED the thing to death. For me it was like an evening at BOM or NEWSIES all over again-- a night of packaged showbiz shtick geared toward the masses that just left me scratching my head, and cheering inside that I had seen such a spectacular matinee of DROOD that very afternoon. Yes, the glories of musical comedy are alive and well on Broadway, just 10 blocks north of the offerings at the Hirschfeld Theater.

What's the seating like in the Hirschfeld? Are the outer aisles of the orchestra acceptable, i.e. no obstructions. Can you still experience the show fully?

What's the running time of this show?

Someone, with all due respect, I think you totally missed the point of that scene. Lola refuses to be pinned down by others' efforts to define her in simple binary terms of attraction. That's why different people can draw different interpretations of the character. I learned that is a sign of good art.

You might want to look up the term "genderqueer" before you go off accusing others of being "sad" and "regressive" -- especially Cindy Lauper, Harvey Fierstein and Jerry Mitchell, three of the most progressive humanitarians you'll find working for LGBT rights. I wonder why you & Whizzer keep posting such negative notes over and over. Others obviously thought it was a fantastic evening.

Hmmmmmmmm.

Someone likes one show and not another? CLEARLY they must be a troll.

Nine posts, I believe? That's an opinion and an opinion and an opinion and an opinion and.... That's more than earning it, it's establishing a monopoly by hostile takeover.

Best Friend-- curious to know where your animosity toward me and others comes from.

Chanel wrote: "Fierstein says he wrote the character of Lola as heterosexual, but Billy Porter says he plays it as gay-gay-gay. I find this fascinating. Can someone who's seen the show comment on this?"

I commented. I responded not to what I know of Harvey or Cindy's history of defending LGBT rights, but only what was performed on the Hirschfeld Stage Sunday night. To take what I consider the star character of Kinky Boots and deny him an identity as a sexual being despite singing a series of songs revolving around sex ("Sex is in the Heel", for god's sake) seems to me, yes, regressive and sad. I know from Drag Queens, have a few as friends, and have donned a ton of eyelashes, wigs and kinky boots myself in my time. Those queens are real live sexual beings, very often with actual boyfriends, husbands and lovers of their own. (Don't actually know any paired with women.)

Lecture over. I don't belittle you for loving the show. Don't belittle me for not.

Someone, I bear absolutely no animosity toward you or anyone else on the board. I am sorry if it seemed otherwise to you, and thank you for letting me clarify that. I was responding only to your opinion that "Lola is reduced to an asexual character was one of the saddest most regressive things about the night's politics."

I respect that you "know from Drag Queens" very much. I also do, and in my experience, some are straight, some are gay, and some are bisexual. Some choose to define themselves, and some choose not to, especially when they're being pressured. What I saw was a character standing up to being bullied by refusing to be defined by anyone but herself. I think that's why even the creative team are saying you can see Lola in different ways. I thought that was a very rich and interesting characterization, something way beyond what I've seen on stage before. You may have seen something different. I respect that and appreciate the chance to discuss it.

My point about the creative team's work for LGBT causes was not to imply that the play should be judged by anything other than what's on the stage. I simply pointed that out to say "hey, wait a minute, before you call someone's politics 'sad' and 'regressive,' respect for the people involved suggests considering that there might be another way of seeing it. I disagreed with your opinion, and thought it was an unfair blow, so wanted to defend a different point of view. I hope that clarifies where I was coming from, and thank you for considering my perspective.

And I'm reluctant to add another, but would hate for there to be a misunderstanding or for you or anyone to be needlessly upset. I absolutely agree everyone has a right to express their opinion, and never said otherwise. I look forward very much to yours -- I always do. But I believe that by the same token, if someone expresses one over and over, I'm allowed to express mine that there's a different point of view. I felt concerned enough to do so tonight.

I am no shill, but a follower and new poster to this board. I am sorry if you found no merit in my perspective. Perhaps others will feel differently.