LESTAT - The New Carrie! — Page 8

haha, yeah, because i really dont wanna have to waste my money to go in the theatre and see the actual show :P :) the cast recording is as far into this show as im going...

Is it common practice for a Broadway production to wait until costumes and sets are completely finalized to release photos?

---

"Littered."

*snort*

---

For the "family tree" that would probably work, but I dunno about all the ones with the cast lounging on each other-- there's a, er, size difference between Sarich and Noseworthy.

I was kind of confused that they had a brochure for the SF run anyway. But hey, I own one. Maybe it will be worth something some day.

---

... so many possible comments, so not going to make any of them.

---

I have the SF program too. I'm bringing it to the theater when I see the show on Saturday night for the cast to sign!

I saw the show tonight. I did student rush for $21 and sat in the center 4th row balcony, but moved down to second row mezzanine at intermission.

I really didn't think it was going to be as "bad" as I'd heard, but it kind of was. I loved it though. I thought it was floperific. The man next to me called it "In My Life with Vampires". Hardly. But I can definitely understand why some people were comparing it to Carrie. It has that whole gothic, bloody, outrageously dark aspect, but some really dark lines seem funny, and then it's interspersed with material like blonde childlike Claudia screaming "I don't want to be 10 forever" (paraphrased, of course) and jumping around with dolls, pulling their heads off.

(For those in the thread who have mentioned Second Act Trouble, I've read it from cover to cover twice... also pick up Not Since Carrie, and The Happiest Corpse I've Ever Seen: The Last 25 Years of the Broadway Musical.)

"I Want More" was glorious, and certainly that distinct number that all flops have that wakes the audience up from their naps and snaps them out of their stupors. (Like "You Are So Beyond" in Marilyn or "Serenity" in Triumph of Love or "I'll Never Go There Anymore" in Kelly) Is it me or is Claudia Tina Denmark five years later?

I thought Hugh Panaro was just fine in the role. He seemed sensual enough to me. In general, I don't have any complaints about the cast. Jim Stanek (who I thought was so- so in Slut) was very good, although I thought his song and style were blatantly musical comedy, clashing with the rest of the show/ cast when he first came out... this soon passed though. Poor Carolee Carmello. She is one of my favorite actresses ever- please get her into a hit soon. Allison Fischer was very good, but I don't think her performance itself is revelatory- the way the show is written, her role is a lifesaver. She comes along and declares herself as a character and what she wants very clearly. After a whole two hours having no idea what Lestat the protagonist wanted exactly, Claudia emerges and literally screams her wants as a character, which the audience found very refreshing. Then, lo and behold, she has ANOTHER want song, albeit this one is not as showstopping.

What DID Lestat want? Was there a moment when he went from wanting to not harm anyone and wanting to stop sucking blood to giving in? Did anything make this happen? Was there a transformation at all? What was his objective for the entire first act? Does he want to be with Nicholas? Does he want to find a way to do good as a vampire? There were inklings and hints of what his objective might be, but it was always murky. Sure he went on a journey, but a journey for what? And why does the song list in the program mysteriously not list any of the characters who sing the songs?

Why was Nicholas so good where every other character was bad enough to actually turn into a vampire? What was so evil inherently about Louis? Why was the Dad given such importance at the beginning if he wasn't to be an important character? What was with the line about Gabrielle not wanting to spend time with Lestat anymore- didn't understand that... The rules of the world that the show was in were NOT set up clearly at the beginning, and I'm sure they'd be much easier to understand by someone familiar with the books... I can come up with answers to some of these questions and some of the many others I thought the show was unclear about as well... but the answers are unsure, because I thought the script and direction combined left many things unexplained and misguided...

As far as the "Vampire Flop Genre" is concerned, I think it's kind of like the "Italy Musical Flop Genre". For many reasons, it is hard to write a musical about either of these subjects that will not flop. Audiences today can't accept them for some reason, and this may be a fluke coincidence, but more likely it's the result of American culture... vampire horror movies are allowed to be somewhat pulpy, campy, and "bad", but if a vampire musical is this way, it will not succeed commercially- it will become the target for criticism of musicals being silly. The music and attitudes of Italy also don't come off well in musical theatre for various reasons- Bravo Giovanni, Carmelina, Buttrio Square, Anna Karenina, Chess, Sail Away, Something More, Portofino, La Strada, etc... but then there was NINE, so amongst the vampire floppage, perhaps there is room for a hit as well...?

I would recommend Lestat to a few of my friends who love gothic, mysterious shows... the atmostphere of the show is cool, the direction and music are interesting, and cast is certainly superb... I hope they improve the show before opening night, because I don't wish bad things upon the show, I feel badly that I keep wanting to describe it as floperific! (Even though this is a compliment coming from me.) I will definitely see it again after it opens because I am curious about changes... plus I think I will enjoy learning the show and music more thoroughly.

To those who are upset about not liking Lestat after buying super- expensive tickets... try student rush OR TKTS OR a broadwaybox or playbill.com discount... OR I'm sure it will be up on TDF shortly...

---

Spoilers ahead, I guess...



I thought Hugh looked and sang well (everyone in this show sounds great) but he had this sort of weird, Americanish "gee whiz" quality to his performance. When he releases his mother to wander the world, he does so in a manner suggesting he's encouraging her to run for president of the P.T.A. Earlier, when he "releases" the vampires from their underground tomb (or something...it can hard to understand exactly what's going on) he does it like he's telling a bunch of nerds that they REALLY CAN win the big game.

Favorite lyric: "The shy Chinese behind their painted fans."

---

MYB,

For the record, having actually SEEN the show (and no, seeing it in SF isn't going to cut it. You saw a different show), I never had a problem with figuring out Lestat's motivations. The two acts are quite different thematically, but they are both clearly from the same vein of creative thought, and flow rather nicely.

And as for stand-out moments of the show, I thought "I Want More" was definitely one of them. But so were "Crimson Kiss" and "Sail Me Away". (And yes, the latter needs some sort of expository before or after.)

Does Hugh still deliver his lines in that annoying "sing song super hero" voice he used in SF? That was very annoying.

---

I was referring to InfiniteTheatreFrenzy's well-written review of the show, where SHE said, "What DID Lestat want?"

And again, that's the same question I had about the SF show.

Good god.

I have to agree with a lot of the others who've posted on this thread: the worst aspect of the show was the length. I saw it last night -- and granted, it was only a preview performance -- but the first act (especially) was interminable. It seemed to go on and on forever. And though so much was thrown at the audience, it didn't really feel like anything of substance really happened. It's too bad, really, because I think they could have done much more interesting work with the source material. And there was obviously a lot of great work put into much of it.