LITTLE SHOP revival video in London...- Page 2

[Link Larkin Wanabe]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 3:01am

I have to admit that I find Sheridan's more subdued take on Audrey to be very endearing.

Akiva

[EugLoven]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 3:07am

Little Shop is one of my Top favorite shows... and this production looks really disappointing.

The plant looks like a green talking garbage can and, I too, would much prefer to see 3 black urchins.

[Rentaholic2]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 3:26am

NathanLaneStalker, "community theatre production" were the words that came to my mind as well. The talent seems great, and I appreciate that the show doesn't look as over-the-top and cartoonish as the American revival, but the set isn't quirky enough--it's quite bland, actually. Yes, it is a simple little shop, but it needs character (in a production I was in, our set included a large black and white photo portrait of an old woman in big glasses who we dubbed "mama Mushnik"--stuff like that).

And don't get me started on the Audrey II. I think the American revival's Audrey II was maybe a little "much" and pretty cartoonish, but dang was it cool and impressive...at least it gave the illusion that the plant itself was actually saying the words we were hearing. I'm all about getting back to the basics, but if you have the ability and resources to make an Audrey II really COME ALIVE and show emotion, character and humor, by all means, you them.

[goldes]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 4:03am

I saw this production last month, and thought it was just phenomenal. It's clear that the production team went out of there way to not just replicate what's been seen before. Audrey is not an Ellen Green clone. The urchins have a very modern "attitude" approach. And yes, the plant looks and sounds different - but actually worked quite well in the show. To enjoy it, you just need to put aside your assumptions based on our productions and take it for what it is.

I was talking to the music director afterwards, who told me that Alan Menken really enjoyed this production as well...

[folkyboy]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 4:14am

i don't think it looks as bad as everyone is letting on. granted, it doesn't really look Broadway calibur but it seems like it is done with the best intentions (which is more than i can say about most Broadway shows).

and the plant reminds me of a large sock puppet but kinda cute :)

[Eastwickian]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 5:38am

Compare and contrast this well reviewed and sold-out production to the decidedly mixed-review flop that played on Broadway and you'll discover why you can't judge the entire show based on a short video clip. As with Sunday in the Park with George, the Menier have managed to reinvent the show (why are people always so shocked when things are done differently?) using their limited resources, and in this case have produced a really great production of an (arguably) overdone musical.

I should be on their books

[dirty rotten guy]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 5:42am

Im suprized by these comments. When I saw the plant I thought it looked awesome, especially those spindly vines coming off like something out of a Tim Burton film, and it was great to see someone give a new take on it instead of the same plant we get variations of over and over again. I did think the voice of the Audrey II was less powerfull than I have heard it performered befre but I thought the rest of the cast looked great. I for one LOVE Ellen Greene but I am very open to this new, less over the top Audrey. I always enjoy seeing a new interpretation, it keeps the piece from getting stale and tired, and this looks to be a fresh take. I imagine this is a much more subdued and probably, overall more affecting Little Shop.

[mallardo]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 8:05am

Having seen both the Broadway and London production I can categorically say that there is NO comparison. The London production is simply poor. Yes, Sheridan Smith reminds of Jane Krakowski - except she can't sing! In fact no one in the cast can sing. The Urchins - whatever color they are - are woeful. And worst of all is the guy who plays Orin etc. No attempt at the long held high note that Douglas Sills used to stop the show with. No fits of crazed laughter. No voice. Nothing.

At the Menier, the set was much too big for the tiny stage and I spent most of the show watching two sweating stage hands giving trying to push the flower shop into the wings. Believe me, when it comes to Musicals, London critics are not to be trusted. If you want proof of that check out the god-awful Cabaret currently playing, then read the rave reviews.

Whoever said this LSOH looked like community theater was on the money.

[Eastwickian]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 8:36am

But did you like it?

Seriously, you must have seen a totally different show to me - I was never distracted by the set movement, and thought that Sheridan Smith's performance was terrific. IMO the whole of the cast worked hard to create a perfectly believable 'world' which was certainly less cartoon-like than previous versions have felt the need to be. And if there are no 'crazy long notes' written into the score, I have no objection to Jasper Britton choosing not to copy the mannerisms of someone else's interpretation.

For the West End transfer, his role is being played by someone who is not known for their singing ability, which should be interesting...

[mallardo]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 9:00am

Eastwickian, we just have to disagree. I was very seriously disappointed in LSOH. Mainly because I loved both previous productions I saw at the Chocolate Factory - Sunday in the Park and Last Five Years. In both cases the best productions of the works that I've seen. I just thought they missed the boat this time around.

[ruthiefan_felix]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 9:16am

I think its abit unfair tat people that havent seen the production is bashing the show! I havent seen the show yet but will do and am looking foward to it.

[Eastwickian]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 9:25am

Mallardo - absolutely; from the points you raise I can see why you felt disappointed, we must have just picked up on different things! And I have to agree about the critics reaction to Cabaret, I was fully expecting it to get slaughtered...

Updated On: 2/8/07 at 09:25 AM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 11:20am

It looks more like a high school set.

And that poor urchins face in the video, she has no idea where to look.

All off the Urchins costumes look like they came rigth off of the rack at Target.

That plant is just wrong looking. Like a garbage can with teeth.

Updated On: 2/8/07 at 11:20 AM

[MovieGuy1031]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 1:46pm

I think it looks horrible. The plant is just ridiculous looking.

[BtMartin25]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 3:47pm

nothing can compare to the Broadway Revival... this is like 10 times worse.

[love you forever]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 3:58pm

yeah I agree with everyone else who thinks the plant looks awkward and bad!!!! Also I didn't think the guy who was singing for the plant was that great either. I'm kinda disappointed

[purpleprince101]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 4:03pm

i am a HUGE little shop fan. this looks really corny. the plant looks horrible


<---------

[MovieGuy1031]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 4:03pm

I have the cast recording of the Broadway Revival, and I adore it... yet there seems to be alot of negative views on the show starring Hunter and Kerry... what was wrong with it?

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 6:08pm

How else can I say it?

There was a spark with the first show, and everything just worked. It was lighting in a bottle and revivals never quite meet that expectation.

[Rentaholic2]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 6:12pm

my only complaint with the Hunter Foster version of LSOH is that they took a quaint show, suited for a small dingy off-broadway theatre, and try to turn it into a huge, over-exaggerated (often slapstick) production. I did however think that most aspects of the show were great - the plant was just ridiculously cool, I mean, it REALLY came to life. BUT, with this revival, part of the charm of the show was lost a bit. But overall, I still thought it was great.

[loverly]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 6:15pm

Isn't Little Shop supposed to look a little down on its luck?

[helloagain]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 6:15pm

I don’t think that the production was in any way what many of you are calling it. Unfortunately that video does not really represent the show very well. Firstly smith’s performance is wonderful and very different as is the production. The production was not trying to be a “revival” per say but more of a reinvention. The show and set was ingenious you cannot compare it to last years Sunday as the shows could not be more different and are completely different animals. Little shop showed really how versatile the chocolate factory is the ingenious set folded out and I can’t really describe it but it was amazing. The stage was the same size as the audience if not bigger the theater only seats about 150 people and not in separate seats! (If you ask me the theater only seats 75 but they think differently, sorry if that sounds like complaining it’s not). And to the comments about the “white” urchin I don’t think any of your comments about the casting are fair. I am all for colorblind casting and this defiantly falls under that category. The person that was cast and I do hope I am not offending anyone in saying this but is a larger performer, and casting is very limited to larger females in musical theater and her voice is huge and deserved the part she got, in this production the urchins were not presented as “the Supremes” as it would have affected the integrity of the production and the way the urchins were presented fit the production perfectly.
Just my two cents,

Harryx

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 6:33pm

This is an amzing production that is almost a tribute to its original off broadway run other than the OTT broadway run(does broadway have to make everything look so OTT).

The cast are great and it plays at a great pace and the sets represent the down trodden feel of skid row a hell of a lot more than the New York production did.

[theaterdude87]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 6:40pm

It just seemed so bland when you were looking at the pictures...I really enjoyed the revival and yes it may be over-the-top but it worked for me...it just seemed like somthing was missing...especially with Sheridan sound like someone from brooklyn in one not of the song and then singing like maria in som...did not work for me.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 2/8/07 at 6:45pm

shes got a good voice but not the best by far

Shes a tv actress over here who starred in the TV show 2 Pints Of Lager And A Packet Of Crisps and has some of the best comic timeing i have seen from a young actress in a long time.