Legally Blonde Blooper 4/10/07

Glad to hear that you enjoyed it! I'm really excited about all of the positive feedback that this show has gotten.

That wasn't a blooper, that scene goes from December to April.

The dog barfing is a funny live blooper.

hahaha wondered how long it would take for one of the dogs to do something erm messy on the stage(bless)

Glad you loved it , its a great show

---

For all its glitz, energy, pyrotechnical dance numbers, Legally Blonde disappoints. I caught the Sunday Matinee April 8 at 2 pm.

When I saw Legally Blonde the movie, I didn't expect to like it, but Reese Witherspoon embraced her blondeness, was in on the blonde joke from the get go, was over the top blonde and when she lost her boyfriend, we realized she was a real person with real feelings and we felt for her.

No so in the musical. The musical opens with a cutsiepie number called Omigosh with a plethora of obnoxious sef involved valley sororiety girls. After the number, Elle Woods joins the groups with dog in hand and becomes one of the insipid masses of blonde vapidness. When she loses her boyfriend, I felt nothing except good that a little pain came into the insipid woman's life. (I believe Avenue Q instructs this is Shaudenfraude) The musicals fails here where the movie suceeds in letting us want to side with Elle Woods. That is the biggest problem with the show.
You don't care about Elle Woods.

Hairspray, the musical, achieves this so much better when we zero in on Tracy Turnblatt in the opening number of the musical and we fall in love with her from moment one. Sweet Charity, the musical achieves empathy when we focus in on Charity from moment one. Not so with Legally Blonde.

Although "Ohmigosh" is a visually stunning number with unfortunately eye rolling and embarrasing lyrics, it works against the main character in the opening position of the show. I recommend they move this number until after we meet Elle Woods.
Give Elle the first moments of the show and make us fall for her.

I don't think it's Laura Bell Bundy's fault but the director and the book writer and how they set her up. Laura Bell Bundy does a decent enough job but she is missing a directorial hand. This brings us to Jerry Mitchell.

I have been a big fan of Jerry Mitchel for many years admiring his work on La Cage,
Hairspray, Full Monty and others, but he is missing the directorial eye focussing instead (as many choreographers turned directors do) on the energetic dance number.

Another problem with the focus of the show can be fixed very easily. There are a trio of "sororiety sisters" aka "the greek chorus" which is behind Elle. Wel one of them is blonde and she steals too much focus. She has a better wig than Laura Bell and she is prettier than Laura Bell. They should make this girl a red head or a brunette. They should also give that girls wig to Elle Woods as Elle's wig looks fakey and the sororiety sister simply has a better wig. It seems as if they are dead set on having a carbon copy of Reese Witherspoon's hair which looks just like that; a fake carbon copy of Reese Witherspoon's hair. (Thankfully, Laura Bell's hair or wig is much improved in Act Two)

I found the music a great disappointment as well adding very little to enhance the movie enjoyment. Thank g-d for Jerry Mitchell's choreography to camoflauge this second rate score and lyrics. Now, if he could just focus a little as director, he may be able to fix the proceedings.

As for the supporting cast, I think Michael Rupert as the curmudgeonly lawyer does a great job. Chistian Borle (who was so wonderful in Spamalot) is not used to best advantage as a character actor. Orfeh and Nikki Snelson are energetic and fine. All are fine performers but their major character trait is "energetic" and they lack a real director's hand.

I think Legally Blonde will please 12 -14 years olds but will dissappoint thinking adults. When a musical doesn't add or improve on the movie, and I don't care about the main character...what is the point? For all its glitz and glamour, I was legally bored.

HaHa.

Poor dog, but thats hilarious.

What were the reactions of the audience?

---

"The dog barfed probably because he hadn't had anything to eat since 8 that morning. Anyone who read the Broadway.com article knows they starve the dog so he will perform better."

not to go all 'PETA', but oh my goodness! that's terrible.

that blooper's pretty hilarious, though.

Goldenboy/Westvillage - I know a great deal of "sophisticated theatre goers" who have really enjoyed this production. I agree that it's primary demo is girls 8-15, but not everything has to be as complex as Wicked or as edgy as Spring Awakening or as fresh as The Drowsy Chaperone. It has it's place and does quite well in the world of musical theatre and will hopefully be around longer than the Wedding Singer - another great musical people loved to hate just because it was based on a movie.

Yes, but you still did not enjoy it. So it was much easier for you to side with him/her.

---

not everything has to be as complex as Wicked

I giggled when I read this. I like Wicked, but I don't think I would EVER classify it as "complex."

Legally Blonde was so unbelievably basic ... very elementary in script, music, execution and even performance. There was nothing special on that stage. Its a pure bubblegum musical that loses its flavor very quickly. Very very trite. Like goldenboy said, it didn't improve on the movie, so why bother?

Wedding Singer ... a great musical????? I don't think so. Not because it was based on a movie; because it was pretty damn lame.

Updated On: 4/11/07 at 06:01 PM

I had a dog, and I dogsat a dog, and not feeding them from 8am to, say, 10.30pm isn't necessarily as cruel as it sounds. The dog I actually owned had one hearty meal a day, and the dog I sat had two daily meals at not too dissimilar hours to 8am and 10.30pm. Neither dog was mistreated or starved, they were both very happy and healthy and loving, and it was actually on the vet's advice that the dog we owned had one daily meal. If they're not feeding the dog straight after the show, then that's definitely an issue. But if they're admitting in public the dog doesn't eat after 8am, then they probably don't have anything to hide in that regard.

Reminds me of someone on a pet community who said that water bottles were a really cruel way to give water to a pet because it was like if we had to drink through a hose. I drink most of my stuff through straws, considerably smaller than hoses, and it's not a problem. Hohum. ^_^

---