#26
Posted: 9/8/12 at 9:11am
I think she's fabulous in this.
I've been so jaded the last couple of years due to my fave show cheapened beyond belief at the height of its popularity and at a milestone, that I was one of the members who expressed harsh discontent at member reports describing an unexciting, bland, and significantly subdued take on a character that is said to have been "humanized" by her, a claim far too common these days and almost always complete bullsh*t.
I developed a sort of resentment toward audiences for not noticing, or even caring about the significantly thinned out new orchs at the so-called 2006 revival of Les Mis, and especially not noting the impact that had on how the production was perceived. So when reports that my ultimate guilty pleasure that is Carrie: The Musical was being given the pretentious, gimmicky treatment of the 25th ann. Les Mis, I went off before hearing a second of Mazzie's performance.
Thankfully, I have enough sense that I've only allowed my fiery passion for this art form to reach such heights of quick judgement on those two occasions. While I no longer so much "resent" audiences as much as I used to, after this and the shocking let down by fellow Les Mis fans and general audiences in that horrid orchs debacle, I am very, very wary of where people's opinions come from. At least wary enough not to assume we mean the same thing.
In a way, part of what allowed me to think it was safe to assume the worst and take their reports at face value before even having a chance to listen and judge for myself was giving them the benefit of the doubt. It's natural to assume when someone says keys were lowered to the point it renders a song ineffective and is described as "subdued" to the point Mazzie appears to be drugged half the time, then you throw in confirmations that the director is approaching this from a pretentious, preachy perspective, the least to expect is a rant on how badly theatre sucks these days and the idiocy of modern directors.
As tainted as my outlook and opinion on audiences is, I never would have thought I'd listen to the audio preserved rendition of what was said to be horribly lacking months later, and feel like a fool for going off on what was--to be sure--anything BUT a lackluster performance by Mazzie.
Yes, it did cross my mind at the time the possibility that the highly negative reports by members were solely in response to the simple absence of WoW notes in the style of Betty Buckley. Now I see that was likely the sole reason based on the results and I find I am sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo glad that I am me!
I can't imagine being of such limited perspective. How depressing that must be. That head voice is bad because it is head voice regardless of the dynamics and nuances Mazzie has to offer that are every bit as powerful as anything Buckley did. I'd say she is just as great. I'd rather be a nit picky mofo than one that is either so easily impressed and wooed by sh*t or easily dismayed by the presence of variation. As heavy handed as I can get, at least I have reasons for my beliefs and takes on things enough to fill a page, or 100, with drivel!
That's my obnoxious, self important post of the day. Hooray! XD
P.S. - The orchs in this are a tasteful adaptation of the originals, which were one of the original production's strengths and saved in their Broadway modification from the outrageously pretentious earlier stuff dripping in lushiness and sentiment that brought the overall feel of the show down a few hundred pegs in Stratford. Ugh.
I've been so jaded the last couple of years due to my fave show cheapened beyond belief at the height of its popularity and at a milestone, that I was one of the members who expressed harsh discontent at member reports describing an unexciting, bland, and significantly subdued take on a character that is said to have been "humanized" by her, a claim far too common these days and almost always complete bullsh*t.
I developed a sort of resentment toward audiences for not noticing, or even caring about the significantly thinned out new orchs at the so-called 2006 revival of Les Mis, and especially not noting the impact that had on how the production was perceived. So when reports that my ultimate guilty pleasure that is Carrie: The Musical was being given the pretentious, gimmicky treatment of the 25th ann. Les Mis, I went off before hearing a second of Mazzie's performance.
Thankfully, I have enough sense that I've only allowed my fiery passion for this art form to reach such heights of quick judgement on those two occasions. While I no longer so much "resent" audiences as much as I used to, after this and the shocking let down by fellow Les Mis fans and general audiences in that horrid orchs debacle, I am very, very wary of where people's opinions come from. At least wary enough not to assume we mean the same thing.
In a way, part of what allowed me to think it was safe to assume the worst and take their reports at face value before even having a chance to listen and judge for myself was giving them the benefit of the doubt. It's natural to assume when someone says keys were lowered to the point it renders a song ineffective and is described as "subdued" to the point Mazzie appears to be drugged half the time, then you throw in confirmations that the director is approaching this from a pretentious, preachy perspective, the least to expect is a rant on how badly theatre sucks these days and the idiocy of modern directors.
As tainted as my outlook and opinion on audiences is, I never would have thought I'd listen to the audio preserved rendition of what was said to be horribly lacking months later, and feel like a fool for going off on what was--to be sure--anything BUT a lackluster performance by Mazzie.
Yes, it did cross my mind at the time the possibility that the highly negative reports by members were solely in response to the simple absence of WoW notes in the style of Betty Buckley. Now I see that was likely the sole reason based on the results and I find I am sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo glad that I am me!
I can't imagine being of such limited perspective. How depressing that must be. That head voice is bad because it is head voice regardless of the dynamics and nuances Mazzie has to offer that are every bit as powerful as anything Buckley did. I'd say she is just as great. I'd rather be a nit picky mofo than one that is either so easily impressed and wooed by sh*t or easily dismayed by the presence of variation. As heavy handed as I can get, at least I have reasons for my beliefs and takes on things enough to fill a page, or 100, with drivel!
That's my obnoxious, self important post of the day. Hooray! XD
P.S. - The orchs in this are a tasteful adaptation of the originals, which were one of the original production's strengths and saved in their Broadway modification from the outrageously pretentious earlier stuff dripping in lushiness and sentiment that brought the overall feel of the show down a few hundred pegs in Stratford. Ugh.
Recreation of original John Cameron orchestration to "On My Own" by yours truly. Click player below to hear.
Updated On: 9/8/12 at 09:11 AM
