Little Shop of Horrors -Gen. Discussion- Page 2

[Elphie3]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 12:06am

I've always thought it would be a great idea to cast a female as Audrey II. Taking it to a further degree, I once saw a production where Audrey II was a Poison Ivy type - coming alive as a sexy plant woman whenever she was alone with Seymore.

I know, this sounds terrible - but it was actually brilliant (this production did it right) and there was sexual tension, almost a triangle between Seymore, and Audrey and Audrey II.

[bwayguy22089]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 1:12am

Yeah, that's how I'd picture it to be. To me, it would actually add a cool little twist to the plot

[logan0215]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 1:47am

I've always been curious about the bad reception the recent revival received. I love the cast recording and also very much enjoy Kerry Butler in it, so what gives?

[MrSweetNAwful]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 1:54am

Basically the beef with the revival was

little show
BIG PRODUCTION
BIG HOUSE

people thought it had lost it's little-indie-show-that-did cred by being glammed up on the Great White Way.

[misto625]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 2:02am

To answer one question posed by the original poster, I did in fact see the Florida pre-Broadway tryout of the show with Hunter Foster and Alice Ripley. Alice's performance was basically an impersonation of Ellen Greene and she didn't really do as much to make the role her own. It was my first time seeing her live though, and I think she's a great performer.

I don't have a problem with Audrey II being voiced by a female such as Jennifer Holliday. I think that would work very well actually. It can't be any worse than Billy Porter's performance.

The recent London production had a very different design for Audrey II which made her look like an overgrown weed. I can't remember any other changes right now

As to why the recent Broadway revival had a bad reception, my guess is that audiences generally felt the show was too overblown, big and brassy when it should have been on a smaller scale and in a smaller theatre. I didn't get the chance to see Kerry Butler, but that wasn't as bad as having to sit through Joey Fatone as Seymour. The best part about the production was Audrey II. Huge kudos to Michael-Leon Woolley and Martin Robinson et al for an amazing performance that still is one of my favorite Broadway memories. The three urchins were quite wonderful as well. Overall it was greatly improved from it's pre-Broadway tryout and I still prefer the Broadway version of the show to the movie, so it worked fine for me!

[Smaxie]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 2:51am

I saw the original Off-Broadway production and have seen many productions of it over the years. I've never seen a production that has improved upon the Off-Broadway original. There was something about the style of it and particularly Howard Ashman's direction that I haven't seen captured by anyone else. It danced a fine line between camp and sincerity, cartoon and reality. It was in the perfect theatre for it (the Orpheum). Just a flawless evening and one of the best shows of the 1980s.

[mallardo]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 5:59am

Whatever the problem was with the Broadway production -personally I loved it - it wasn't the cast. Hunter Foster, Douglas Sills and Kerry Butler were all great.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 6:00am

Smaxie...beautifully put! I was quite enamored (sp?) of the original production (Ellen Greene). Much more so than with my date! It was my very first Off B'way show.

[ohjustjake]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 8:26am

In the production I saw, Audrey II was played by a woman and it was fantastic. I have seen this show a couple times, including the revival, and I STILL prefer a woman playing Audrey II. She was this black jazz singer, and she really brought this soul to it. It was so great.

[thejcm]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 8:32am

I got a chance to see the revival on tour here in Louisville, KY and it definitely wasn't the performances that I had a problem with. The show was in a house that has at least 3000 seats here but I was lucky enough to be front row so it didn't seem so overblown to me. However, the set didn't actually fill the stage (but not many do here).

I actually really liked the direction in the revival, especially with Tari Kelly as Audrey. She was perfection. She was very "Ellen Greene" in the way that she was so sincere, and her Audrey was so wacky but it was just how Audrey was, not like the actress was playing it for laughs.

[mallardo]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 8:54am

I agree that Tari Kelly was the standout member of the tour cast. I haven't heard much about her lately. Wonder what she's doing?

[East Village]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 8:57am

Saw both the off-broadway and broadway productions. Didn't really have a problem with the broadway production being over-produced. I thought the problem was the direction. All the actors seem to be told to play their parts too straight -- specially Foster who didn't seem to be enjoying himself one bit the night I saw it. The show needs a little bit of camp and a wink-and-a-nod.

[once a month]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 9:44am

I accidentally caught the original off Broadway production opening weekend, as well as the opening weekends of the Broadway revival and the Florida version.
I adored the original with Ellen Greene! I'll never forget the finale as we lept to our feet cheering, and as the plant grew more menacing and began to step toward the audience, the ceiling over our seats opened causing green vines to cascade down to out shoulders, startling me. I'm so sorry I didn't grab one as a souveneir!
I agreed with a past responder, as much as I love Alice Ripley, it was a carbon copy. Glad I got the Playbill, however.
As for the revival, I enjoyed it more than let's say, the La Cage revival, but it was strangly distant, I'm sure due to the house. I did thoroughly enjoy the finale, when the plant threatened to engulf the few several rows in the orchestera. That was cool.

[LadyDramaturg2]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 11:38am

I saw the original at the Orpheum, where it was so quirky and different, and then the vines dropping onto your face at the end, -- well ! Ellen Greene was just so One-Of-A-Kind at that moment in time.

I didn't see the Florida tryout, but I did hear from someone who worked on the production that the chemistry just didn't gel, and tho Alice sounded wonderful, she wasn't Audrey.

I saw early previews of the recent Broadway version, and they were terrific -- then over time, Jerry had the actors take all of the small quiet moments out of their line readings. By opening, it seemed to me that the cast was just ripping through the dialogue, and the timing was off; it disappeared, really. I thought it ruined the touching-ness part of the story, and at times, it ruined the funny-ness part, too.

But I think you'll never see Doug Sills play a part at the peak of perfection like he did in this show, and I thought he deserved the Tony.

[don't kill me, he was brilliant.]

[Gothampc]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 12:54pm

This show works great when it takes on the flavor of the original movie. Watch the original 1960 movie. I don't believe this show works well when it's a big, splashy production. Small, dark and campy make it fun.

[Mark_E]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 1:32pm

I saw the London Revival. Having only seen the film I thought it was absolutely fantastic. Fab staging, just loved it, and am booked to see the tour of it in two months time from the front row .

[misto625]

Posted: 2/2/09 at 3:51pm

I agree with the poster who said the chemistry was a little off in the Florida tryout. Plus the costumes were quite horrendous and the Finale sequence was not quite right. I'm glad other people enjoyed the Broadway production and recent tour as well. I missed seeing Doug Sills as Orin et al. He's been robbed of the Tony a couple times it seems. I would like to see the Roger Corman film sometime as well, is it easy to find on Netflix or at Blockbuster.