LuPone or Lansbury

[rflpfl2]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 5:08pm

After seeing the show this weekend I really must say that LuPone as Lovett was my favorite.
And before I am crucified by those on this board, I really have to say that the trashy and desperate Lovett LuPone portrays seems to me more at the true core to the character.

[SorryGrateful]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 5:10pm

You are totally allowed to have your own opinion. If you were saying something like, "Lansbury sucks! LuPone forever!" we'd all gang up on you, but you sound reasonable. I wish I could say who I like better as I've not yet seen LuPone. Give me time.

P.S. Welcome!

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 5:10pm

Both...I was equally touched by each performance.

Their Lovetts, respectively, are completely different.

And I love them both the same.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 5:17pm

Now that Lupone has played Lovett, it's time for Lansbury to play Evita!

LOL!

[rflpfl2]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 5:27pm

They are very different. Which is, I guess, a testament to how good a role it must be that such different takes can be so amazing. Even though I like LuPone's best, - I think that a large portion of my partiality is due to the staging, which enables such a performance. I get chills thinking about how thrilling it was.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 5:30pm

Lansbury beats LuPone out by a hair for me.

It's so so SO hard to compare them though. It's like theyre playing two totally different characters.

[mizzie]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 5:36pm

I haven't seen LuPone! Give me time, give me time! However, I'm not sure that I even like Lansbury's interpretation of the role. Her Lovette seemed like a character, and not a real human being. Sure, she was funny, but I didn't feel anything for her. When she died, I didn't really care, or feel sorry for her. She just didn't seem real to me.

She's fun to watch, and funny, but I (personally!) don't feel any substance to her Lovette. Therefore, I think that I will prefer LuPone's interpretation of the role, because it simply seems more human!

[alphieboy]

Posted: 10/31/05 at 9:18pm

Lansbury. No question at all.

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 5:19pm

Apples and oranges dear!!! I loved the amazing Dorothy Loudon too!

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 5:27pm

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. Can people please use spoiler alerts?

I am purposly not listening to all the cast recording so I don't figure out what happens until I see the revival. And I come here, and I read what happens.

Just great.

[GYPSY1527]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 5:35pm

Don't worry! You can read all you want and nothing and I mean NOTHING will prepare you for how it is performed. Its theater, not a novel...its the action that counts!

[MoonOnAstring]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 6:18pm

I was sitting with my mouth wide open in shock at the end, and I've seen this show dozens of times. Don't worry, you'll still be suprised!

To answer the thread question, I prefer Patti's interpretation of the character... Angela's was, of course, brilliant and she CREATED this character, but I was more affected by Patti's interpretation in this revival. Having said that, I never saw Angela do the show live so perhaps it isn't a fair comparison.
I'll just give the cop-out answer and say that I love them both!

[OtherDaryl]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 6:32pm

They're different and memorable and legendary - there is really no need for comparison at all. Each lady has been asked to do very different things in very different productions a quarter century apart and each has risen to the occassion beautifully.

And Dorothy Loudon was pretty darn wonderful as as Lansbury's replacement in the original production, too.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 6:37pm

I like Patti's better. Her Lovett is more of a person rather than a caricature (not to insult Lansbury, but I felt like her Lovett was very much a put-on). I also believed Patti was crazy and capable of murder rather than just kooky.

[Isabella2]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 7:55pm

Lupone's voice wins by a long shot. However, I am ony comparing voices as I have not seen Angela Lansbury in the role yet. Lansbury's voice has a strange quality to it that I'm not very fond of, and she's also lacking a vibrato. As for Lupone, I didn't quite like her performance in the concert version of Sweeney Todd, it was loud and annoying at times. Not to mention the other singers were quite horrible performance wise. George Hearn was much too old for the part and Toby sounded like he was from a highschool production of it. The lack of props also confused me and the way Llovett died made me laugh rather than cry.

The revival (my first viewing) had me enchanted the whole way through. Lupone was perfect and Cerveris is the ultimate Sweeney. This chilling set-up had me in shock. I loved every character. I even felt bad for the judge. To me, this show is the tale of sweeney todd. anything different would seem wrong. Well actually i'm not sure of that. I have yet to see the original one.

[MoonOnAstring]

Posted: 11/1/05 at 8:01pm

The original was incredible in its own way, and will probably always be what people imagine when they thing "Sweeney Todd" but I have always had a bit of a problem with the fact that it was so literal. I prefer the approach the revival took to the story, and I found most of the characterizations more interesting and compelling.