MEF reviews "Sweeney Todd"

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 6:25am

I saw the new Broadway production of Sweeney Todd last night, and all I can say is, "WOW!" This was one of the most thrilling experiences I have ever had at the theatre. I loved the concept, the orchestrations, the sets, and above all, the BRILLIANT performances.

As the title character, Michael Cerveris (an always-reliable performer) is a revelation, and a surprisingly intense Sweeney. His anguish and pain were so real and evident, and there were moments when I nearly cried watching his performance. I would say that right now he's a shoo-in for next year's Tony.

Now, it's no secret that I'm a whore for Patti LuPone, and have always enjoyed her Lovett (even in the not-so-well-received concert staging). Well, in the 5 years since she last played the part, she has really grown by leaps and bounds, and was incredibly moving, empathetic and diabolical. This is not a typical Patti LuPone performance. Anybody who goes in and expects her to be riffing and belting out to the heavens will be sorely dissapointed. But if you go in expecting nothing (as many did), you'll end up being blown away.

Ben Magnuson and Lauren Molina were excellent as Anthony and Johanna, respectively, and I loved the symbolism of Johanna playing the cello. Donna Lynne Champlin was over-the-top and fabulous as Pirelli, and really added some great comedy to the show. Alexander Gemignani was all right as the Beadle; I was expecting more from him but he has time to improve, since I'm planning on seeing this show again MANY times. And Manoel Felciano is easily the best Toby I have ever seen or heard.

The two performers that I really didn't care for were Diana DiMarzio as the Beggar Woman and Mark Jacoby as Judge Turpin. I didn't feel that either of them were intense enough for their respective parts, and Ms. DiMarzio didn't look or sound interested with the show at all.

Mr. Cerveris' entrance (I won't give anything away) is absolutely brilliant and worth the price of admission alone.

Go see this revival. It's truly superb and one of the best things to hit Broadway in years. After the string of dissapointments that opened this season, I'm glad to finally report a bonafide winner!

[Liz_Bennet]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 9:14am

Thanks for the review. Reactions to this production have been love it or hate it. I really don't know my opinion will be when I see it in a week! I guess that makes it more exciting (I usually only buy tickets to things I'm pretty sure I will like).

[Lorelai]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 9:59am

Thanks for the review!!

I'm going to see it tonight and your review has made me really excited.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 10:06am

Glad you liked the production MEF.

Regarding Diana DiMarzio -- her portrayal of the Beggar Woman is very, very similar to the actress who played the role in London, which translates, to me, that a lot of her choices are from the director, not the actress. Doyle has clearly decided that the Beggar Woman is not the cackling, screaming creation that most productions favor. This Beggar Woman is almost zombie like. Completely detached from the "reality" (can you call it that?) of this story.

To her credit though, when I saw the show on Wednesday night from up very close, I watched DiMarzio and she is certainly invested in her character -- particularly in the moments when she is not "on". And I think her "don't I know you Mister" to Sweeney is probably the most chilling reading of that line, I've heard. She also sings the hell out of "City of Fire."

[SorryGrateful]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 10:07am

Great review, mef! Thank you for such a thrilling endorsement. Why oh why do I have to pay rent this month instead of going to NYC?

[fiatlux]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 10:15am

Great review.

"Regarding Diana DiMarzio -- her portrayal of the Beggar Woman is very, very similar to the actress who played the role in London, which translates, to me, that a lot of her choices are from the director, not the actress"

I think you're right - there's something of her almost being in post-trauma...?

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 10:27am

Ooooh now I am even more excited about this. What a great Interpretation of the Beggar Woman.

[Songsstresss]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 10:34am

Was I the only one who thought it said Diana DEGARMO at first?! I had a little twinge of panic and then realized it was just that I can't read!

[ShineOn]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 11:12am

I really love that take on the Beggar Woman as well. I think it makes so much sense.

Seeing the show tomorrow night. Will post my thoughts Sunday.

[Ciar?]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 11:27am

Totally agree about The Begger Woman. Thought she was fantastic! The quiet approach tunred out to be quite haunting. Her "City on Fire" was so powerful!!

[Chrysanthemum62001]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 11:32am

LOVE IT! I'm gonna move in to the Eugene O'Neill this week!

[andyf]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 12:20pm

"Mr. Cerveris' entrance (I won't give anything away) is absolutely brilliant and worth the price of admission alone."



...seriously? Did they completely change it or something since Wednesday night? I've seen this show done in high schools where Sweeney had a more interesting entrance than that. I actually felt kind of cheated by his entrance; I wish they could have done something cooler, but I'm sure someone will rationalize the lack of an even mildly entertaining entrance fits with the "minimalist" staging. I thought his acting was good (i.e., kind of creepy) when he popped up, but I thought it was a pretty lame entrance.

So back to my initial question...have they completely reworked it since Wednesday night?

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 1:22pm

While I agree that Diana's "hey, don't I, know you" is amazing, but that was the only part of her performance I enjoyed (but it had nothing to do with her as an actor or singer, except for i couldn't understand half of city on fire). the rest was quite dull, and it looked to be because of the direction. I jjust really feel that the crazy, over-the-top beggar woman from the original is more appropriate for the character.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 1:36pm

Well it was more appropriate for Prince's production, but you know most crazy people don't really act that way. Lucy also drank poison which basically fried her brain -- she doesn't have tourettes -- its not IN MY LIFE or anything.

[lovinlovett]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 2:30pm

Sob! I so want to see this! But I live in Atlanta...crap.

[fiatlux]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 5:51pm

"I just really feel that the crazy, over-the-top beggar woman from the original is more appropriate for the character."

Why?

I saw this production way back in 1979 - and one of the troubling things that I've had is that over-the-topness. Lovett, Todd etc

I think because Hal Prince did not trust the basic impetus of the piece the Broadway public has been conned with regard to the story.

Interesting to see was the original London production with Sheila Hancock and Denis Quilley et al - they all played it as real, no nonsense,no awful accents, no cackling, no silly laughs during Epiphany, they were very good but the production was seen to be a sham and the critics regarded it as such, because the show was not true to its antecedents.


Updated On: 10/7/05 at 05:51 PM

[Isabella2]

Posted: 10/7/05 at 11:01pm

My sister and I were probably the only one who found the beggar's performance when she started to sing "How'd ya like a little bounce around the bush?"

That seemed to happen a lot. Us laughing when no one else was...

I think it was supposed to be funny, but i'm not sure. All in all Diana was amazing.
Updated On: 10/8/05 at 11:01 PM

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 4:19pm

Sweeny Todd IS over the top. That's why all those cackles and laughs make sense in the original production. Sweeny Todd is a penny dreadful... it is supposed to be contrived and unrealistic. There are benefits to playing it natural... I'm sure... but the idea that Hal Prince's production was flawed because of the over the topness... is an idea I don't understand. If the production was naturalistic that would just point up how unrealistic the ENTIRE story really is. NOBODY recognizes him? He doesn't even recognize his own wife? The whole bit about the asylum? The whole story is high melodrama which is why the melodramatic acting of the original makes sense. To me. Whatever.

kc

[fiatlux]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 5:09pm

"Sweeny Todd IS over the top."

That is an interpretation but it doesn't need to be done like that. You could describe many a Shakespeare or Jacobean play in the manner in which you've outlined - close family members not recognizing each other is necessary for all of King Lear, but it doesn't usually get played in the way that you've described.

[Necromancer07707]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 5:16pm

"'Sweeny Todd IS over the top.'

That is an interpretation but it doesn't need to be done like that. "


Um, yes, the show should be over the top. It was written to be a melodrama.

[fiatlux]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 5:25pm

"Um, yes, the show should be over the top. It was written to be a melodrama. "

It was written as a "musical thriller" and it was based on a blank verse tragedy. Stephen Sondheim always wanted the chamber-thriller not the overblown version that Hal Prince came up with.
Chris Bond upon whose work the show is based also preferred it that way and has directed several very successful productions of the show in that fashion. There is room for more than one interpretation of this show.
Updated On: 10/8/05 at 05:25 PM

[Isabella2]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 10:35pm

You what what I didn't get? I thought I was just stupid, but now else in family who saw it with me could tell me the answer. Why did Sweeney leave in the first place? What did he do. And how did he come back? Maybe I'm just stupid but I didn't think it was very clear to me in the show. As brilliant as the show was, that's only thing I didn't get.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 10:49pm

He was sent to a prison in Australia on a trumped up charge by the judge who desired his wife (Lucy -- aka the Beggar Woman) -- they never explain really how he escaped.

[andyf]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 11:04pm

Hey, hey, hey!

Have we learned nothing from Wicked???


Don't ask questions about holes in the plot; just watch the pretty show!

[bta212]

Posted: 10/8/05 at 11:15pm

*struggling to maintain calm*

Andyf--please acknowldege that there is more to 'Sweeney Todd' than a pretty show.

Also, let's all agree that the fact that just because the details of Benjamin Barker's escape from Botany Bay are not presented in detail does NOT mean that 'Sweeney Toddd' should ever be discussed in the same breath as 'Wicked'

*loses struggle and begins to load ammunition into semi-automatic machine gun*