MERRILY WE ROLL ALONG Previews — Page 2

The Hudson does not have SRO

BdwyFan said: "This will be a hard ticket to get I’ve a feeling."

More like costing an arm and a leg! But probably.

The last time I was in the Hudson was 04/23/17 for the final performance of "Sunday," not far from where Sondheim sat. Entering last night felt like a lifetime later.

Although it felt like the easiest version of the book to follow, the central problem remains: who cares about these characters? You love these actors and how much they are enjoying sharing their love of Sondheim with us in this communal event, but not the story.

I'll never understand how the original creative team thought they could sell this show to a new audience every night. At least this production is using costume to convey time change effectively. And in order for the story to work, surely you must first try it in rehearsals and readings doing it in a linear fashion. Do you care about the characters? Does it only work as a gimmick going backwards? Will an audience remember who said or did what 20 minutes ago and will they care?

That said, I enjoyed the show. As Maria Friedman noted in her sweet welcome to the audience, it's the first Broadway production since the original 42 years ago.The sound design felt better than the current "Sweeney," but not as great as "Company." Doors were open earlier than 7:30. Lights down at 8:05, up about 10:55. I'm sure people will post the curtain call, many cameras out. The shimmering curtain is still there.

I think the central problem for the cast and creatives of any production of Merrily that has tried to “get it right” is that they’re getting high on their own supply. In the whirlwind of getting it up on its feet; working through the character beats; and reaching actively into the emotional depths, it’s hard to see the forest for the trees. Of course they understand the emotional resonance from scene to scene. They’ve spent months (or in Maria Friedman’s case, years) examining it. But when a fresh audience comes in every night, how do you convey that emotional journey without the constant reminder that, no, it doesn’t ultimately amount to anything but bitterness?

I haven’t seen this specific production yet, but I did finally get around to watching the West End recording, and the problem with the show is still there. As others have noted, you just don’t care about these characters. They can have all the chemistry in the world, but the show’s structure and raison d’être is a bummer through and through. The score is never less than excellent, sure, but - as the kids say - the book is just not giving.

Updated On: 9/20/23 at 10:06 AM

Playbills were delivered to the theater yesterday, and must’ve been a misprint bad enough to warrant not distributing. If anyone hears what it was, would be fun to know!

Scarywarhol said: "I can't believe that there's a Broadway production of this and I'm barely interested, but I saw the cinema release of its West End iteration and it basically reminded me of the Carrie revisal. So eager to appear competent above all else that it managed to make one of the most unique shows of all time feel generic and dull. Just felt like a real lack of theatrical vision directorialy. Did it change much or at all at NYTW?"



Ya this sounds pretty awful. Has Radcliffe ever been very good on stage or is he just allowed to do this because he is famous.

This has never been a good show, the only draw here is the celebrity cast and I hope it finally does well in NYC.

Ya this sounds pretty awful. Has Radcliffe ever been very good on stage or is he just allowed to do this because he is famous.

The latter.

Updated On: 9/20/23 at 02:00 PM

He was also great in Cripple of Inishmaan. It's a shame he hasn't been recognized by the Tonys yet, he has been more than deserving throughout his theatrical career.

I thought he was very good in Cripple of Inishmaan and he's an okay fit for Charlie if it needs to be a movie star. It's the production that looks like a yawn. Critical response means nothing to me after several decades of every undergrad "stripped-down" gruel production of shows that used to have actual identities being treated as innovative, surprising, brave...

Updated On: 9/20/23 at 04:00 PM

Regarding the sound design, I couldn’t see any visible mics and I am thrilled to report that you can understand every word, even during some complicated stage business throughout. Only times we couldn’t hear was when the actors started up before applause ended.

I've been lucky enough to see Radcliffe in 7 of his 8 stage outings (only one I missed was Equus, a bit before my time). I think he’s always been good onstage, and he’s proven a certain dedication to the stage that has paid off. I think he’s gotten better and better with time.

My only major reservation is that Radcliffe is the epitome of the expression “Jack of all trades, master of none.” He’s devoted so much of his energy to tackling new challenges, and he’s consistently successful. But then he moves onto a new challenge, and never quite hones the new skills that he developed. And it especially shows when he’s playing opposite people who have.

The big exception being comedy; I think he’s developed into a genuinely delightful comic actor in his own right.

This is Radcliffe’s 2nd musical, but it’s so different from H2S that it feels like a totally new animal. So again we’re seeing him venture into new territory, in a sense. My personal opinion after seeing him at NYTW is that he’s perfect for the role, and delivered a really strong acting performance all around (both comedically and dramatically) but that the singing left something to be desired (maybe he’s improved since NYTW though)