MY FAIR LADY (2018) Previews — Page 24

but in Angels in America Prior sings a few lines from MFL so surely the score must be memorable?

GeorgeandDot said: "I may be a jacka**, but at least I've got taste, hun. More than you've got."

It’s an opinion, of which I was asked to explain. And I’m sick of yours. If you’re going to be on here just telling people how wrong they are, what’s the point in having a discussion. Sorry not everyone has glowing reviews of your precious classics. Stop being so offended. It’s not like you wrote it.

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 01:13 AM

GeorgeandDot said: "Green, you just made a joke of yourself when you suggested that My Fair Lady was a blah musical. Go back to stanning The Great Comet and Anastasia or whatever the new teen musical is on Tumblr."

It was blah. And I’m clearly not the only one with this opinion. Should I start liking it just because you told me I can’t enjoy any theater at all since I don’t like MFL? Do you really think your berating me is going to change my mind? What is the point, really.

Anastasia sucked. And wtf is Tumblr. I’m a lot older than you think.

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 01:20 AM

GeorgeandDot said: "Start acting like it then."

Pot meet kettle.

It doesn’t make any sense to me why you care so much of what 1 person thought of this show. Maybe this is fun for you. It’s getting to be kind of fun for me!

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 01:38 AM

Dancingthrulife2 said: "I don’t think anyone who juxtaposes Great Comet with Anastasia should be teaching others what “taste” is. "

Thanks but be careful, your username relates to Wicked as well, they might gang up on you too.

I didn’t know when I created mine that it would define my entire taste-level. There should be some sort of warning when you go to create an account.

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 01:47 AM

Again- not a teen, not a student.

If you’re going to be sassy, make sure you take the time to comprend what I said.

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 02:10 AM

A plea for civility.

This site attracts people who love theatre. This is a community of affinity that includes a great many different tastes.... a big part of what makes all that theatre offers so alluring to so many people. Something to be celebrated one might think. But so many of us find in it a reason for snark and contentiousness, including myself I fully admit.

I concede it's a huge culture shock to me, as it is to a number of people, to read a number of posts which show that MY FAIR LADY, of all shows, invites so much criticism of its book and score. ("YOU DON'T LIKE THIS MUSIC, ARE YOU SERIOUS? ARE YOU INSANE" I fully admit, I feel like shouting... but then it's time for a deep breath and to realize we aren't discussing impending nuclear war, we are talking about a musical for Christ's sake!).

I admit that it seems absurd to me that so many people who are fans of what I personally - and subjectively - see as absolute crap can't understand the joys of MY FAIR LADY.

I admit that I find it hard to understand how there can possibly be seasoned theatregoers who don't get the thematic relation of "I'm Getting Married in the Morning," as eleven o'clock number clearly but begrudgingly celebrating two of the major interrelated potential fates for both Eliza and Alfred - middle class morality and matrimony - to the arc of the overall story being told. To me - but that's just me - it's obvious: presenting, in the most entertaining and witty and (at least at one time) crowd pleasing fashion, Alfred's destiny as either perfect foil or imperfect but still somewhat palatable model (all depending on what Eliza decides to do with her life) for Eliza's own.

I find all of this quite hard to believe. And, honestly, I find it sad.

But that's me. I'm not such a narcissist (although I certainly have my moments) as to believe my way of looking at theatre is the definitive way, or that anyone else's way is per se inferior. Just as my views are molded by my own unique experiences and worldview, and on my age, class, gender, ethnic and social background and education, so are everyone else's.

I accept that. We are a multicultural group of people of different ages, tastes, backgrounds and inclinations. Isn't that our strength?

Some of us came of age worshipping Frank Loesser and or Lorraine Hansberry, some Andrew Lloyd Webber, and or Neil Simon, others the Disney shows and or (fill in with flavor of the month, or maybe just maybe here to stay in the canon, dramatist). A little empathy and understanding that if "I were in the other person's shoes, I might just hold the same or similar views which, as it is, being me, I find, to put it mildly, disconcertingly foreign."

That kind of empathy might be a nice thing.

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 08:39 AM

JBC3 said: "^ This. All of this please"

One more thig I want to say. Clearly from the earlier posts it shows I didn’t understand that:

1. The production now is as it was intended

2. There are themes and a deeper meaning of which I didn’t understand from a first viewing. This is exactly what I come here for a lot, to read and learn. I attend theater alone most of the time, so I have no one to discuss it with, and started to get into theater only last year after I needed to find joy in something during a terribly dark time in my life.

3. I was totally willing to give MFL another shot- watch the movie, another production after my discussion with Scotty.

But GeorgeandDot’s unnecessary bullying about my unrelated username and supposed taste level, suggesting my opinions for anything mean nothing because my first impression of one show, ruined that for me. After this, I don’t want to hear another word about MFL ever again. And that’s the shame of it all.

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 09:49 AM

Thanks for that, Henrik. Perhaps it's time to hear from someone else who's actually seen this production.

Watching the show last night from the center loge, for the most part I was absolutely enchanted. I've always considered MFL the greatest of all golden age musical plays, despite having never seen a Broadway mounting that actually worked for me (going back to the revival in 1976). There was no major revisal here-- Bart Sher's essential choice was to focus on Eliza's story front and center. That's the whole point. Never look away from her, never miss the impact of how someone else's speech might affect her. And when she makes the choice she does at the end, that choice is truly earned. Frankly Lauren Ambrose was a revelation to me-- a translucent actress with a lovely soprano (and yes, an odd way of standing when singing those high notes), who had the skill to make Eliza's journey heartbreakingly real. She is the reason to see this mounting, hands down.

Harry Hadden-Paton is young and vibrant and a commanding singer, and never really broke the mold set forth by Rex Harrison 60 years ago. In this staging, he wasn't meant to. Jordan Donica was a sparkling, ravishingly beautiful Freddy-- the best I've ever seen. Sorry to say, Leo Butz is the one weak link in the cast, never mastering either the accent nor the contagious glee with which Alfred seizes life's chances.

The set designs are often ravishing, but always very traditional, which was a surprise given what Michael Yeargen is capable of. He showed something magical in the St Paul's Exterior and in the Exterior Higgins House where the false perspective facades are sliced off at the ends in a fresh way. I would have adored an entire production designed just that way. And was it budget cuts that left the Ascot Gavotte just one sad striped awning on an empty stage?

The Catherine Zuber costumes gave me life, as expected. They are thrilling ideas of the period that side step every choice ol' Cecil Beaton made with the originals. Eliza's ballgown is absolutely to die for-- though weirdly most of her other ensembles were the only minor missteps in the amazing parade.

The show, let's face it, is a little long, particularly since they've interpolated line after line from Lerner's film screenplay. (Anyone who only knows the published play script by heart will be surprised by any number of added beats, including Eliza's introduction to a steam shower in scene 3!!) So, with apologies to Chris Gattelli, here is a list of cuts I'd propose forthwith: in Act 1, lose a verse and chorus in the "Loverly" dance break. Lose a verse in the "Bit 'o Luck" reprise dance break. Lose all those added measures in "Poor Professor Higgins" while we waited for the turntable to finish rotating. In Act 2, cut all that needless Ballroom dancing before the dialogue begins. Most of all, please God cut the 5 minutes of Can-Can and Drag Acts straight out of La Cage aux Folles that absolutely destroyed "Get me To the Church On Time"! What on earth do ugly men in boxers, corsets and wigs have to do with Eliza Dolittle's story? Lerner and Loewe would be horrified by that whole sequence and Bart clearly lost his mind in conceiving it. The show rights itself soon enough ("A Hymn to Him" is absolutely delicious), and "Without You" is the best singing Lauren does all night.

M A J O R S P O I L E R A L E R T



Which brings us to the final scene. I loved the touch to the face. I loved the choice to leave. But why oh why did Eliza enter the scene through the study doors and exit through the fourth wall??? Was she a vision of Higgins' imagination? Did she really come back in the flesh? A simple blocking fix would immediately make Bart's intention crystal clear. My honey and I were on our feet in an instant for the well-earned standing ovation this show deserved, but we argued about that beat the whole way home.

Updated On: 3/31/18 at 10:26 AM

QueenAlice said: "Regarding the ending...spoilers...

I’m a little surprised to see the various debates about interpreting the ending. It was crystal clear to me that this was a fantasy moment for Higgins and a point of internal reckoning with his relationship with Eliza. She entered through the study because that is where she entered this office for the first time and she left through the fourth wall because he was letting his limited view of her go. But of course she wasn’t there in the flesh.

It was one of the few things I really liked about the production."

Spoiler:

Straight from the horse's mouth (as in Bart Sher after a preview):

He said that wasn't his intention. He quizzed me on what I thought the ending was and I said "She came back to say goodbye to Higgins but also to show that she still cares about him." And he said "that's exactly it." He said his intention was to have Eliza come back for a sweeter, gentler farewell to Higgins because after all, she cares about the guy and didn't want to end it the way she had at his mother's. Since he said that straight to me then I assume if it's still coming across as a fantasy then that's something they need to fix.

What blocking fix would take care of it? I'm genuinely interested.

enjoyable2 said: "What blocking fix would take care of it? I'm genuinely interested."

I actually think Lauren not walking out of the theater would fix it a little. She can walk out of Higgins' study onto the street, and that can be the fade to black. Therefore Eliza is still "present" in the final scene, but it's clear she's away from Higgins.

I find it interesting that some who were not familiar with My Fair Lady saw this production and found the score dull. I've often wondered if, seeing a just opened show that all now agree has a classic score, I would have recognized the greatness of the score on first hearing, or would have had to listen a good number of times and receive positive feedback from critics.

The score from My Fair Lady was very popular. No film would have been made if this was not so, for My Fair Lady retains a large portion of Shaw, and Shaw's didactic plays in which one or maybe two characters assume the role of Shaw, badgering the audience with comments on middle class beliefs and morality that were meant to startle, alarm or amuse his middle class audience, did not play with everyone.

The score was spread by television more than anything. Browsing YouTube reveals some of those old performances. On the fifth anniversary of the show's opening, Ed Sullivan devoted about half of his show that night to performances from the show. It began with the performance of "With a Little Bit of Luck" and "Wouldn't It Be Loverly" in full costume and ended with Julie singing "I Could Have Danced All Night." Julie also turns up singing "Danced All Night," "Just You Wait" and "Show Me" on Dinah Shore, and a special devoted to Lerner and Loewe.

Yes in those days the three television networks devoted inordinate amounts of time to "musical variety" shows and music specials.

Besides television being used to spread the word about the score, many vocalists ran to cover "The Street Where You Live" and "Danced All Night." Nat Cole probably had the best cover of the first song. Ol' Blue Eyes made "I'm Getting Married in the Morning" a staple of his concerts and performed it on one of his best TV specials. All this drove large sales of the OBC album.

My own first memories of My Fair Lady are centered around "The Rain in Spain." I probably didn't really understand what the song was about, but the sing song lyrics repeated over and over were a novelty and everyone appeared to be having a great time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lyCkriueS8