Mendes-Peters GYPSY — Page 3
#53
Posted: 8/7/10 at 2:37am
As an ignorant whippersnapper, I don't think I've ever seen a picture of a young Lansbury. GORGEOUS.
#54
Posted: 8/7/10 at 2:58am
PJ,I can't help but laugh at that photo, and I don't know why.
#56
Posted: 8/7/10 at 12:33pm
Thanks for the pictures, Joey, she is an unbelievably beautiful woman and also happens to be my favourite Rose.
Whatever character she plays, this woman just seems to GET it.
Whatever character she plays, this woman just seems to GET it.
#57
Posted: 8/7/10 at 12:36pm
I also think the pictures are sexy, but I think what Im trying to say (even after watching that scary youtube clip) is that Angela never emanated sexuality or sensuality in my opinion. She can look sexy or pose sexy, but I really never felt it from her authentically in her acting. I feel the same about Meryl Strepp and Hilary Swank and a few other actresses-almost no sexuality.
On the contrary there are several actresses who I think exude a raw sexuality-Lesley Anne Warren, Sherie Rene Scott, Bernadette Peters, Ellen Barkin, Glenn Close, and Naomi Watts to name a few. Its not about what you look like-its about an energy you exude.
On the contrary there are several actresses who I think exude a raw sexuality-Lesley Anne Warren, Sherie Rene Scott, Bernadette Peters, Ellen Barkin, Glenn Close, and Naomi Watts to name a few. Its not about what you look like-its about an energy you exude.
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello
#58
Posted: 8/7/10 at 1:44pm
Bettyboy72, I understand completely what you're saying.
#59
Posted: 8/7/10 at 3:32pm
I suppose if you were ever gonna pay Angie a compliment like that, sexy is the most appropriate. I don't think she was ever pretty or cute, but I think there was sex appeal.
Nonetheless, this (Google image result #2) still brought the lulz.
#60
Posted: 8/7/10 at 5:00pm
What is the difference between a concept musical and a narrative exactly? I'm trying to distinguish between the two in my mind but can't seem to come up with concrete examples of each. Any more examples or information would help.
#61
Posted: 8/7/10 at 6:10pm
A concept musical doesn't have clear features of a plot. There are some features here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plot_(narrative)
Sweeney Todd could follow this very closely..the exposition of the characters and setting in the Ballad, "London", "Worst Pies"..and the rising action beginning at the end of "My Friends", through Little Priest, Sweeney's Johanna with the climax being the Judge's death/Lovett's Death...some falling action of the Barber and his wife reprise..Sweeneys' death...then a semi-resolution (but not as clear followed) of the Johanna/Anthony bakehouse scene and the final Ballad of Sweeney Todd.
You couldn't really impose this structure so clearly on a musical like COMPANY.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plot_(narrative)
Sweeney Todd could follow this very closely..the exposition of the characters and setting in the Ballad, "London", "Worst Pies"..and the rising action beginning at the end of "My Friends", through Little Priest, Sweeney's Johanna with the climax being the Judge's death/Lovett's Death...some falling action of the Barber and his wife reprise..Sweeneys' death...then a semi-resolution (but not as clear followed) of the Johanna/Anthony bakehouse scene and the final Ballad of Sweeney Todd.
You couldn't really impose this structure so clearly on a musical like COMPANY.
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
#62
Posted: 8/7/10 at 6:37pm
I preferred Sam Mendes' staging to the most recent Arthur Laurents production in every way except for Herbie: Boyd Gaines brought a whole new dimension to that role...
Sort of like Bernadette did for Rose; here at last was a Rose that was sexy and appealing, a Rose that would have had three husbands, a Rose that could easily have been Dainty June when she was much younger, making sense of her compulsion to live vicariously through her.
Much more interesting than Battleship Rose, I thought.
Sort of like Bernadette did for Rose; here at last was a Rose that was sexy and appealing, a Rose that would have had three husbands, a Rose that could easily have been Dainty June when she was much younger, making sense of her compulsion to live vicariously through her.
Much more interesting than Battleship Rose, I thought.
#63
Posted: 8/8/10 at 9:04pm
Mender's production is much better than Laurent's slow paced, static revival.
#64
Posted: 8/8/10 at 9:11pm
Mender?
Mendes' revival was infamously known for being slow as molasses.
Mendes' revival was infamously known for being slow as molasses.
#65
Posted: 8/8/10 at 9:26pm
I thought the Mendes-Peters Gypsy was the best of the 15 or so productions I've seen of the show- but I did see it at the very tail end of the run so I can certainly understand if it started off rough.
It was surprising to me as I'd seen Peters in Annie (which everyone loved) fairly late in her run and she absolutely walked through it. It was one of the worst performances I'd ever seen a "Star" give in a show.
It was surprising to me as I'd seen Peters in Annie (which everyone loved) fairly late in her run and she absolutely walked through it. It was one of the worst performances I'd ever seen a "Star" give in a show.
#66
Posted: 8/8/10 at 11:25pm
"TD90016, did you see either Tyne or Bernadette?"
A: I'm not the person posting as the smarter version of you.
B: I saw both of them and thought Bernadette sucked and Tyne nailed it. And I told Tyne so last time I worked with her.
But then, you don't really care about that. You just thought you'd call me out on something I have no part in.
Your double is someone who has more free time than me.
A: I'm not the person posting as the smarter version of you.
B: I saw both of them and thought Bernadette sucked and Tyne nailed it. And I told Tyne so last time I worked with her.
But then, you don't really care about that. You just thought you'd call me out on something I have no part in.
Your double is someone who has more free time than me.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
Updated On: 8/9/10 at 11:25 PM
#67
Posted: 8/8/10 at 11:29pm
What did she say when you told her you didn't like her?
Updated On: 8/8/10 at 11:29 PM
#68
Posted: 8/8/10 at 11:36pm
I'm not upset.
I just like pointing out when you are a little obsessed with me.
I just like pointing out when you are a little obsessed with me.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
#69
Posted: 8/8/10 at 11:45pm
How am I obsessed with you?
Posting back and forth, offering differnt points of views, and writing about likes/dislikes on these message boards is the whole point of these message boards.
Posting back and forth, offering differnt points of views, and writing about likes/dislikes on these message boards is the whole point of these message boards.
#70
Posted: 8/8/10 at 11:55pm
"How am I obsessed with you?"
Because you keep calling me out by name.
I haven't really been on this board for a couple of months, so I find it funny that someone made a sock double of you, and the first thing you do is blame me.
You don’t understand how your pompous posts are irritating to more than just me.
Because you keep calling me out by name.
I haven't really been on this board for a couple of months, so I find it funny that someone made a sock double of you, and the first thing you do is blame me.
You don’t understand how your pompous posts are irritating to more than just me.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
#71
Posted: 8/9/10 at 12:00am
I did it twice, both abbreviated. And, if you don't like my postings, then don't read them.
#72
Posted: 8/9/10 at 12:35am
I like to read the thread.
Your posts calling me out were part of the thread.
Stop calling me out because I will wreck you.
Your posts calling me out were part of the thread.
Stop calling me out because I will wreck you.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
#73
Posted: 8/9/10 at 9:50am
While we are discussing different Roses, I, too, think that Tyne Daly "nailed it"--she had an aura about her that summoned up my memories of Ethel Merman in the role, as a sort of "Earth Mother". Daly was so good, along with an exceptional Crista Moore as Louise, that I went back to see her GYPSY seven or eight times. However, I did not at all like Jonathan Hadary as Herbie. His outburst of anger when Rose pushed Louise to do the strip was embarrasingly over the top. Couldn't Laurents the director have reigned him in? No one can top Jack Klugman in the role of Herbie in my book. And Merman really liked Klugman. It showed.
I am currently reading the Arthur Laurents book MAINLY ON DIRECTING and find myself getting annoyed with each turn of the page. Particularly distressing to me is his put downs of Ethel Merman. And on the one hand while he generally speaks of the importance of the actor following the directions of the director, he mocks Merman's explicit following of Jerome Robbins direction, particularly in the performance of "Rose's Turn". Merman in her autobiography refers to Robbins as "teacher". Laurents seems to be fiercely jealous of Jerome Robbins's pivitol direction and choreography of the landmark 1959 production. Laurents apparently felt the need to re-invent GYPSY for the Patti LuPone production, but except for the ending, there is nothing that new about it, although his elimination of the faux rape scene and the reprise of "Small World" is, as I have already said above, lamentable. He goes on about re-thinking "Little Lamb" to make it more touching(with a stuffed toy lamb,yet). Hogwash. That song has touched me in all five major productions. I think I will write a review of MAINLY ON DIRECTING when I have finished it. Arthur Laurents gives me a pain.
I am currently reading the Arthur Laurents book MAINLY ON DIRECTING and find myself getting annoyed with each turn of the page. Particularly distressing to me is his put downs of Ethel Merman. And on the one hand while he generally speaks of the importance of the actor following the directions of the director, he mocks Merman's explicit following of Jerome Robbins direction, particularly in the performance of "Rose's Turn". Merman in her autobiography refers to Robbins as "teacher". Laurents seems to be fiercely jealous of Jerome Robbins's pivitol direction and choreography of the landmark 1959 production. Laurents apparently felt the need to re-invent GYPSY for the Patti LuPone production, but except for the ending, there is nothing that new about it, although his elimination of the faux rape scene and the reprise of "Small World" is, as I have already said above, lamentable. He goes on about re-thinking "Little Lamb" to make it more touching(with a stuffed toy lamb,yet). Hogwash. That song has touched me in all five major productions. I think I will write a review of MAINLY ON DIRECTING when I have finished it. Arthur Laurents gives me a pain.
"Madam Rose...and her daughter...Gypsy!"
Updated On: 8/9/10 at 09:50 AM
#74
Posted: 8/9/10 at 10:03am
I'm not obsessed with TheatreDiva90016, not at all. I don't even read TheatreDiva90016" posts, why should I? I don't even know who TheatreDiva90016 is. I don't think about TheatreDiva90016, write about TheatreDiva90016, respond to TheatreDiva90016. I don't eve know why I'm writing this about TheatreDiva90016. TheatreDiva90016 is obsessed with my being obsessed with TheatreDiva90016- which I'm not because I'm not obsessed with what TheatreDiva90016 writes, what TheatreDiva90016 thinks, what TheatreDiva90016 sees, what TheatreDiva90016 knows, what TheatreDiva90016 thinks about me. I don't care what TheatreDiva90016 thinks about me.
If TheatreDiva90016 doesn't like my posts he can stop reading my posts about TheatreDiva90016. TheatreDiva90016, stop reading my posts where I ask you questions. TheatreDiva90016, stop reading my posts where I address you directly.
TheatreDiva90016, stop thinking I'm obsessed with you because I don't think about you at all, TheatreDiva90016. I don't ever think about, TheatreDiva90016. I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
If TheatreDiva90016 doesn't like my posts he can stop reading my posts about TheatreDiva90016. TheatreDiva90016, stop reading my posts where I ask you questions. TheatreDiva90016, stop reading my posts where I address you directly.
TheatreDiva90016, stop thinking I'm obsessed with you because I don't think about you at all, TheatreDiva90016. I don't ever think about, TheatreDiva90016. I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016. Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Let me say that again to be clear: I'm NOT obsessed with TheatreDiva90016.
Updated On: 8/9/10 at 10:03 AM
#75
Posted: 8/9/10 at 10:08am
Kneel Bee you made me laugh out loud. If bette had been any bigger, gosh, imagine......LOLOL
yay for you
yay for you
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95