#1
Posted: 11/5/05 at 10:52am
I know, random, right? I was dragged against my will to see this tonight...but it was free, so I couldn't resist. We really went to check out it's new stars, Michele Pawk and John Dossett.
The first time I saw this show with the original cast I thought it was well put together and extremely fun, for what it was. The second time I saw it (a year later,) I wanted to run for my life - so that is why I was very apprehensive about putting myself through this again tonight. I'm not going to review the show - clearly, no one needs to hear anything about MAMMA MIA after it's been running for 4 years - sometimes it's just nice to hear how a long running show is (or isn't) holding up.
Unlike BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (which I had the displeasure of sitting through last month,) MAMMA MIA! has held up surprisingly well. Yes, it is due in part to it's extremely young and youthful cast (that are constantly being recycled,) but also due in part to the crispness of the visual design - which makes it so that even when the performers are no longer top-notch (which they haven't been for quite some time,) the entire production LOOKS brand new and pristine.
Michele Pawk (the real life Mrs. Dossett) is quite charming in the role, but lacks the depth necessary to give a convincing portrayal of a woman who is haunted by her past - i.e. being disowned by her mother, not knowing the father of her child, etc. For the most part, though, she is great. My only sincere qualm about her performance is her lack of vocal power. She has a very standard Musical Theatre voice with an extremely limited belting range - and while I'm not one for constant belting, the role of Donna does require just that. It you're not belting those notes out (particularly in the last half of "The Winner Takes it All") over the deafiningly over-amplified "orchestra," then you might as well not be singing, in my opinion. A few flat notes, but that can be contributed to (but not excused by) vocal problems she was facing last week. And she has KILLER legs.
John Dossett, whom I adored in GYPSY and DEMOCRACY, gives his usual ultra-reliable performance. I know he just started in MAMMA MIA, but Dossett has the unique ability (as he showed in GYPSY) to continuously make the material appear fresh, like he's saying it for the first time, and like he actually MEANS what he says. You might argue that that's the job of ANY good stage actor - and I would definitely agree - but there are so few great stage actors left that when I see someone like Dossett rise to the occasion time and time again, he can't help but earn my kudos.
Judy McLane and Olga Merediz are more than adequate as Tanya and Rosie, but neither one are as memorable as the role's originators, Karen Mason and Judy Kaye. They have found things to play with here that other casts hadn't - I'm not saying all of them work - but it's nice to see people having so much fun together onstage while still upholding a satisfactory performance.
Lastly, Andy Kelso (while he is a dream to look at,) is a terrible actor. He comes across as an outcast from the reality TV show "Who Wants to Be a Soap Star?" and he passes for straight just about as well as Carol Channing passes for young.
I must admit that while watching this show, I felt much like the character of Ms. Jones (HOW TO SUCCEED...) during the "Brotherhood of Man" number. At first, I was mortified, and disgusted that a show of such poor quality is still selling out. But before I knew it, I - like Ms. Jones - was up on the table with my steno pad dancing along with all the other men. Okay, not really dancing - but I found myself surprisingly entertained. Now, let's not mistake my being entertained for my being captivated by the characters and their situations - I certainly wasn't taken in by the story, and I certainly didn't feel anything for the characters - but I definitely wanted that finale megamix (a la JOSEPH) to last longer than it actually did.
The first time I saw this show with the original cast I thought it was well put together and extremely fun, for what it was. The second time I saw it (a year later,) I wanted to run for my life - so that is why I was very apprehensive about putting myself through this again tonight. I'm not going to review the show - clearly, no one needs to hear anything about MAMMA MIA after it's been running for 4 years - sometimes it's just nice to hear how a long running show is (or isn't) holding up.
Unlike BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (which I had the displeasure of sitting through last month,) MAMMA MIA! has held up surprisingly well. Yes, it is due in part to it's extremely young and youthful cast (that are constantly being recycled,) but also due in part to the crispness of the visual design - which makes it so that even when the performers are no longer top-notch (which they haven't been for quite some time,) the entire production LOOKS brand new and pristine.
Michele Pawk (the real life Mrs. Dossett) is quite charming in the role, but lacks the depth necessary to give a convincing portrayal of a woman who is haunted by her past - i.e. being disowned by her mother, not knowing the father of her child, etc. For the most part, though, she is great. My only sincere qualm about her performance is her lack of vocal power. She has a very standard Musical Theatre voice with an extremely limited belting range - and while I'm not one for constant belting, the role of Donna does require just that. It you're not belting those notes out (particularly in the last half of "The Winner Takes it All") over the deafiningly over-amplified "orchestra," then you might as well not be singing, in my opinion. A few flat notes, but that can be contributed to (but not excused by) vocal problems she was facing last week. And she has KILLER legs.
John Dossett, whom I adored in GYPSY and DEMOCRACY, gives his usual ultra-reliable performance. I know he just started in MAMMA MIA, but Dossett has the unique ability (as he showed in GYPSY) to continuously make the material appear fresh, like he's saying it for the first time, and like he actually MEANS what he says. You might argue that that's the job of ANY good stage actor - and I would definitely agree - but there are so few great stage actors left that when I see someone like Dossett rise to the occasion time and time again, he can't help but earn my kudos.
Judy McLane and Olga Merediz are more than adequate as Tanya and Rosie, but neither one are as memorable as the role's originators, Karen Mason and Judy Kaye. They have found things to play with here that other casts hadn't - I'm not saying all of them work - but it's nice to see people having so much fun together onstage while still upholding a satisfactory performance.
Lastly, Andy Kelso (while he is a dream to look at,) is a terrible actor. He comes across as an outcast from the reality TV show "Who Wants to Be a Soap Star?" and he passes for straight just about as well as Carol Channing passes for young.
I must admit that while watching this show, I felt much like the character of Ms. Jones (HOW TO SUCCEED...) during the "Brotherhood of Man" number. At first, I was mortified, and disgusted that a show of such poor quality is still selling out. But before I knew it, I - like Ms. Jones - was up on the table with my steno pad dancing along with all the other men. Okay, not really dancing - but I found myself surprisingly entertained. Now, let's not mistake my being entertained for my being captivated by the characters and their situations - I certainly wasn't taken in by the story, and I certainly didn't feel anything for the characters - but I definitely wanted that finale megamix (a la JOSEPH) to last longer than it actually did.
"If you are going to do something, do it well. And leave something witchy."
-Charlie Manson
Updated On: 11/5/05 at 10:52 AM
I LOVED her live "Winner"- it would send chills down my spine. I have all of her cd's and those two versions of "Winner" are among my favorite songs she recorded....What a voice. Thrilling. 
