New York Times Reviews Wicked again

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 10:50am

http://theater2.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/theater/reviews/15zino.html?oref=login

Interesting...Did they invite critics again?

"Its popularity among teenage girls borders on the religious; I once met a young fan who could recite every word, gasp and pause in the Tony Award acceptance speech of Idina Menzel, who originated the role of Elphaba, the Wicked Witch of the West. After running for over 20 months (and spawning two other productions around the country), its soaring ticket sales and strong bond with its audience have overshadowed what's actually going on lately inside the Gershwin Theater, which, I can report, is far more ordinary.

Those witches in this behind-the-scenes story of "The Wizard of Oz" are still defying gravity, but now - double, double, toil and trouble - they seem to be coasting. "Wicked" has been playing long enough for its first- (and second-) string stars to have moved on, but not long enough for audiences to have forgotten them. The current cast is a patchwork of wildly uneven talents; Elphaba isn't the only one who looks green.

Ms. Hilty adds a bit of a goofy charm to the perfect Glinda, but she can't seem to locate the jokes in her lines or find the lift in the bouncy tune "Popular." Ms. Bean, who has a precise and impressive singing voice, is more believable as an outcast than the statuesque Ms. Menzel, but her characterization is generic, which also could be said of David Ayers, who plays the love interest of both witches, Fiyero. He is the kind of square-jawed and blow-dried leading man always in demand in musicals, even if he fades into the background.

With "Wicked," she has once again hit upon themes (makeovers, popularity, boys) that obsess girls. All the more reason for the current stars to loosen up and enjoy themselves. Act out, take a risk, make a new face. The more seasoned actors understand. The former "Golden Girls" star Rue McClanahan, dressed in flamboyant kimonolike costumes, is doing maaahvelous things with vowel sounds as Madam Morrible, the flamboyant headmistress of the witches' school. She steals scenes with a flip of a hand.

Ben Vereen makes a convincingly broken-down Wizard, even if he did resort to some on-the-fly improvisations. When he made his first entrance, his microphone fell out of his ear, and as he frantically tried to put it back, his old show business instincts kicked in. "Excuse me," said the Wonderful Wizard of Oz. "I have wax in my ears.""





Updated On: 7/15/05 at 10:50 AM

[TheColorOfFlame]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:02am

The Times often reviews a musical later in its run; I remember Ben Brantley giving Hairspray a second, still overwhelmingly favorable, review. He really loved the sexual energy of its new stars.

Too bad Wicked doesn't work without star power. Well, at least that's my opinion (https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?page=2&thread=850927&startthread=1058817&boardname=bway).

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:03am

I'm just wondering if the TImes was invited to review it. It seems weird the producers would need to do that.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:05am

That was an odd review. It was basically only for the new cast rather than the production. Too bad its once again off track. :-/

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:10am

I think the review is pretty spot on, and much nicer to some people (cough, David Ayers, cough) than it could have been.

[musicalsFan]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:21am

Probably safe to guess that's a review that won't be touted on
Megan Hilty and Shoshana Bean's websites.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:25am

I think this is a very fair review. As much as I have come to enjoy WICKED, particularly its score, the truth is it's simply not a great musical.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:26am

I still wonder...Were they invited or go on their own bill?

It seems to be foolish to invite critics at this point.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:30am

Two years into the run is fairly standard for re-reviewing. It's a shame they couldn't have reviewed it with Jennifer Laura Thompson, or couldn't have waited until (supposedly) Ana Gasteyer goes into the show in NYC. Somehow I have a feeling Shoshanna Bean and Megan Hilty are going to be two of the less memorable people to play these roles.

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:33am

It's not uncommon to re-review long running shows after their have ben some cast changes, but I can't imagine that the NY Times would just go back on their own initiative, I'd think the producers would have to issue an invite-- but did anyone else re-review? I didn't see anything else.

My guess is that they were hoping for a most positive take this time around. No such luck.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:37am

Why haven't we seen reviews from other papers and sites then?

It seems an odd choice, especially since the show is selling so well, and as you said, there are likely to be better leads down the pike.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:42am

The EVITA syndrome seems at work.

After LuPone (and the gifted alternate, Terri Klausner) left tha show, none of the replacements became names. Sometimes, the role seemed indifferently cast (Derrin Altay, in the Bean position--the 2nd--disappeared). Yes, Nancy Opal scored in the Ives plays and URINETOWN, but as a character actress, not really a diva/leading lady. The only semi-name to play the role closed it, Florence Lacy. But she'd already been on b'way (DOLLY).

Elphaba could have this lite curse, and the word in the review of Bean that is telling here is "generic." The main requirement for the role seems to be the Big Voice with money notes. I think when Mantello took a risk with Gasteyer, it was bold and smart. She is miles away from Menzel, physically and in temperament. They're more apt to keep the show fresh by playing with the casting, trying new things, not trying too hard to replicate the exact originals with watered down versions.

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:42am

Positive reviews for Rue ! I'm laughing at the fact that all the teenies would be like OMG MEGAN AND SHOSANA R THA BEST, THEY RULE, N THAT RUE LADY SUX. That's obviously not the truth.
Updated On: 7/15/05 at 11:42 AM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:46am

What's the point in dissecting whether the Times was invited or not? The article was more a discussion of the box office phenomenon than it was anything else. The point the writer was making was that even though the show is devoid of star power that lifted a mundane musical with more holes in its plot than a brick of Swiss cheese has all the way up to slightly-less-mundane, it's still a box office powerhouse thanks to what the writer calls "the true believers." The point is, it doesn't matter how bad it sucks. The former Powerpuff Girls set is placing its collective butt in the seats. It doesn't matter the quality of what they're actually seeing in front of them because, as The Knack once wrote, "The little girls understand."

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:47am

No, it was a review.

[Hanna from Hamburg]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:51am

Unfortunately, a lot of long successful musicals have this same problem. Replacements seem to be told the "marks" they are supposed to make and, unless you are an EXTREMELY seasoned performer, that's how it comes across. I know when I saw Les Miz (years after it opened) I felt like most performances felt like "move from point A to point B to point C" and "sing this line this way." I haven't Wicked without the original cast, but there's something to be said for being involved from the beginning and having the opportunity to find out who the characters are along with the entire creative team.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 11:56am

I felt the same way about Chicago when I saw it in January. Especially the ensemble.

[jczelyph]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 12:56pm

I saw Wicked last Saturday. I have previously seen it in March 2004 with the original cast. The first time I saw the show, I was thrilled. I enjoyed last week's show immensely too. I knew what was coming so the thrills were tempered but still exciting. I loved all of the lead performances although it is sadly too apparent that today's cast is certainly no match for the original cast (with the exception of Ben Vereen who I thought was slightly more engaging that Joel Grey as the Wizard). Shoshana reaches the notes with less effort than Idina, allowing her to add some new riffs to certain parts but her voice has a more reedy quality than Idina's and lacks the sonic clout of Menzel's pipes (compare an oboe to a clarinet and you'll get my drift). She delivered certain lines with a ridiculous deadpan, 'wink wink' inflection which made Idina into some cigar-twiddling comedian rather than the intelligent, witty madame she is meant to be. I didn't love her delivery of the comedy lines, but overall, I still loved her portrayal of Elphaba and the character is still a favourite of mine.

Megan Hilty was overall very good and is to be congratulated on her attempts to turn Glinda into her own part, rather than copying Chenoweth's delivery. David Ayers was suitably bland enough to play FIyero, perhaps the least developed part in the show. I loved the comment about 'blow-dryed leading men' because it is SO true, a fact which struck me last night watching Tim Martin Gleason play Raoul in Phantom.

I love the show and it is still a fantastic production, full of theatrical panache and some unashamedly crowd-pleasing gimmicks. Granted it's not as sparkly as it was with the entire original cast (NLB managed to turn Fiyero into something a little more sexy...), but it's still a wonderful show which I truly love.

[mlsheehan]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 2:00pm

I'm glad Rue got some love. Now, I don't feel so lonely sticking up for her on some of the other posts.

jczelyph,
I agree with your assessment. I certainly wasn't disappoint by Sho or Megan. I thought they gave good performances and were trying to create something a little different. Not always an easy thing to do as a replacement.

[jczelyph]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 2:03pm

Exactamundo, misheehan! Being a replacement is tough and personally, I loved Rue's arch portrayal of Morrible. It was infused with a delicious camp sensibility but I kinda felt it was a slight cop-out from not singing really. But I enjoyed her nonetheless.

[Thenardier]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 2:25pm

The ironic thing is the Rue got the good review - when I have been reading reviews where she gets the worst review.

This is definitely a case of "good reviews for legend status."

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 2:30pm

I always admired Cameron Mackintosh for recognizing that Les Miz was having the same trouble and recasting and going back into rehearsal. There is nothing worse than seeing a stale show that most of the actors are doing by rote.

[bwayfan3]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 3:21pm

I bet they were not invited. The producers would really have no reason to. They're filling the seats. Replacing must be tough, but I guess it's crucial to take your own spin on it. That's why I'm really curious about Ana Gasteyer. I was shocked when I heard she was cast becuse I thought that was complete miscasting but according to the Chicago papers she's the greatest Elphaba EVER!!!!! She's probably much better equipped to put her own spin on it than any of the other women who have played the part since Idina.

But I do feel kind of bad for the two actresses. I mean, in so many words, he said the only thing Shoshana has going for her (besides a nice voice) is that she's less attractive, the way Elphaba is supposed to be. HARSH

[TabooPhan1]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 3:58pm

I just wanted to say that Bobbybubby, I LOVE your quote! I have that performance on DVD and find myself watching all too often...

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/15/05 at 4:01pm

Well the only bad reviews I've heard about Rue - were from the Wicekd teenies who never heard of her before. The adults, or "mature fans" ususally say Rue is pretty damn good. The teenies are too crazed on Shoshana and Megan to really focus on Rue's performance.