On A Clear Day First Preview — Page 7

It's an old joke, and I had the t-shirt, but now they could really call it ON A QUEER DAY.....

Am I wrong or wasn't BORN AGAIN... given to the students in the original run, or maybe the tour or stock productions.

One thing no one seems to remember was Herbert Ross' great, sexy ballet for the raunchy friends of Melinda. It was very erotic. There are pics of it in the original program book. and Freddy Wittop's delicious period costmues.

The Kansas City Starlight website shows CLEAR DAY playing during the summers of 1967 and 1970; I know from later years that the big midwestern theaters used to (maybe still do) co-produce and tour most of those productions. So it would make sense that Miranda saw the 1967 production when it got to Houston; I saw the 1970 production in KC and it starred John Cullum.

Miranda, that was the last time I saw the show, so take the following with a grain of salt. The Wiki synopsis says this about the tycoon:

"Greek shipping magnate Themistocles Kriakos learns of Mark's belief in reincarnation and offers to finance a study of the events of Melinda's life in exchange for Mark's help in discovering who he will be in his next life, which will allow him to leave his fortune to his future self."

My memory is that there were occasional references to Mark's stuffy colleagues being appalled by his research into ESP and past lives, and therefore threatening his position at the university. The appearance of Kriakos and his money saved Mark's job. It was just another thing thrown into the mix and seemed designed to show how obsessed Mark was, how he would risk everything to be with Melinda.

I knew Cullum had replaced Jourdan, Miranda, but I never knew why. Jourdan's singing seems fine in the film of GIGI, but of course laying down a track for a movie and singing live 8 shows per week are two, very different things. (BTW, Cullum also played Sir Dinadin in CAMELOT and you can hear him on the OBC record in "Take Me to the Fair.")

I suppose Cullum has always been stiff, in a sense, but no more so than most musical leading men of the 40s, 50s and early 60s. I think it may have had to do with standards of masculinity of the period more than any lack of ability on Cullum's part. I don't see Cullum or Raitt or Keel or any of those guys doing BOY FROM OZ.

Cullum was in the first professional production I ever saw, a 1966, pre-Broadway tryout of MARY, a musical drama about Mary Queen of Scots that also starred Inga Swenson in the title role. (It tried out in my hometown, Fort Lauderdale, of all places! The librettist was from there and also went to my junior high school, so we were offered $1 tickets to fill out the house.) Apparently it wasn't very good, but I was 12, thought it was perfect and became a lifelong fan of both stars. (This may have been Cullum's next project after the Broadway CLEAR DAY.)

I only saw Cullum in CLEAR DAY because I had a layover at the KC airport and noticed an ad for the show in the paper. With less than $20 in my pocket, I hopped in a cab and demanded to be taken crosstown to the theater. (Ah, the follies of youth and thank God for 1960s' prices! I was 16 and had no idea how much the 10-mile trip and ticket would cost. I managed to get back to the airport in the middle of the night by taking a series of buses when I ran out of cash.)

I later saw Cullum on Broadway in 1776, SHENANDOAH (many times) and ON THE TWENTIETH CENTURY (also many times). In CENTURY, he really cut loose as Oscar Jaffe, I thought, so I'm sure he always had it in him. Cutting loose just wasn't required by earlier parts.

Updated On: 11/22/11 at 07:50 PM

Regarding the Greek shipping magnate, I've never seen Zorba or listened to the cast recording and so never made that connection. I always assumed the character was a parody of the Greek shipping magnate, Aristotle Onassis.

I've also never heard of the show being based on the play "Berkeley Square". I know I've read somewhere before that the story was inspired by the Bridey Murphy case.

As a longtime fan of this flawed but fascinating work, I have been eagerly awaiting this new production, but I'm very unhappy to learn that David/Melinda has no psychic powers at all. For me the psychic abilities were a big part of the charm of the character and the show.

Gaveston: Aha! I was wondering why you were on that trip all alone at such a young age. Did you worry all through the show re how you would get back to the airport, or were you able to suspend your anxiety?

I'm afraid I worried all through the show; I only knew the first bus that headed in the general direction of the airport and had to wonder if I could get connections all the way. And I was never what you'd call a "free spirit." As I recall it, however, there was a lot of time for set changes (and for the Daisy/Melinda transformations), so I had those periods for worry and could pay attention to the show during the scenes.

Yes, if by "unwitting bravery of youth" you mean utter idiocy, Miranda. (But the incident does serve to show just how much I like John Cullum.)

Giitter, yes, I do know what you mean and I tried to say above that Daisy's scattershot powers would be less problematic if they didn't reflect confusion in the show as a whole. I agree the show WANTED to be a fantasy, but I don't know that it ever really got there.

Most of the present day scenes were concerned with pedantic matters such as Mark trying to keep Daisy in therapy, Warren trying to keep Daisy in line, Mark trying to keep his job, etc. Notice that none of those actions move forward; at best, they merely try to maintain the status quo.

And the 18th century scenes are all in the past, so they basically just "unfold" without really offering much in the way of suspense. I do remember Melinda's fate being concealed from us until very late in the plot, but that's just a minor mystery, not drama (and certainly not comedy).

No matter how much we love the score, I think we have to admit the original had a lot of problems.

Sorry you had such a miserable time, Tony.

I'm neutral on Connick, Jr., myself, so I'm not here to defend him or change your opinion of him.

But I do think the character he plays has always tended toward the unsympathetic. (Think of the movie!) The doctor is not only manipulating a patient to get to her alter-ego, his entire through-line is rather, well, whiny and clingy. It's fitting that his big number is called "Come Back to Me".

Apparently, they've attempted to justify his behavior by giving him a dead wife. Smart choice, but not enough to please you and others.

This is why I asked people why they thought Connick was attracted to the project in the first place. For John Cullum, the show was his first lead and big break on Broadway. For Yves Montand, it was a chance to star in a big Hollywood musical. For Connick?

That disclaimer applies to all of us, henrik. Tony seems sophisticated enough to know there is no guarantee he will agree with anybody else's opinion.

Personally, I felt about Georges in SUNDAY exactly as you describe your reaction to Dr. Mark in CLEAR DAY. While I recognize his skill, I'm not a big Patinkin fan.

And I didn't see the Evans production, so we've probably gone as far as we can go with the comparison. Suffice it to say I found both characters rather stiff, but I love John Cullum and find Mandy Patinkin to be a bit trying. (To be fair, the latter is just a matter of personal preference. I know MP is highly skilled and has many, devout fans.)

Thanks for the youtube link. It's a side of Barbara Harris I had not been aware of. I also thought her version of "Hurry, it's Lovely Up Here" was superior to Barbra's film version of it because Barbra seemed to be more showing off her voice (A LOT)than serving the song. Also Barbara Harris had to do the whole thing live, into an overhead mike and working with flowers at the same time!