Posted: 8/16/17 at 4:20pm
For selfish reasons I'm glad Tony is planning to be back tonight- nothing against Eric. I just may not get the chance to see it again and if his is the lauded performance I want to see it!
Posted: 8/16/17 at 7:53pm
Phillytheatreguy10 said: "Anyone have experience with the Today Tix rush for this- I got ticket, curious as to seat location.
"
I was just off the right side aisle in the last row of the mezzanine. It was perfect and didn't feel too far away.
Posted: 8/16/17 at 8:51pm
Am planning to see this show solely because Tony's in it.7
Posted: 8/16/17 at 10:54pm
I just got out of tonight's show. The only way I can describe this is like Endless Appetizers at TGI Friday's. There are the familiar comfort food songs everyone knows, alongside a bunch of new items on the list that they are trying out or have a very niche fan base. Ultimately, after two and a half hours, you grow sick of this assortment of small plates and realize that it ultimately did not create a filling meal.
There were three main highlights for me:
- Tony Yazbeck doing "The Right Girl". He can dance up one HELL of a storm and I'm glad they gave him this moment to shine. Even when he wiped out a bit toward the end (I believe by slipping on his own sweat), he rebounded quickly and finished strong.
- Bryonha Marie Parham's "Cabaret" which definitely slow burned at the beginning before nearly bringing the damn house down at the end. I actually got chills.
- Michael Xavier's "Music Of The Night". This is, to me, where he sounded most in his element in a night where many of the songs seemed like very awkward fits.
Some of the more appalling moments of the night:
- Chuck Cooper as Tevye. Who in holy hell thought this was a good idea? No offense to Cooper, who was magnificent, but this had me cringing because I could not suspend the amount of disbelief required to get through it.
- Janet Dacal as EVITA. There was ZERO consistency here. Her "Buenos Aires" played liked an audition for a performing arts school, and then (after an awkward "A New Argentina" interlude) her "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" was overacted and pitchy, not to mention sounding like a mock-up of Elena Roger.
- The finale number is really a pathetic coda after a long and storied journey through theatre history.
It was worth the $30 I spent to see it, but spending anything more for this would be downright criminal. I see this having a decent life in community theatre down the road, but this show could've rolled in with a bang and instead awkwardly plopped in with a whimper.
Stage Door: The entire cast came out, signed, took pictures, and were all sweet as pie. There was one dad there with his son who was most certainly acting aggravated/embarrassed with his interactions with the performers, even though the poor kid was able to interact with them and they seemed to enjoy his banter.
Posted: 8/16/17 at 11:26pm
I saw it this afternoon and Tony was out which was a disappointment. I did not care for the understudy. I am sure Tony has more charisma and sex appeal.
The entire affair felt labored. I could not help but wonder how much the cast believed in it. They did not have much of a relationship with each other or the audience.
I would have preferred a tight ensemble review without all of the sets and costumes. Once the songs were presented as scene work I couldn't help but compare the performers to all of the outstanding actors who had played those parts over the years who had a richer understanding of what they were doing.
I also felt the show could have used some star power and it ran way too long for my taste. The narrative was unnecessary given we all know in advance what holds the material together.
The Showboat section worked about the best for me and having never seen Brandon Uranowitz before I thought he was a smart performer who made very clean acting choices. I guess I will have to wait to watch it on PBS to see Mr. Yazbeck.
Posted: 8/17/17 at 10:40am
Delayed review/note, but Eric was a pretty impressive cover for Tony, especially through The Right Girl.
Skimming the past several pages, I haven't seen much mentioned about Janet Dacal, who I've always wanted to like, but have typically been underwhelmed by her performances. Her Eva was quite impressive. Would it have been better if she had an ensemble for Buenos Aires? Absolutely. But what she was able to do with that number solo, vocally and with her energy/presence, was impressive!
Posted: 8/17/17 at 10:56am
^^Quizking- 100% Agree with your thoughts, was there last night too! Tony was my standout- what a performance- The Right Girl actually brought tears to my eyes it was that good! Bryonha Marie Parham was my surprise she was spectacular in all of her moments- what a find. Xavier was the best when he was the Phantom. Decal was my biggest disappointment- her Evita was so lackluster and then they saddled her with the Sophia Vegarra accent, I get we're trying to maintain authenticity, but Decal is Hispanic and that should've been enough not to make a caricature here (side note: if we're re-creating Prince's greatest hits, Patti did not use an accent)- what a mess- her You've Got Possibilities was so promising, I had high hopes- she had no spark or power to her vocals- her Aurora later lacked for me too- Parham should've taken that song too. Thank God I'm not crazy in thinking Cooper's Tevye was a mess- one of the worst interpretations of the song I've heard! All around, I thought he truly only shined in the Showboat section- his "Old Man River" was quite spectacular. I thought Ziemba was good- but personally, suffered from the Carmello effect with her Lovett- which was fine, but Carmello is knocking it out of the park right now and Ziemba was barely a blip on the radar for me. Skinner was her usual spectacular self. It was worth seeing, I thought the finale number was nice, but I agree, lacked some punch. My only other criticism is some of the material would've been nice to hear with a little more power behind it in terms of a larger orchestra. I'm only 30 so I wasn't around for the original productions of some of these shows, it was cool to see the recreations and celebrate his career. Oh, and I think the boy you're referring to at the stage door may have been on the Autism spectrum and was just very excited. Parting words- TONY YAZBEK.
Updated On: 8/17/17 at 10:56 AM
Posted: 8/17/17 at 11:24am
@Phillytheatreguy10
Oh, I'm sure of it. I was happy to see the kid enjoying himself so much. It was the father's attitude that incensing me so much.
Posted: 8/17/17 at 11:51am
^ I agree not great in the support department, but I imagine it's a difficult job. Thanks for sharing your review- I thought I was the only one because at the stage door everyone was so complimentary, which I understand, you're not going to say "that was blasphemous" but that's why I remain silent lol!
Updated On: 8/17/17 at 11:51 AM
Posted: 8/17/17 at 7:30pm
bk said: "
What a post. The Right Girl was there because the authors wanted it there, not because Mr. Nelson had to have anything. It's a great number in the right hands. In Mr. Nelson's hands it was a hugely dramatic and affecting number, as well as very exciting. In the last revival, which you speak of seeing at the Ahmanson, nothing was in the right hands, not one single thing, starting with the director straight on down the line. Too Many Mornings was a "revelation"? I have to laugh when I read pronouncements like that - the only thing missing is the word "thrilling." The song isn't about begin operatic, BTW, and nothing, NOTHING will ever justify an intermission in this show. The original cast and creative team understood this show perfectly - no one else has since, and that includes its book write who has watered it down over and over again - it didn't need to be "fixed" ever. As to Prince of Broadway, it doesn't sound like it's working very well, but I'd have to see it to judge for myself.
"
I didn't pull the comments in my post out of thin air. I saw the original production twice and have read nearly every major critical account of the show. No, I'm not going to make an academic research project out of supporting my references. Reread SONDHEIM & CO., FINISHING THE HAT and EVERYTHING WAS POSSIBLE and look for the quotes, if it matters to you.
I agree that none of the FOLLIES revivals I have seen really compares to the original, but I refuse to be miserable every time I see a revival of my favorite show just because it doesn't measure up to what I saw in 1971. You are entitled to be as miserable as you like.
If you think everything in the original was exactly what the creators wanted, you don't understand collaboration--which surprises me, given your excellent work remastering Broadway OCRs. (No, I haven't forgotten your exquisite work on the OBCR of FOLLIES, which I play all the time.) There are always trade-offs.
Sondheim also admits that the change from "Uptown/Downtown" to "Lucy and Jessie" left Michael Bennett with a song he couldn't figure out how to choreograph (in the time remaining) so they just left the choreography from the former and it became a song that audiences loved, but Bennett hated and Sondheim felt lukewarm about.
Sondheim also talks about the need for a Gene Nelson solo turn and how after struggling to invent a number inspired by Bennett's choreographic idea, it turned out Nelson never could do the steps.
I share your love for the original production; it remains my favorite 2 hours in a theater. But that doesn't mean it was literally perfect. How could it be, with such an "embarrassment of riches"?
As for "Too Many Mornings", the original was one of the most astonishing pieces of staging I had ever seen when I was 17. And it was beautifully sung. But Clark and Raines are different performers with different voices. Of course, the number would be sung differently in 2015! All I said was they made a virtue out of necessity.
Posted: 8/18/17 at 11:59pm
Saw this tonight. Too tired to write more but will say:
Good: Tony Yazbeck in almost everything, especially "The Right Girl" and as Tony in WSS
Bad: Michael Xavier in everything. He simply does not have enough voice for the parts he (tried to) sing. His Phantom was an embarrassment.
Edit: Here's a roundup of Prince of Broadway, Government Inspector, Play That Goes Wrong and more:
http://poisonivywalloftext.blogspot.com/2017/08/theater-diaries-prince-of-broadway.html
Updated On: 8/19/17 at 11:59 PM
Posted: 8/19/17 at 9:53am
Should add: the narration by the various singers was by far the worst part of the show. It made it seem like a cruise-ship entertainment evening. Such inane writing.
Posted: 8/20/17 at 8:50am
I'd like to play the part of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition here. I mean no disrespect to any who posted negative reviews of the show here, as everyone's experiences are different and valid. But I had a thrilling time at this last night, and would like to throw some opinions out there on the positive side for anyone still considering getting a ticket to this piece after reading this thread.
My seats were row J, all the way house left. Perfect view. (TDF.) I'd recommend sitting close if possible.
Because I went into the show with low expectations regarding the "book" of the piece, I wasn't disappointed to discover there was none, and was free to enjoy examining the different numbers as microcosms of the original productions (which I am too young to have seen) as interpreted by the individuals of the cast. I definitely would have made some different choices regarding which shows were represented, and perhaps which numbers or sequences from shows (the most prevalent in my mind being switching out "So What?" For "What Would You Do?," choosing different ALNM numbers, and having a couple more ensemble numbers even if shorter, to utilize this stellar cast to the fullest). But since the show is what it is and they chose what they chose, my comments below will relate to my reactions to the numbers put before the audience. A non-inclusive list because you folks don't have all day. :)
--"She Loves Me" - Brandon Uranowitz does more physical comedy here and brings more to this song in terms of raw emotion without going camp than any other performer I've seen in this number. This isn't one of my favorite shows (I particularly dislike "Will He Like Me," because it's dramatically dead, though Bryonha Parham sings it beautifully here), but I'm glad I saw Brandon's interpretation of this number.
--"Follies" - This is my favorite show, so I'm biased here. I was not around to see the original, but I've seen and heard the footage that's out there, and I've been reading on this board for years about how no production since has ever captured the magic of the original. I'd certainly never seen the full "The Right Girl," to my detriment. I loved that they opened this sequence with the Loveland set and "Beautiful Girls." Emily Skinner WAS Phyllis, and Karen Ziemba WAS Sally, down to tiny details about how they walked down the stairs. The "Waiting...Upstairs" sequence left me breathless, as, watching it, I palpably felt the dichotomies at play between the Old and Young characters, and how they were communicating across time in a futile circle of "Coulda-beens," youthful optimism, regret, and something like a stalled capacity for the Old characters to make changes in their current lives in order to pick up where the Young ones left off but with the benefits of wisdom and experience. I feel I have a glimpse into what the original felt like, and the punch it packed. That alone was worth the price of admission for me. Then came Tony Yazbeck's "The Right Girl." Yes, astoundingly danced and sung, but more than that, I feel that having seen this number with the dance makes me understand Buddy more, that he has drive and determination to match "the famous Benjamin Stone's," if only he could let it out - but his being emotionally bound to Sally keeps him from letting it out, lest he lose his mind, too. Seeing this number really illustrated for me how much more alike than different Ben and Buddy are, and how much differently their lives would have been had they married each other's wives. Buddy wanted a driving force, and Ben wanted nurturing. I'm still haunted in the best possible way.
(Continued in next post)
Posted: 8/20/17 at 9:21am
--"Fiddler" - I loved Chuck Cooper's Tevye! He captured the world-weariness, the comedy, and the soul of this man whose only real desires include studying Torah, having the respect of his community, not starving to death, and not having his wife scream his ear. I especially enjoyed the reading of the lyric "screaming at the savants day and night."
-"Cabaret" - Okay, Brandon's Emcee made me completely rethink this character. Because Brandon dances so flawlessly and his vocals are so sonorous, it brings to mind a character who, like Sally (perhaps, depending on the production), is too good for the Kit Kat Club but is using it as a hideout to keep himself safe--yet he must dance his role beautifully, because he is a true and skilled artist trapped by his time and place who doesn't find the least amount of humor or joy in the acts he is presenting. His "If You Could See Her" carried the emotional weight of a man presenting his own cultural heritage in caricature form. Here, his dancing came through for me as the last line of defense of his own sanity as a Jewish man doing what he needs to survive. Interestingly, and to my chagrin and silent fury, the audience laughed at the last lyric (which, thank goodness, was the original and not the "mishkeit" version). I'm hoping that it was natural reflex at the "joke rhythm," not a sign of the times. Ziemba's "So What?" elevated a number that I had never cared much for or seen as more than an "I Am" song to a three-act play that begins unemotional, evolves to embittered, and resolves with passion to remain alive despite the circumstances. I still would have given her "What Would You Do," especially given how this sequence is staged, but I'm grateful I got to experience this interpretation of the song. Bryonha's "Cabaret" was both a nervous breakdown and a force of nature. How fantastic to hear someone belt this beauty of a number to the rafters without losing the context, significance, or weight of the song! I was stunned into "woo"-ing when she finished, which I usually save for curtain call.
--"Showboat" - I have never seen this show. (I know, I know...) But I feel I understand from the two numbers presented why it is such a classic, and why it's problematic today. I was most struck by the progress that has been made in terms of diverse casting, and how far we have left to travel. It was a thing of harrowing beauty to see the same actress play Queenie "traditionally" and also play Sally Bowles during the course of one evening.
"Merrily, We Roll Along" - Another top favorite of mine. I enjoyed this arrangement of "Now You Know," and would love to see Emily Skinner in a full production as Mary Flynn. It was pretty clear, though, that most of the audience was not familiar with this piece, and was more of a "Phantom," "Evita," and "Sweeney Todd" crowd, judging by the set pieces' entrance applauses.
"Phantom of the Opera" - Not my favorite show by a long shot. But something in Michael Xavier's performance made me want to return after a 20-year absence. His vocals were excellent, no problems with the range. He captured that "creepy/seductive" vibe that (especially in this day and age) makes you want to urge Christine to get out as fast as she can, yet empathize with his desire to create, as well as hers to be his instrument. Still not my favorite show, but I'm pleased that I had the opportunity to see these snippets.
Updated On: 8/20/17 at 09:21 AM
Posted: 8/20/17 at 9:33am
[Sorry for the third post to conclude; my tablet screen started acting up and I wanted to submit before I lost everything I had just typed.]
So for me overall, I had a fantastic time at this show. Would it have been nicer to have a "connective thread" or specific emotional journey carried through the numbers? Very much so. Would it have been more interesting to hear a few juicy stories from Mr. Prince instead of the one-liner intros? Absolutely. Could more effective choices been made in terms of which numbers to showcase, and which shows to represent? Undoubtedly. But I left the theater feeling like a very lucky girl to have seen all these insanely talented actors throw themselves, in-character, into some of the most iconic roles in theater, and give me new things to think about for each one.
Side note: this was a Saturday evening performance on the last week of previews. I went to the Stage Door, and every single person came out, signed (with their own matching silver Sharpies), and took pictures.
Posted: 8/20/17 at 10:01am
GavestonPS said: "bk said: "
What a post. The Right Girl was there because the authors wanted it there, not because Mr. Nelson had to have anything. It's a great number in the right hands. In Mr. Nelson's hands it was a hugely dramatic and affecting number, as well as very exciting. In the last revival, which you speak of seeing at the Ahmanson, nothing was in the right hands, not one single thing, starting with the director straight on down the line. Too Many Mornings was a "revelation"? I have to laugh when I read pronouncements like that - the only thing missing is the word "thrilling." The song isn't about begin operatic, BTW, and nothing, NOTHING will ever justify an intermission in this show. The original cast and creative team understood this show perfectly - no one else has since, and that includes its book write who has watered it down over and over again - it didn't need to be "fixed" ever. As to Prince of Broadway, it doesn't sound like it's working very well, but I'd have to see it to judge for myself.
"
I didn't pull the comments in my post out of thin air. I saw the original production twice and have read nearly every major critical account of the show. No, I'm not going to make an academic research project out of supporting my references. Reread SONDHEIM & CO., FINISHING THE HAT and EVERYTHING WAS POSSIBLE and look for the quotes, if it matters to you.
I agree that none of the FOLLIES revivals I have seen really compares to the original, but I refuse to be miserable every time I see a revival of my favorite show just because it doesn't measure up to what I saw in 1971. You are entitled to be as miserable as you like.
If you think everything in the original was exactly what the creators wanted, you don't understand collaboration--which surprises me, given your excellent work remastering Broadway OCRs. (No, I haven't forgotten your exquisite work on the OBCR of FOLLIES, which I play all the time.) There are always trade-offs.
Sondheim also admits that the change from "Uptown/Downtown" to "Lucy and Jessie" left Michael Bennett with a song he couldn't figure out how to choreograph (in the time remaining) so they just left the choreography from the former and it became a song that audiences loved, but Bennett hated and Sondheim felt lukewarm about.
Sondheim also talks about the need for a Gene Nelson solo turn and how after struggling to invent a number inspired by Bennett's choreographic idea, it turned out Nelson never could do the steps.
I share your love for the original production; it remains my favorite 2 hours in a theater. But that doesn't mean it was literally perfect. How could it be, with such an "embarrassment of riches"?
As for "Too Many Mornings", the original was one of the most astonishing pieces of staging I had ever seen when I was 17. And it was beautifully sung. But Clark and Raines are different performers with different voices. Of course, the number would be sung differently in 2015! All I said was they made a virtue out of necessity.
I saw the original 5 times, including once in Boston with FoxTrot and Uptown / Downtown. It also goes down in my memory bank as my favorite 2 hours in the musical theatre ever. IMO, the 'overture', Waiting for the Girls Upstairs, Who's That Woman, Lucy and Jessie, the montage ending with Broadway Baby, Beautiful Girls, the staging of Live, Laugh, Love represent the highest level of excellence ever achieved in musical theatre; and yet, some of the dialogue scenes and numbers for the four leads are just too dreary, leading to the huge diversity of opinions on the show.
After seeing 5 or 6 subsequent productions, most of them multiple times, i have reached the conclusion that the original production is never going be matched because the staging and production values were at least as good as the score, and they are not economically viable today (probably weren't when it opened, but they were better artists than businessmen (I think Prince was listed as producer)). And, without that staging and level of production values, the show's deficiencies -- mainly its book, maybe its basic structure (i.e., intimate, sometimes boring / talky scenes focused solely on the four, periodically interrupted by some of the greatest production numbers and solo spots ever in one show) -- become that much more obvious, and are always going to be an issue. The most problematic aspect the show is the one for which there appears to be total unwillingness to alter: the book; and that unwillingness has already relegated Follies to 'Tier 2' status.
Posted: 8/21/17 at 8:16am
Am I the only one who chuckled briefly during the Follies sequence because Young Ben grew up and became a black man? I get that it's just a revue- disbelief suspension and all that- but it still tickled me.
On that note, I saw it on Friday...and reading these posts make me grateful that I didn't miss TONY YAZBECK! He was so fabulous. I was never a fan of "The Right Girl," but the way he danced the hell out of it...lordy.
Posted: 8/21/17 at 10:22am
I can understand the raves some are giving Yazbek's cover of "The Right Girl;" as an out-of-context song and dance, he delivers it very well.
I couldn't shake, however, the odd feeling that the number made no sense as the song from Follies; it's a song and dance for a man approaching old age who has nothing but regrets about the choices he's made in life. Performed by a hot young guy in the prime of life, that level of meaning, which for me elevates the song to brilliance, is erased, reducing it to a variety show song and dance (albeit, as noted, one done very well). I regretted the loss of the song's meaning, but perhaps I'm in the minority.
It's interesting that Yazbek's age is difficult to find - ibdb , imdb, Wikipedia all have nothing definite. But I'd be surprised if he's seen 40 yet.
Posted: 8/21/17 at 2:38pm
I would guess Tony Yazbeck is in his late 30s; he was in the 1989 Gypsy as a child, so if we assume he was around 10 there that would put him at 38 now. Personally, I loved his version of "The Right Girl". He's honestly one of my favorite performers working today, and the versatility he showed in this show is particularly impressive.
And re: laughter during "If You Could See Her," that happened every time I saw the revival of Cabaret at the Roundabout a few years ago. In my audience for Prince of Broadway, there was a mixture of short, shocked laughter and gasps. I wouldn't necessarily put the laughter down to anything other than people being surprised by the ending of the song being what it is, but it's certainly interesting to examine a visibly Jewish Emcee and that song in the context of what's going on politically at the moment. I'd love to see Uranowitz take on the role in a full production, his short take on it in this was really uncomfortable but fascinating.
Posted: 8/21/17 at 2:41pm
Tony graduated from CCM in 1999. Assuming he was 22 then, that would make him turning 40 this year.
Seeing this this upcoming week with very low expectations, but very excited to see Tony. I adore that man.
Posted: 8/21/17 at 2:44pm
Tony honestly makes the whole thing worth it, he's really extraordinary to watch. The show itself is fine, fairly enjoyable but overall kind of unnecessary. Like, I didn't find it arduous to watch or anything, but my overarching question is just...why. The bits in between songs are kind of cringey and pointless but thankfully there aren't many of them and they aren't long.
Posted: 8/24/17 at 11:01am
Oh boy. Saw this a few days ago and can't get it out of my head. Really went in with an open mind, thinking "I don't care about narrations, I just want to see a cabaret of my favorite shows." But... woof.
This show is corny and inconsistent. The show never decided whether it was going to treat the show as a bunch of small cabaret acts, or if it was going to try and replicate the shows it is taking numbers from. Some shows had intros from the cast, and some didn't. The "I'm Hal Prince!" factor is... bizarre. What's with the glasses? You can barely even see them. I almost wish they brought back Robo-Prince. The closing number is pure cheese. Half the numbers had no excitement because there is no emotional arc building up to them -- if they gave them a little context, then maybe I could get behind it.
I think there's a way to do this right. I don't think this is it. Hal Prince is known for his staging, but there were no ensemble numbers. They should have stuck to four or five leads with recognizable names and had a typical ensemble to help with ensemble numbers and dancing. Maybe go for a "show in a show" idea a-la Cabaret or Candide. Maybe some testimonials of actors working with Hal about him, saying profound statements about what a genius he is. I didn't learn anything about Hal, and I didn't particularly love the numbers themselves. What's left?
That being said, people around me seemed to have a great time.
Stray observations, off the top of my head:
-West Side Story, Little Night Music, Cabaret, & Showboat were my favorite parts, which is weird because they certainly aren't my favorite shows in it.
-Lots of bizarre song choices. My Friends? Will He Like Me? So What? Now You Know? There are songs that better represent those shows.
-Michael Xavier didn't fit into any of the jackets he was wearing. They were all too big. Why is that?
-Tony Yazbek as Che looked like Lin Manuel-Miranda as Hamilton.
-The set of She Loves Me looked like it was about to fall over, and I was very nervous about Brandon Uranowitz on that lamp post.
-The show starts by talking about how his first show was The Pajama Game, and then quickly cuts into a number from Damn Yankees. What?
-If you're going to have a cabaret style show that is "All your favorite songs!", don't change the arrangements...
-Follies "Beautiful Girls" had... only one showgirl? And then Sally and Phyllis, but out of context it looked so weird.
-"The Right Girl" was a great performance, but I didn't care about it -- there was no emotional arc to make me want to sit through a 7-minute solo tap number.
Updated On: 8/24/17 at 11:01 AM
Posted: 9/2/17 at 10:43pm
newintown said: "I can understand the raves some are giving Yazbek's cover of "The Right Girl;" as an out-of-context song and dance, he delivers it very well.
I couldn't shake, however, the odd feeling that the number made no sense as the song fromFollies; it's a song and dance for a man approaching old age who has nothing but regrets about thechoices he's made in life. Performed by a hot young guy in the prime of life, that level of meaning, which for me elevates the song to brilliance, is erased, reducing it to a variety show song and dance (albeit, as noted, one done very well). I regretted the loss of the song's meaning, but perhaps I'm in the minority.
It's interesting that Yazbek's age is difficult to find - ibdb , imdb, Wikipedia allhave nothing definite. But I'd be surprised if he's seen 40 yet."
Totally agree. As extraordinary as it was, it felt as if it was inserted purely as an applause catcher. I guess Yazbek's relative youth requires another suspension of disbelief in a concept that requires many. As much as I loved the show, I can't begin to imagine what a non musical theater maven would make of it. I had to "explain" Evita, Kiss of the Spider Woman, Night Music etc. to my son so the numbers made sense to him- and he knows his theater!
Posted: 9/2/17 at 11:43pm
The sooner this charade ends, the sooner I can look forward to seeing Yazbeck in the full-mount production of Crazy For You.
Posted: 9/3/17 at 1:01am
I had a chance to see the show again and from a technical stand point the transitions were sharper. Yazeck was back in and he was so much better than the understudy I had seen previously. He moved exquisitely. It is just too bad that he is stuck in such a stinker. It is fun to be part of a hit but it can be excruciating to be part of a miss. Something tells me he is not all that happy about it all.
I think given that Prince is still alive they should have recorded a narrative with his voice and then presented the numbers as if performing in a Cabaret space without costumes and sets. Numbers would not have to have been sung in their entirety and lesser known songs could have been used from other musicals that Prince was associated with. I know I am not sounding very original but I think that narratives in reviews generally do not work very well. Reviews usually wow me with dynamic performers who personally connect to the material emotionally and then make the audience feel as if they have shared something intimate and binding with them.
