"Peter Pan Live"- Page 24

[decast]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 11:58am

I have to say it's not my favourite musical anyway, and I got 10 minutes in the Disney film when I was 3 before I demanded to leave the cinema so you know, it's not my thing, but kudos to NBC for doing these and it can't hurt with giving the general public more access to musical theatre.
The whole thing for me fell a little flat. Allison Williams was fine but I guess I expected more from her, I certainly expected more from Walken, such a disappointment. For me it was down to Kelli o'Hara, Christian Borle and what seemed to be the entire original cast of Newsies to keep me interested.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:10pm

I felt she was just as out of place as Carrie was, but Carrie at least the "it" factor going on.

What does "it" mean in this context? Speaking words as though on had never spoken them before in her entire life? If so, then I agree!
No Mother. Mother no.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:10pm

Here's Tom and Lorenzo's very astute take, with which I agree on just about every point-- except for their criticism of adults cast as the lost boys, those boys being the source of most of the entertainment value in the night for me.

Anyway, enjoy--

We had no plans to do any sort of review this morning because three straight hours of live-tweeting should serve as review enough, and also because something like this is so different from the rest of what you can find on television that it’s difficult to really apply any sort of criteria to it. Do you review it as a television show or as a live play? Because it never really settles into either form completely. There’s no live audience and too many camera effects and commercial breaks to effectively judge it on the merits as a live play. On the other hand, there’s a certain level of forgiveness one is expected to apply to any sort of roughness in the final product, which makes it unlike normal TV reviews, which expect and demand a high level of polish.

What really kind of set us off and made us decide to write this at the last minute was the surprise and then later, the annoyance we felt when we woke up to a bunch of TV critics struggling mightily to praise this effort while at the same time preemptively lashing out at anyone who would dare criticize it. It was bad enough when portions of the entertainment media seemed to buy into the cast and producers’ rather desperate last-minute pleading that everyone be nice on twitter, but when critics start using the term “haters” derisively (and worse, unironically) … well. Hold my gold, girl.

Look, this was bad. We shouldn’t have to say this at the start of a review, but believe it or not, despite our three-hour twitter snarkfest on the topic, we really wanted to be entertained. We wanted to see Christopher Walken wow us all and we even secretly kind of hoped that Allison Williams would blow any criticism or charges of nepotism out of the water with some sort of astonishing breakthrough performance. And while she certainly gave it her all and he definitely managed to supply most of the laughs of the night, it was a limp, sometimes boring, and occasionally amateurish production.

This should be the point at which the defenders implore us to remember that this is a show for children and you have to suspend your disbelief. We agree with that on principle, but this production made some serious errors that actively worked against the audience buying into the story, not least of which were some of the casting choices.

Let’s start with Christopher Walken. All of twitter laughed as one at the sight of him all but rolling his eyes through this production, but rather than come across as insouciant, by the end of the night, it was obvious that he simply wasn’t up to the task of a three-hour musical production. He was listless, missed a lot of his cues, stepped on people’s lines and we’re pretty sure forgot whole portions of his dialogue. And his makeup looked like it was applied by a bored drag queen. Worse, there were parts where he was clearly lip-synching and doing a bad job of matching the track.

In fact, as an aside, we’re pretty surprised to see how little outrage or criticism arose from the fact that the actors were singing along to pre-recorded tracks. You’d think for all the hoopla about this being a live performance, there’d be a little bit of a scandal about that.

As for Allison, she has a passably decent voice. She was, for the most part, energetic when the scene needed her to be. But you never lost sight of how much and how hard she was working all throughout the play. Not one aspect of her performance felt natural or spontaneous (and that latter quality should really infuse the character). And while this has more to do with the traditions of the production rather than being her fault, in 2014 it’s asking a lot of the audience to pretend that a clearly grown woman is supposed to be a prepubescent boy. There’s nothing remotely masculine about Allison Williams. There is not even anything about her that one could characterize as “child-like.” Never once throughout the entire story did we lose sight of the fact that a grown woman was pretending to be a little boy. In this day and age, it’s kind of hard not to see that as a little creepy; especially when the entire story hinges on this grown woman breaking into a bedroom full of children in the middle of the night and essentially abducting them.

And speaking of creepy, we have absolutely no idea why the production decided to cast a bunch of muscular, good-looking, clearly adult men as the Lost Boys. Not only was it jarring to see all these flamboyant chorus boys standing next to actual little boys and pretending to be the same age as them, but it was creepy as hell the way they all surrounded Wendy and started calling her “Mother” at every turn. It also made no sense why all of these strapping men would look up to the scrawny, sylph-like Peter Pan as their protector. So with an obviously adult female as Peter and a bunch of obviously adult men as the Lost Boys, the resulting undertones were decidedly sexual in nature. The Wendy and Peter relationship turned into a “Boys Don’t Cry” style transgender romance and every time the Lost Boys tossed the two actual little boys in the cast around, we got disturbing reminders of Michael Jackson’s slumber parties.

And before you call us creeps and assholes for saying this, all they had to do was cast relatively age and gender-appropriate kids in the parts to make the production work. In 2014, there’s no reason why Peter Pan has to be played by a woman (outside of a long, meaningless and archaic tradition) and there’s certainly no reason why the Lost Boys need to be a bunch of adult chorus boys. There are plenty of kids with Broadway-level talent and experience out there. Hell, there are actual boy bands out there who could have played the parts.

Which brings us to our next point: if you’re being true to the original story, then you’re dealing in 19th Century thinking about children and gender. At one point, Tom turned to Lorenzo and said, “You know? I’m not sure, if I had kids, that I’d want them watching this.” The way all the “boys” pressure Wendy into the role of surrogate mother, and the ways in which she defines that as “telling everyone what to do” are kind of ****ed up. And then at the end, the adult Wendy sends her daughter off with Peter in the hopes that the women in her family will always get a chance to run away with him? That is freaking WEIRD. Between the weird gender politics, the casual racism, and the high definition helpfully showing off every wire and every instance of Lost Boy bulge, we couldn’t help thinking that this is one children’s story that either needed a serious overhaul for modern sensibilities or to be relegated to the dustbin of community theater productions. A notable attempt all around, but it was doomed from the start, as far as we can see. There’s a difference between “old-fashioned entertainment” and “offensive minstrel shows” and this falls somewhere in the middle.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:11pm

I liked the last line of the Times review: "It was a cautious, please-all production, but it took guts to do it."

ETA: At one point, Tom turned to Lorenzo and said, “You know? I’m not sure, if I had kids, that I’d want them watching this.” Who? Whaaaat?

Updated On: 12/5/14 at 12:11 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:11pm

I just finished watching it and haven't read any of this thread (honestly). But I'm just going to assume everyone really enjoyed it, right?

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:18pm

After Eight did. So you're in good company!

[OperaBwayLover]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:27pm

Just thought of something: why was "Oh, My Mysterious Lady" dropped in favor of the (new?) Hook/Peter duet?

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:30pm

I will preface this by saying that, as we know, I love Peter Pan as a property.. Not the musical or movie, etc. I love the character, I love what Barrie created. I also had a great time watching. Good, bad, the ugly, etc. it will keep this post short and maybe comment more later.

Again, every problem boils down to a common thread. Rob Ashford. He can't direct and he can't shape scenes... Unless he has actors who can do it for him... And he can't edit his own choreography.

Peter Pan, if you stick to what Barrie wrote, works wonderfully. It grabs you. It is deep and it has high stakes. You kill this instantly by writing it off as a children's show because you then never dive below the surface of what is on the page. THIS Peter Pan suffered by having all new book written by a woman who had no clue who these characters were and by trying to impose her own new elements rathern than streamline what was already there.

[tenorphil81]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:40pm

I really wanted to like this, and while it wasn't a complete disaster, I didn't feel very uplifted by the presentation. Allison Williams made a good effort, but (as many others have said) she lacked a lot of the spunk and spontaneity of Peter. Christopher Walken was quite disappointing and almost uncomfortable to watch, especially when surrounded by theater professionals. Louderman, O'Hara, Borle and several of the supporting players/chorus rose to their task, but sometimes strong supporting performances cannot redeem two leads who don't hit the mark or miss it entirely. (At least with Ms. Underwood, you had McDonald, Benanti and Borle to watch.)

I'm praying that this doesn't jeopardize the chances of MUSIC MAN going up next Christmas...though, if they continue to cast poorly, I almost DON'T want that to happen. (Am I the only one who thinks Jon Hamm might be an inspired Harold Hill opposite Kelli O'Hara as Marian?)

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:50pm

It's important to pray.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:52pm

This ain't time for praying. You gotta THINK.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:57pm

No, you need to CLAP!

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 12:58pm

I’m not a huge fan of the material itself, but I think the whole cast and crew did an extremely impressive job. I just kept thinking about all of the hard work and thought that went into this production and how much could have easily gone awry if everyone wasn’t on point – even just down to seamlessly dancing around the cameramen walking through. Very, very impressed by the time and effort that went into this. Hats off to all those involved!

As for the performances, Walken was the weak link for me. Every time he was on it just felt like he stopped the momentum and energy of the show. It felt awkward when Borle would be trying to do the Hook/Smee bits/jokes that are written, because it seemed like Walken was just in his own world, doing whatever he pleased.

Allison was stiff and a bit physically awkward, but was enjoyable enough. When she was in a scene with anyone but Walken, I think her scene partners really helped elevate her in the moment. The scenes/dialogue between Walken and Allison were the most flat, awkward moments. It really felt like they needed the musical theatre-trained actors there to help them look good. When the Broadway performers were leading the scenes, it felt like a different show (in a good way).

Kelli O’Hara was simply wonderful. Borle did a great job (although I think there were many funny Smee bits that didn’t land well because of Walken).

Taylor Louderman was the shining star of the show for me. I’m a fan of hers from “Bring it On” anyway, but I thought she really played a wonderful Wendy. And, it truly felt like she carried all of her scenes with Allison. She was the one character I felt for and cared about; she came off so genuine and her earnestness felt palpable. Her voice was beautiful and it was great to hear a different side of her voice outside of the pop-belty we heard in “Bring it On.” Her duet with Kelli was the highlight of the night for me.

I’m always happy to see anything theatre-related on TV and, even if it doesn’t translate perfectly, it makes for a fun and impressive night to watch. And, it doesn’t bother me a bit that the two leads aren’t theatre actors, as long as they continue to fill the rest of the cast out with Broadway actors. They could easily cast every supporting role with more recognizable names and I truly appreciate that they turn to Broadway actors (especially even casting some not well-known Broadway actors), instead. I hope these live performances continue for years to come!

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 1:02pm

Peter Pan Live! earned a 2.3 adults 18-49 rating down a lot from last year's The Sound of Music Live, which earned a 4.6 adults 18-49 rating.

[broadway86]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 1:44pm

Oh, man...

Williams played it safe the entire evening, which dragged the overall energy down. Didn't make any sort of impression on me from the word go.

Walken didn't really play much of anything other than Walken on... something. Slick dancing, but I didn't get any of Hook's narcissism or his psychotic obsession with Peter. Disappointing, because I really expected to ham up all of these aspects.

Taylor Louderman was solid as Wendy, but most of her line readings suggested she was on the verge of an orgasm.

Kelli O'Hara, engaging and lovely throughout.

Christian Borle, unusually subdued and forgettable. Granted, he was working off of a dramatically absent scene partner most of the time.

Tiger Lily, a bit monotone but looked great and danced splendidly.

Nana, adorable. Updated On: 12/5/14 at 01:44 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 1:55pm

Thank God Twitter didn't exist when Mary Martin did it.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 2:10pm

...if everyone wasn’t on point – even just down to seamlessly dancing around the cameramen walking through...

It was impressive but, to be fair, there were a few mistakes: visible lighting equipment (both playroom/nursery scenes), cameras and cameramen in shot (see "Blood Brothers"), placement of Tinkerbell (numerous scenes) and so on. Kudos to the entire team but it wasn't seamless or perfect by a long shot.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 2:17pm

"As for Captain Hook -- seriously, was Kevin Kline unavailable?"

Or anyone else? Literally anyone else would have been better.

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 2:25pm

It was impressive but, to be fair, there were a few mistakes

True, but considering all of the things that went right and the skill and precision it took from the whole group to make everything tick along as well as it did, the fact that there were only those few (minor) mistakes leaves me in awe and impressed.

[eperkins]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 2:36pm

I think Tony Sheldon would have been a magnificent Hook.

[gcal]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 2:49pm

Allison's performance grew on me throughout the night. My biggest issues are similar to my problems with the Sound of Music-- non-stop choreography and camera blocking. Could they have not found the right angles to make the flying look more impressive?

Sound of Music looked over-rehearsed, and Peter Pan needed another week. Ah well, maybe next year...

[musicaljen]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 2:51pm

I am one of those people who really enjoyed The Sound of Music Live last year and kept watching it over and over through 2014. I really enjoy live musical presentations on television, but when Peter Pan was announced I felt disappointed since I was expecting another title like Music Man, Cinderella or King and I. Since the 50s live presentation of this musical has been done lot of times for television and I couldn't understand why it had to be done again. That being said when I read that new songs and the script was re worked for this particular production I decided that it must be given a chance.
The sets were amazing and I really felt that Nanna (Bowdie) was the star of the show. What a cutie that dog is. The Darling children were also very good.
I felt that this year's performances did not match last year's standards. Walken's performance was wooden and he just walked through that role with no emotion at all. To be honest I did expect line flubs from him tough, so it was a surprise that did not happen. Regards the flying scenes I think the cast needed more training, especially during the flying out of the window. Despite the flaws I still going to purchase the DVD and re-watch this production. My thanks to NBC for doing this again this year.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 2:55pm

I remember in an interview a member of the cast said they rehearsed The Sound of Music for five weeks, and on the making of Peter Pan, it was eight weeks. A lot of people are saying it looked under-rehearsed last night but I don't think it would have made a lot of difference in the performances.

The breakdown of the ratings, in half hours:

11.4 mil/2.7 > 10.8 mil/2.8 > 9.6 mil/2.5 > 8.6 mil/2.3 > 7.4 mil/2.0 > 7 mil/1.8.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 3:20pm

Before I make any comments here, I haven't read every single comment on this thread (It goes on for over 20 pages), so forgive me if what I express here was already stated.

I've seen the original Mary Martin verions (both b&w and the color re-make), as well as Sandy Duncan and Cathy Rigby on stage. I also saw Rigby's TV version. PETER PAN LIVE! was the lamest of the lot.

Yes, Allison Williams could sing but not well enough to sustain the notes as written. She also lacked the charisma needed for the role. I usually look forward to every scene Peter is in but that wasn't the case last night because Williams blended into the scenery in every scene.

Christopher Walken looked more like Fu Manchu than Captain Hook and had the same expression on his face the whole evening. One of my grandchildren asked if he was wearing a mask. Yes, he tap danced nicely.

The show moved at a snail's pace and was hindered by a batch of commercials every seven minutes. I think if it was performed without commercials the show would have come in with a 2 hour and 15 minute playing time. Each commercial break broke the mood that had been established. The new songs also slowed things down considerably.

It was good to see that more of Barrie's plot came out in this version but that, too, made for a longer evening.

My grandchildren dozed off one at a time and they all were sound asleep before they could clap Tinkerbell back to life. Sad, This was supposed to be a family show but it ran until 11 PM.

How could the newspaper critics have seen this show and made their deadlines for the morning editions? I'n guessing they were provided with a DVD of the dress rehearsal and weren't reviewing what we saw last night.

I'm sorry, it just wasn't a good show. NBC managed to suck all the life out of the material.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/5/14 at 3:21pm

It lives.