REVIEW: Bye Bye Birdie (long)

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 1:53am

Considering most of you will take this all with a grain of salt regardless of what I say, I'll just be totally, 100% honest in my feelings about the show.

Start with the stuff I didn't like:
Gina Gershon - I was highly disappointed. Her singing is... bad. Her dancing is non-existent (clearly as a result of her lack of ability, sadly). Her acting is off. What she does have is the sex appeal. I feel like much of her issue is nervousness or discomfort. Much of the issue that I had with her will fall away as the lengthy preview period wears on, but there are quite a few things that will stick, unfortunately. She's no Chita. I wanted so badly to like her, but now that I've seen her, I wish another actress had been cast. Sorry, Gina! I still love you <3

John Stamos - I'm not sure what he was doing with Albert, but he came off as 1) a closeted homosexual and 2) a loser. Albert is neither of those things. His dancing was sloppy and his acting (clearly) was all wrong. But his voice was surprisingly very nice. If only the other two elements came up to par.

Overall, it was a major downer that the two central characters suddenly seemed like ensemble players. Their plotline suddenly became the B plot. Sad.

What I liked:
The set - The base set is three walls of white tiling with different patterns (flowers, arrows, letters, polka dots) that are lit in different colors and slid all over. Onto the stage are brought very mod and TV sitcom-y set pieces. Like "The Brady Bunch" meets "Leave it to Beaver" on acid. It was very colorful and bubblegummy and it fit the tone perfectly. The use of a moving floor (a la original INTO THE WOODS) allowed not only for some fun scene changes, but also some interesting blocking. Also, the use of projections here and there was great. Not over the top or excessive, but subtle things. The use of them during the overture was a really fun way to get the show started.

The costumes - Like the set, very vibrant and cute. Fit the tone.

The choreography - Excellent. It all worked very nicely with the music and concept of the show. What else is there really to say? It just worked.

The teens - Damn, those kids are good. "The Telephone Hour" was so much fun. As were every other group number. They all just look so into it and had so much energy and it made me smile every time they came onstage.

Jayne Houdyshell & Bill Irwin - They steal the show, like other posters have said. They stand serious shots at Tony noms. They're both true comedic geniuses. It just can't be denied. My only issue with Bill Irwin was during "Kids." I'm not sure if he can't sing or if he chose to just ham it up to the max, but I couldn't understand a word he was saying. And I know the song.

Nolan Gerard Funk - I was shocked by him. I was expecting nothing from him and he was a great Conrad. His pop vocals came through sometimes just a little too much, but overall, he really got Conrad down. His dancing isn't bad either. I was pleasantly surprised. His Conrad is less Elvis and more Jonas Brother, but I'm pretty sure that was the point. It works better than I thought it would, thanks mostly to the bubbly concept.

Allie Trimm - She has a great voice and she certainly gets most of the humor. But everyone else is doing a much more satirical comedy than she is and so some of her jokes fall flat. She'll get better. Also, she tries to hard to get her vibrato to go and you can see it in her face. But I liked her a lot.

The rest of the cast was great, too. The standouts in smaller roles were Matt Doyle's adorable Hugo and Brynn Williams's hysterical Ursula. The show, from a technical standpoint, is in great shape. The performances need some fixing, everywhere from simple tweaking to entire re-imagining. I plan to go back once the show opens so as to get a better feel for how much has changed.

Updated On: 9/11/09 at 01:53 AM

[Parks]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 2:30am

Not trying to be rude... but... why does this review get its own thread when you very well know the other thread exists (and you've even posted in it several times)?

[scott68]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 2:49am

Because he/she has a new, non-BBB related avatar to lend the review objectivity, Parks. Duh! Totally threadworthy.

[dramarama2]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 2:54am

Parks your avatar made me lol. Haven't seen that before

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 8:56am

Oh stop moaning when you all came in the thread and read it....for the review

Thanks ColorTheHours048 for taking the time to do a great review. I really hope Gina improves, i had such high hopes

[WestVillage]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 9:46am

Let's face it ... some people are just more easily pleased than others and some people are more demanding of what they expect from Broadway. The other string certainly has many opposite opinions than ColortheHouse. In the other string, CTH complained about the theatre queens around him who were nitpicking at everything (I was probably one of them). Well, for this theater queen, after 40 years of theater-going experience and having seen well over 1500 shows, you're damn right I'm going to nitpick. But BBB doesn't even need nitpicking to point out its many flaws. Other than Jane, it is no better than a good community theater production.

Anyone who thought Nolan Funk was great has seen far too few great performances. Saying he was great, in my book, makes anyone lose credibility, because he was really so painfully bad.

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 10:05am

It's just an opinion. No one is right or wrong for having liked or disliked the show. And I only had a problem with the nitpicking theatre queens because they had the nerve to talk DURING the show. Some of them even had the nerve to leave mid-curtain call. I changed my avatar yesterday to BIRDIE to wish them a successful first preview. Now I changed it to the next show I have interest in seeing which begins previews tomorrow and I'm seeing on Sunday.

I'm not some 13, 14, 15-year-old kid who has just seen WICKED or RENT with a play or two thrown in there. To discount my review because I liked someone you didn't like is completely false and unfair and totally not the point of theatre. Had you asked me WHY I liked him, that would be different. But "Anyone who thought Nolan Funk was great has seen far too few great performances." is kind of demeaning and rude. I come here to post my review separately so that people who actually care about reading a different perspective on the show don't have to wade through a bunch of unrelated posts and negative reviews and you try to count it out.

I went into the show wanting it to be good and I was vindicated. People on here talk about me being biased because I had already made up my mind to love it (which is not always successful for me, having wanted to love many shows and been sorely disappointed) and even put down someone completely respectful like RyToast because of his affiliation with Roundabout. Not all of you are completely free of having a bias and coming here to gush about a show and you know who you are. I post here because I love theatre and I want to talk about it freely with other people who love theatre. I guess that's silly.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 12:39pm

ColorTheHours, if you had seen as many productions of BYE BYE BIRDIE as I have (about 10 and I'm only 27 years old), and if you knew every single line in the show as well as my friends and I do, you would have nitpicked as well.

I blame Robert Longbottom for all the horrendous changes he made to the book and I'd be willing to bet that Michael Stewart was rolling in his grave cringing. Lee Adams was probably in pain as some of his wonderful lyrics were butchered (he was sitting across the aisle from us). I wish I had brought a pad and pencil to write down all the book changes - there were way too many, and they were not necessary. One that I remember was they all congregate in the schoolyard now instead of the ice house. They should have left it as is.

...however, even with the horrible changes, and Gina's non-singing, non-dancing dreadfulness, there is still much to enjoy about BYE BYE BIRDIE, and I hope it improves.

...and the reason Whizzer and I ran to the back of the orchestra to finish watching the curtain call from there, is so that we could exit the theater quickly to get in the front of the barricades at the stage door (which we did, and we got to meet everyone to congratulate them on their first preview).

[ljay889]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 12:43pm

The only lyric changes I heard were in A LOT OF LIVIN TO DO, and those lyrics came from the original movie version of the song. There might have been a changed word or two in WHAT DID I EVER SEE IN HIM?, unless Gershon messed up the lyrics. And we knew that they changed "I'm just a Spanish tamale AS YOU LIKE TO SAY."


Updated On: 9/11/09 at 12:43 PM

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 12:49pm

yes, ljay, there were far greater book changes than lyric changes. the one for "Spanish Rose" was fine, since Gina was talking directly to Jayne, but the many changes in "A Lot Of Livin To Do" were horrible (in fact that whole number should be restaged - that jungle gym really restricted things).

[saveusmike]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 1:34pm

West Village your comment here reminds me of something you said when someone called 9 to 5 "fantastic". You cant say just because this show or a show like 9 to 5 that whoever likes it is "easy to please" or "loses credibillity". People have diffrent oppinions and it has nothing to do with how many shows you have seen. I know people who have seen HAIR as thier first Broadway show and LOVED it, whereas I have seen over 100+ shows and I didnt like it all that much. I would have taken 9 to 5 over HAIR anyday. Does this mean I "lose credibility"? Its just someones opinion and personal taste.
It has nothing to do with how many shows you have seen, or how easy you are to please.

CTH thank you for the very detailed review, Which is just your opinion, as many people here are forgetting..
And I completly agree, I come here to talk about Broadway because I love it and I want to talk about it with other people who share my interest.

I dont come to BWW to get corrected for spelling or critized for my personal opinnions of a show, or get sarcastic remarks from people wanting to seem cool on a Broadway Forum.. Some people just take the fun out of things.

Updated On: 9/11/09 at 01:34 PM

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 1:50pm

Just in defense of our nitpicking about the book/lyric changes, in the interview John Stamos did with BWW TV (or maybe it was on Broadway.com) he stated how when he first read the script he went through saying, "This needs to go. This needs to be updated."

Then he said he realized they just needed to be true to the show and trust the material because it was still great, etc. Well changing the ice house to the schoolyard, Margot in Shangri-La to Baby Jane, and axing the line about fighting the dirty Jerries (or whoever's dirty this time) doesn't sound like trusting the material to me. It actually sounds like NOT trusting the jokes will still land.

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 2:04pm

I've seen about 6 different productions of the show and I'm only 20, not including the 2 different times I was in the show myself. So I'm pretty sure I know this show fairly well. Some of the book and lyric changes were unnecessary (Baby Jane, for example), but others were so insignificant that it didn't matter. I don't think it detracted from the writing whatsoever.

[ljay889]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 2:12pm

Would some of you rather have had a complete book overhaul like some recent revivals? They remained VERY true to the original book.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 9/11/09 at 3:00pm

I agree that they stayed fairly true to the book. I mean this was by no means a "Flower Drum Song" revival situation. I guess the changes just said to me that they didn't trust the material as wholeheartedly as South Pacific did, or the upcoming Finian's Rainbow will. Sadly they should have, because the show is wonderful as is.

[rich.hanson59]

Posted: 9/12/09 at 12:46am

ColorTheHours, I completely agree with everything in your review.