Radcliffe, Groff, and Mendez star in MERRILY - Reviews & News Thread- Page 4

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 3/10/22 at 6:28pm

g.d.e.l.g.i. said: "True as that may be, it's not like that problem doesn't exist with the show in its conventional order. There's no dramatic justification forwhywe're experiencing the show backwards and why we're seeing specific events happen at specific points;it often seems to move at random, with no real story justification for why we move from scene to scene and a lot of "this happens and then this happens" plotting.

(Having said that, for all the love the original 1981 book gets in this thread, it was especially awful attryingto justify why certain events happened when; a good example is the script at one point essentially having Charlie go "after that terrible TV interview he'll never forgive me!" aaaaaand cue the next scene being the terrible interview. I can only imagine that was the result of frantic revisions based on audience reaction in previews.)

I feel like that graduation scene is the key, which is why it's a shame it was cut in revision. Older Frank has a line regarding the valedictorian (played by Younger Frank) where he says something to the effect of "You remind me a lot of myself." In my opinion,thisis the central point of the show, and what they were trying (and failing, alas) to do originally. On a metatextual level, Old Frank is taking this valedictorian backward through his own life to show exactly how he got to this point -- and, most importantly, why Younger Frank shouldn't make the same mistake.

The show is fundamentally about youth, and specifically about the current generation not making the same mistakes as the older. But instead of emphasizing that element when they set about revising the show, they stripped the youth out of it entirely. They got caught up in the puzzle because that's what they were most concerned about (shades of Sondheim struggling with strictly defining exactly when people were meant to figure out the Beggar Woman's true identity in Sweeney). And so we're stuck with the current version, which, even if it's still flawed after so doing, would work better (IMO) chronologically than backward when answering the question of how Mr. Shepard got "here" from "there.""

The issue with playing it forwards is that so much of the show itself is predicated on the reverse chronological element. IMHO it would be like making Follies a two-act, where the first act is set in the past, and the second act is set in the present. You could do it, but you've just removed the core concept.

It's a shame, because the roots of the show are so appealingly odd and spiky. What I'd like to see more from it is a better understanding of why these people hang around Frank, and what it is about him that makes him sell out. It really should be the major question that hangs over the audience at intermission and compels them to return.

Instead, these questions are rebuffed, and the rewrite is particularly bad about this, with things like the new song for Gussie in the first act, where she basically just sings "your problems are thorny, but I am so horny", which feels like such a cop-out. In the original version of the show she was essentially a caricature, and was sort of whittled up into a slightly more real person, but she's not quite there enough for her to be more than a cartoonish threat.

I've talked about this before, but there's a great moment in the earliest iteration where Frank is talking about how his father died penniless, and this scares him, because he "can't be nobody, with nothing", which is an excellent glimpse into the actual psychological element of Frank and his soul-sucking descent. I wish there was more of that, of how people deal with security, or lack of security, in the face of a finite lifetime, and what that means in terms of consumerism, relationships, and values.

It probably sounds like I'm reaching in that regard, but these are all essential elements that I feel could be brought beautifully to the foreground. In many ways, it's a highly political show, both in the satirical elements (I don't love Bobby and Jackie and Jack, but it's only become more darkly funny as time has gone on) and the examination of Frank's slide into neoconservative ultraconsumerism, and the way the show's broad satire gives way to these sudden hard jabs is so exciting. I think that's a big part of why it's so often revived, and why everyone wants to fix it, because it has those thrilling, grim elements that make it feel so daring.

[UrNotAMachine]

Posted: 3/10/22 at 6:57pm

Charley Kringas Inc said: "it's a highly political show, both in the satirical elements (I don't love Bobby and Jackie and Jack, but it's only become more darkly funny as time has gone on) and the examination of Frank's slide into neoconservative ultraconsumerism, and the way the show's broad satire gives way to these sudden hard jabs is so exciting. I think that's a big part of why it's so often revived, and why everyone wants to fix it, because it has those thrilling, grim elements that make it feel so daring."

I couldn't agree more. I think one of the most compelling pieces of the show is this notion that the story of the disillusionment of these 3 friends is, in many ways, the story of Sondheim's (and Prince's, and Furth's) generation. These kids with endless promise that I think the creators felt sort of squandered their immense potential. Ending the show with this generation of young kids on their rooftops watching Sputnik streak across the sky paired with the knowledge of everything that's going to go wrong in their lives is incredibly powerful storytelling. I think it's those glimmers rich poignancy in an otherwise uneven show that keeps people coming back to it so often.

[Falsettolands]

Posted: 3/10/22 at 10:56pm

So this isn't a replica of Friedman's London production with a new cast...? I rather enjoyed that staging- saw it thrice. Friedman understands this show well and welcome any new interpretation she may have.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 3/11/22 at 12:42am

Falsettolands said: "So this isn't a replica of Friedman's London production with a new cast...? I rather enjoyed that staging- saw it thrice. Friedman understands this show well and welcome any new interpretation she may have."

 

Sorry if I missed something - what have you seen that indicates it isn't a replica? I thought it was implied that it was - same director and choreographer, plus the production played out of town a few years ago, and wasn't it replica then?

[binau]

Posted: 3/11/22 at 3:49am

g.d.e.l.g.i. said: "ljay889 said: "g.d.e.l.g.i. said: "Consistency said: "I'm hoping we'll see some more in the next few years... maybe even a full-scale "Sweeney Todd"? Please?"

Well, you're about to be very pleased by some news coming down the pike, though not necessarily the casting..."

Say what??"

Saying anymore without confirmation would be against BWW's rules, so just keep watchin' the news, that's all I can tell you. Without naming names and thereby breaching a ton of things, I'll simply say that I think the director makes sense on paper, albeit I won't be all that excited personally by what he does with it, but the casting of the two leads is the laziest crap since they invented the self-turning ice cream cone. (Like, compared to this, Sutton Foster as Marian Paroo is perfection.)"

So I’m guessing it’s not with my dream Mandy & Bernadette?

On the topic of this thread, I’ve been Merrily Rolling Along waiting for this to happen for more than a decade and when Sondheim comments “how does it happen” “where is the moment” I guess it’s now, and my dream was indeed an illusion .

Updated On: 3/11/22 at 03:49 AM

[Falsettolands]

Posted: 3/11/22 at 10:20am

JBroadway said: "Falsettolands said: "So this isn't a replica of Friedman's London production with a new cast...? I rather enjoyed that staging- saw it thrice. Friedman understands this show well and welcome any new interpretation she may have."



Sorry if I missed something - what have you seen that indicates it isn't a replica? I thought it was implied that it was - same director and choreographer, plus the production played out of town a few years ago, and wasn't it replica then?"

I think I was getting too tripped up on the word choice in the press release. Several articles said "This new production" but it seems very clear now that this is just third iteration of the same production

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 3/11/22 at 11:32am

binau said: "g.d.e.l.g.i. said: "ljay889 said: "g.d.e.l.g.i. said: "Consistency said: "I'm hoping we'll see some more in the next few years... maybe even a full-scale "Sweeney Todd"? Please?"

Well, you're about to be very pleased by some news coming down the pike, though not necessarily the casting..."

Say what??"

Saying anymore without confirmation would be against BWW's rules, so just keep watchin' the news, that's all I can tell you. Without naming names and thereby breaching a ton of things, I'll simply say that I think the director makes sense on paper, albeit I won't be all that excited personally by what he does with it, but the casting of the two leads is the laziest crap since they invented the self-turning ice cream cone. (Like, compared to this, Sutton Foster as Marian Paroo is perfection.)"

So I’m guessing it’s not with my dream Mandy & Bernadette?"

I can say this much: nope.

[JSquared2]

Posted: 3/11/22 at 12:17pm

It will not be a "replica" production.

 

[Falsettolands]

Posted: 3/11/22 at 1:59pm

JSquared2 said: "It will not be a "replica" production.

"

Oh so it's a whole new production. Cool.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 3/11/22 at 2:08pm

JSquared2 said: "It will not be a "replica" production.

"

Let us know if you’d like to elaborate on this. You could very well be right, but the publicly-available information points toward it being a remount - or at least maybe a soft remount. 

[benfox2]

Posted: 4/14/22 at 5:42pm

New rumour from deuxmoi(gossip account who originally predicted Radcliffe in merrily) is about a Glee alumni "coming back to broadway in a project sure to make their old friends (and fans) cheer". Current Speculation on reddit is that Johnathan Groff will be joining this production as Frank.

Thoughts?

[jacobsnchz14]

Posted: 4/14/22 at 5:51pm

I know Darren Criss is already currently on Broadway, but he's definitely a similar type as Daniel. I would assume it's Groff, as well. If this is the route casting is going, I'm hoping at least someone in the trio is a person of color.

Updated On: 4/14/22 at 05:51 PM

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 4/14/22 at 5:52pm

Here's the Reddit post. I think the One Life To Live reference is what's pushing people to think it's JG.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 4/14/22 at 6:05pm

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "Here's the Reddit post. I think theOne Life To Livereference is what's pushing people to think it's JG."

 

That makes sense. I didn't know the connection so it would've gone right over my head. Aside from that reference, it seems like the clues could equally apply to Darren Criss. I'd say Groff is a decent fit for the role, and it seems like he'd work well with Radcliffe. 

Might've been fun to see two people who played Harry Potter in the same show together, as well as two people who played J Pierpont Pinch in the same revival - though now that I think of it, Groff also played Finch in a concert version back in 2015. 

[DramaTeach]

Posted: 4/14/22 at 6:10pm

I really hope this is Groff, but I feel like Lea Michelle has been in NY a lot lately and now that Hollywood has no use for her, I could see her crying about how much she’s missed the stage and how her love of Sondheim brought her back or some PR spin like that. 🙄

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/14/22 at 6:13pm

Obviously it should be Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson.

[goodlead]

Posted: 4/14/22 at 6:14pm

As to how this version differs from others: Sondheim said , in his decision to work on "Do I Hear a Waltz," "I said yes when I should have said no." In the Friedman version, this seems to be the root of Frank's problem. He should, for example, said no to Gussie when he had the chance. I don't recall whether the book was rewritten, but this struck me strongly when I saw the production.

[Alex M]

Posted: 4/25/22 at 12:42am

Hoping Groff and Lilli Cooper round out the cast. That would be a HIT.

[ElphabaGoodman]

Posted: 4/25/22 at 12:59am

Alex M said: "Hoping Groff and Lilli Cooper round out the cast. That would be a HIT."

it's Groff and Lindsay Mendez

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/25/22 at 1:00am

I saw Friedman's production at the Huntington, where Eden Espinosa was the stand out for me. But then again, I'll always find a woman who drinks too much way more interesting than boys who think they're clever.

It was a lovely production and the going backwards in time stuff just felt like a bit the creatives were fully committed to even though it doesn't really serve any purpose. The songs were, of course, glorious. The overall effect was like leafing through a photo album starting at the end with the most recent pictures first and flipping backwards to the younger days in the beginning of the book. Not all that difficult for audiences that have grown accustomed to narratives across three simultaneous but radically different timelines on just about every episodic prestige tv show.

[benfox2]

Posted: 4/25/22 at 8:31am

FindingNamo said: "I saw Friedman's production at the Huntington, where Eden Espinosa was the stand out for me. But then again, I'll always find a woman who drinks too much way more interesting than boys who think they're clever"

I agree with this. Jenna Russell has always been the standout in the pro shot for me, Mary has such an opportunity for an extremely interesting performance. I don't know Lindsay Mendez's work, but next to Groff and Radcliffe I have high hopes!

[JBroadway]

Posted: 4/25/22 at 9:48am

benfox2 said: "I don't know Lindsay Mendez's work"

She's among the strongest musical theatre actors of her generation. She's a great fit for the role on paper, and her performances in Carousel and Dogfight alone are enough to indicate that she'll knock this role out of the park too. 

 

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 4/25/22 at 10:45am

ElphabaGoodman said: "it's Groff and Lindsay Mendez"

That's quite a trio.

Maybe NYTW would like to rent out a larger venue so they can earn some actual money on it. I know, I know, unrealistic and wishful thinking. :)

I think 30something is also the ideal age for the actors in MERRILY. In Boston, Eden and the London guys read a little too old; if you cast it with 22-year-olds like the original, that's a big stretch in the first half of the show.

[barneyschreibercpa2]

Posted: 4/27/22 at 4:43pm

A casting call from backstage (https://www.backstage.com/casting/merrily-we-roll-along-1248493/) seeking chorus and featured roles confirms this production will be running from Nov 21 - Jan 22 at the NYTW. Would it be able to manage a spring transfer with these dates? 

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 4/27/22 at 4:53pm

barneyschreibercpa2 said: "A casting call from backstage (https://www.backstage.com/casting/merrily-we-roll-along-1248493/) seeking chorus and featured roles confirms this production will be running from Nov 21 - Jan 22 at the NYTW. Would it be able to manage a spring transfer with these dates?"

Yes.

Also, Alvin Hough, Jr. is MDing! Hope he has a strong final stretch over at Tina.