Reports/Speculation on A CHORUS LINE from SF — Page 4

"..this revival is not ACL...it is more like "wannabe ACL".


Wouldn't that be true for any revival of a classic? However, I'll wait until I see it for myself before trashing or praising it.

---

Let's be a little objective, here. To compare method acting exercises as being beneficial to both 42nd STREET and ACL because they both involved auditions is pretty simplistic. The auditions in 42nd STREET are not nearly as naturalistic as those of ACL, primarily because in 1980 they were commenting on cliches of nearly 60 years earlier. In 1975 the piece was of its time, contemporary. What translates to an audience 25 years later as being "true" to the mid-70's is much tougher to communicate.

How much time is spent in the actual auditions for ACL to ascertain acting ability is a side issue for some of the topics of discussion here. While all theatre has to serve some sense of naturalism (in order for us to empathize with the motivations of the characters), ACL has as a concept characters who are not "acting" yet at all, but being themselves in a stressful situation. That sort of "transparency" for any actor, which works almost against their training in technique, and which also must contrast to the very structured work in the harmonized singing and sychronized (even in its random-ness) dancing, is a tough thing to pull off. You could audition/cast for years (and indeed, they used months for this revival) and still not guarantee the optimum mixture.

We are all going to have our subjective views of such an archetypical piece (as we do about Shakespeare and Moliere), and every detail from orchestration to wardrobe. Allow for some flexibility in taste. Everyone is of course entitled to expect the worst, but as I said to M BENNETT in the Linda Eder thread, it certainly isn't much fun. Or particularly sporting. Everyone involved in this revival at least deserves our benefit of the doubt.

---

"I'd love to see her get replaced.'

LOL! Have you seen her performance in "ACL"? I saw her in "Damn Yankees" and liked her better than Miss Neuwirth. How do you know she won't be good in "ACL"? I hope you aren't basing it on speculation. There have only been 3 previews so far! Surely you would want to see for yourself before you go making statements like the one above.

---

I have never been impressed with anything she has done.... Chicago and Sweet Charity were not very good when she was in it.... But that is just my oppinion.....

I would like to see her replaced because i have not found her to be a good leading lady in anything. I think she should just go back to being everybodys standby.

The problem I have with d'Amboise is that she just doesn't seem to have that "star quality" to me. Is she an amazing dancer? Yes. Has her life mirrored Cassie's experiences? Yes (that is why she was cast.) But her singing leaves alot to be desired, and I just don't see her sticking out in that line as Cassie should.

---

I completely agree with Jimnysf. Please do not think the production is flawed and assume new ways for the production to venture unless you have actually witnessed it. Once you have, feel free to speak of it all you want. Reading the thread title, "Reports on a chorus line in SF" one would assume that this thread would be of reviews and opinions of those who have seen the production already, not of speculations of how the production COULD be flawed or perhaps how the casting COULD be flawed.

<----- SEE MY AVIE?! I have every confidence that she will be great in the part. I was VERY excited to hear she was cast in the ACL revival let alone as Cassie. She deserves this. If people say she is "the weak link," I am sure she knows she may need to work on things. No doubt the directors ect are aware of it, too. Charlotte is an incredible performer. The woman is hands down the best Roxie in CHICAGO I have ever seen. She danced her tail off in CONTACT. IMO, she was far supierior to Applegate in SWEET CHARITY.

If she seems to be having trouble finding Cassie, she will grow and get better, I have no doubt because she is a professional and very talented.

I can't wait for October 26th when I get to see her and the show for myself.

She was cast for more reaosns other than her life mirrors Cassie's.

---

EponineAmneris, obviously they had to believe she had talent to cast her as Cassie, but I can assure you, the primary reason she was cast was because her life resembles so closely that of the character. Listen to the ACL podcast that was recently linked here. Bob Avian says that they auditioned many actresses for the part, but that the creative team wanted people who had literally lived the lives that these characters did, and no one embodies that more than d'Amboise for Cassie. I feel like they may have overlooked other things in her because of that fact (primarily her stage presence and singing ability.) Just because she can relate to what the character has gone through doesn't mean she can convey that effectively on stage, and there in itself is the danger of her casting.

If she is lacking vulnerability in her portrayal, as the previous poster's review says, then her whole performance will fall apart. The whole reason the emotional impact of "The Music and the Mirror" is so great is because Cassie is literally "putting herself on the line" over the course of the number. The audience has to believe that she is pouring her heart out to Zach and dancing like her life depended on it. If she isn't emoting vulnerability, that whole concept is lost.

I am not saying she can't be a good Cassie, because she has limitless potential. I am not saying she is a bad Cassie in this production either, because I haven't seen it. I am simply explaining the misgivings I have had about her casting since I heard about it, and explaining why. Take it just as that.

---

Updated On: 7/27/06 at 02:48 PM

Maybe the title of this thread should be changed to, "A Lot of Speculation on A CHORUS LINE in SF from people who have not seen it".

---

Clearly she has talent, thats why she has worked in this industry for so long. However, becaused her life has paralleled that of Cassie's does NOT mean she has the acting chops to deliver that experience on stage. The dangers of type casting...cast type and thats what you get,cast an actress and you get a fully achieved and fleshed out performance. Fabulous dancer, Small, thin voice and mediocre actress, all the components I want for a Cassie...yikes.

"But some of have seen it."

True. Those can go in a thread that would have actual reports from those who have seen it.

---

Why is this so depressing to me???

(It's SO depressing to me.)

I had (okay, and still HAVE) such high expectations for this revival... and I'm entitled to them... based on the incredible initial run, and the show I came to know and love as a young adult growing up in the Midwest. It was one of the reasons I moved to NYC (and then LA) and gave it a shot as a stage actor and singer. The original “Judy” was from my hometown in Kansas and had gone to my high school. Another girl only a few years older than me joined the first national tour as a freshman in college. I was inspired and awestruck by them. And I was lucky enough to be in one of the very first regional productions (aka, non-tour or Broadway company) of A Chorus Line ever done, alongside some awesome (future Broadway) talent. I don't consider myself much of a dancer at all, but I was cast because they needed good SINGERS who could move well, as well as killer dancers who could shine in the "featured dancer" parts. It was a mix-and-match of actors and singers and dancers who could all shine where needed.

These "early reviews" are not only deeply depressing to me for this particular show, but for Broadway in general. I think it has become a popular view in this new century to concentrate on and celebrate sheer ability... and by that I mean just how high a dancer can kick, how correctly-pointed and extended their left arm is on a particular step... and it's the same with singing. It's the common view now that "good singing" is based on how wide of a range a singer has, or how many notes they can riff in a single phrase... or even how pitch-perfect they are, every single time.

What we've LOST in all of this is the HUMAN factor. We've lost the PEOPLE. We want and expect to get perfect little robots to dazzle us with their dead-on skills... instead of move us with who they are. And A Chorus Line can't function and thrive on that level, because as much as it was about singing and dancing... it's about PEOPLE above all else. And Michael Bennett knew that.

So now (at least it SOUNDS like) we have a big new revival of perfect Bennett-dancers... little audio-animatronic performers who can all point their pinkies at the same time in the same way, and kick the same height... and do the exact same turns at the same time, the same way each night. And we (the audience) can all float by them in an endless procession, sitting in "little boats," just like Disneyland. And I HATE it. I want my PEOPLE back. I want to see Cassie, and Mike, and Sheila, and Bebe, and Paul... and the rest. I want to see, and for others who might be starting out to see, just why I loved this show so much to begin with.

---

Updated On: 7/27/06 at 03:16 PM

I truly hope she does well in this role, but I have to agree with BwayBaby18 that I have never been blown away by her.

She was Roxie in Chicago when it toured through DC on its initial run. She injured her foot, so the first time we saw it was with her understudy, Belle Callaway, who was impressive. Next time we saw it, d'Amboise was back in the role. Her dancing was fine, but her singing was somewhat weak and her approach to the role was all wrong. She played Roxie like a naive ingenue and had little grasp of the hard edge or manipulative nature of the role. I have never seen any other actress take this approach and it was all wrong, making Roxie seem almost like a girlish innocent, which totally threw off the dynamics of the play. Hopefully, she changed this approach during the run and on her stints on Broadway in the role. As is, I rank her only above Melanie Griffith of all the Roxie's I have seen.

On another note, she did something that was certainly memorable, but not in a good way. During the "Roxie" number, she ripped a fart on stage. It actually sounded like a glitch in the sound system and I don't think anyone would have known any better...except she tried to work it into the number! By the time she was done, everyone knew what had happened and only a few dimmer members of the audience fell for the "its part of the show" routine. She actually made the incident worse by spotlighting it rather than carrying on with the number. I truly felt sorry for her.

Anyway, I hope her match with Cassie is better than her match with Roxie.