Rumors about Guys and Dolls London transfer to Broadway? — Page 2
Posted: 8/9/23 at 2:13am
RippedMan said: "What's the space in London like?"
Tbh it feels small to me lol. And it doesn’t feel it has THAT many seats in this arrangement, although of course you probably need more capacity in NYC to make it work financially. I’ll trust the judgement of those here but I would have thought the square would be the perfect venue for this.
Updated On: 8/9/23 at 02:13 AM
Posted: 8/9/23 at 3:17am
The Bridge Theatre is ultra modern in technology and quite new.
It has had many "immersive" productions in the past (environmental and immersive are not the same, but whatever) like Midsummer's Night Dream and Julius Caesar. Guys & Dolls is just one more on their list. By this I mean, other productions have been very similar to Guys & Dolls when it comes to placing the audience and moving them around.
The stage has an intricate set of elevators which would not be feasible to replicate somewhere else. That is, this sort of design is for this specific theater's technology.
If it transfers, it would be a either a (silly) massive investment or it would have to be completely reconceived structurally. It is site-specific in the sense that it was exclusively designed to play that venue only,. That is what makes the production special. Moving it somewhere would turn it into a different thing.
Updated On: 8/9/23 at 03:17 AM
Posted: 8/11/23 at 7:09pm
The show will never transfer and look anything like the way it does now. The Bridge is too specialized a space.
Saw it a few days ago and while it was entertaining, it wasn't the end-all that some have said it is.
It's cute. There's a very good Nathan Lane impression being done. Marisha is lovely and I've loved her in many other things, but the G&D songs aren't really perfect fits for her (I was a big fan of Faith for expertly landing the comedy and having the perfect tone to her voice). It's a bit of a round peg in a square hole for me.
Posted: 9/5/23 at 12:48pm
I know they've taken Adelaide in a different direction for this revival with Marisha Wallace (who by all accounts is a marvel), but after seeing ONCE UPON A ONE MORE TIME I would love to see Jennifer Simard as Adelaide in some capacity . . . be it regionally or on Broadway or even just singing Adelaide's Lament in concert.
Updated On: 9/5/23 at 12:48 PM
Posted: 9/5/23 at 2:55pm
I'm not understanding why this is a newsworthy press release? Isn't the sole purpose of having a "swing" on the payroll so that they can still do the performance if someone calls out?
https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Swing-Callum-Bell-Saves-Performance-of-GUYS-DOLLS-at-The-Bridge-Theatre-by-Stepping-Into-Lead-Role-20230905
Posted: 9/5/23 at 3:06pm
As I said in another thread, their attendance has been a lot lower than it has previously been so I’m sure they’re trying to use any reason to get some press back on it.
Posted: 9/6/23 at 5:00pm
Yes it definitely isn't the same hot ticket it once was. It's quite interesting standing in the immersive section now with much less people. I THINK I might say it's even more enjoyable but if it starts to get much thinner it might feel a bit uncomfortable/low energy! That said, I saw the show again recently and I think it's in amazing shape. Enjoyed it even more. The So would highly recommend! I actually prefer the current Nathan Detroit over the original. I started to finally get a bit of a glimpse of what Nathan Lane might have been like in the role! (maybe some might describe it as derivative, but that was a long time ago).
Posted: 5/12/24 at 8:57pm
Did this die?
Posted: 5/12/24 at 9:06pm
Posted: 5/12/24 at 9:25pm
Oh for sure. I really disliked the immersiveness of it. If it was restaged on a thrust, I’d like it. ASPECTS OF LOVE should come
Posted: 5/12/24 at 9:39pm
A shame if the CABARET reviews killed this. This is an actual immersive production.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 11:03pm
Immersive is this worst word to hit theater. Just because you stand doesn’t make it immersive.
Updated On: 5/12/24 at 11:03 PM
Posted: 5/12/24 at 11:26pm
This site or Playbill needs to do a lot of people a big favor and do a story on the difference between immersive and environmental theater.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 11:28pm
I actually hated this from the immersive section. But I also think Guys and Dolls is just really corny and boring. The rising stage is cool but it didn't elevate the story in anyway. And I just felt like I was going in and out of the story by asking to be moved around every 5 minutes.
Posted: 5/12/24 at 11:56pm
The word i've heard people using is semi-immersive. Is that better for you BroadwayNYC2?
Posted: 5/13/24 at 2:46am
Well between cabaret and this I’d probably describe this as immersive. Maybe not quite so much as here lies love but when you’re standing in the action, when you are moving around because of set changes and when the cast are kind of walking around you at points what other word than ‘immersive’ would you use?
Posted: 5/13/24 at 8:19am
I don’t think I’d call it immersive in the way Cabaret or Sleep No More are. You’re actually in those worlds and in those environments. I think this is just a unique staging. But the majority of the audience isn’t immersed.
Posted: 5/13/24 at 9:25am
"Immersive theatre" is usually "environmental" but "environmental theatre" isn't always "immersive." And it seems, honestly that the words are used rather interchangeably.
I personally would call Cabaret, Guys and Dolls, and Here Lies Love chiefly "environmental productions." Meaning the traditional proscenium divide is eschewed for a playing space that puts the audience in "the world" or "environment" of the story.
I think true "immersive theatre" is where the audience gets to take a more active role in their experience of the play. Sleep No More is a perfect example of this - the audience is allowed to "Immerse" themselves in the play through the encouragement of handling props and having unique and meaningful interactions with actors that personalize individual audience experiences. While there are some moments in Guys and Dolls where some audience members might 'assist' in the storytelling through their presence, none of it is very meaningful. I would call the production, thus, 'environmental' with a few light 'immersive' touches.
Posted: 5/13/24 at 9:46am
“I personally would call Cabaret, Guys and Dolls, and Here Lies Love chiefly "environmental productions."
Exactly. None of these shows are immersive theater, even if one or two audience members are interacted with during the show. Corey Cott picks an audience member to hold up a boom box during “Heart of Rock and Roll” - is that immersive theater, too?
Posted: 5/13/24 at 9:54am
The Jerry Zaks tour was my first Guys and Dolls and it spoiled me for all subsequent productions. The touring cast was uneven, but the staging was zippy, funny and colorful. Then I watched the documentary of the Broadway cast recording the album. Lane and Prince cemented themselves in my head as definitive performances. Subsequent productions have felt muted in comparison.
The cast album and Olivier performance of the London revival haven't told me what makes this production so special. The most original idea seems to be Sky dancing at a gay bar in Havana.
I'd say it's different for people seeing the show for the first time. But those folks may have a very different reaction to the 1950's gender politics. Just as they do seeing Rodgers & Hammerstein revivals.
Updated On: 5/13/24 at 09:54 AM
Posted: 5/13/24 at 10:29am
Yeah, I think Sleep No More is the gold standard example for immersive theater. Breaking the fourth wall, or having the action thrust out into the audience, or having action take place around a seated audience isn't "immersive." The ability for the audience to freely explore and engage and not feel like they are in a theater watching a production is paramount.
I don't think any existing piece of Broadway musical theatre can really lend itself to a truly immersive staging because they're simply not written for it. It requires a different structure and thinking.
Posted: 5/13/24 at 2:15pm
I think it's a fair point There is a big difference between the experience of Sleep No More and Guys and Dolls and Cabaret and Here Lies Love. So it would make sense to stop using 'immersive theatre' that describes them all the same.
Posted: 5/13/24 at 8:29pm
binau said: "I think it's a fair pointThere is a big difference between the experience of Sleep No More and Guys and Dolls and Cabaret and Here Lies Love. So it would make sense to stop using 'immersive theatre' that describes them all the same."
There’s a difference because they are all completely different shows. But they are all going for immersive. Quite frankly I find the immersive experience a bit of a turn off. Guys and Dolls should not transfer. I saw it last November and it was just ok.
