SPAMALOT 2023 Previews — Page 3

I still don't understand the director choice for this. I think a Timber's led Spamalot would be very interesting. I think he's good with that sense of humor. 

Interesting to read these reports about Mr Iglehart. They remind me of an evening of songs I saw him do about 18 months ago, at NJPAC, allegedly for eventual PBS broadcast (although I’m not sure if it ever aired).

When he was between songs, telling stories of his career etc, he came across as something of a “fan” and with a sense of “how did I end up on Broadway” wonder. A grateful person, to be sure, but the whole evening seemed as though he didn’t see himself as he sees his Broadway peers. There were also some mistakes (and retakes) of the songs on which there probably should have had been a better grasp.

All of the above surprised me, because I’d seen him be absolutely brilliant in Memphis and Aladdin. 

Now I wonder if things don’t come as easily for him when there isn’t a fast-talking/fast-moving character to play. In the concert for PBS, it was the man himself visibly uncomfortable with the floor being his. With Arthur, there’s a requisite “slower” delivery, and standing still and reacting rather than being the thing that’s reacted TO. 

Updated On: 11/7/23 at 06:59 PM

I also saw this over the weekend. The sets and costumes were giving me a community theatre feel and I thought it worked. Kritzer was the best part of the show for me. Iglehart was fine. I’ve seen him now in three rules (Aladdin, Hamilton, now Spamalot). Aladdin was top performance, Hamilton was rough, and Spamalot was fine. 
 

I was in the balcony and the guys behind me, two separate parties, were HA HA HAAA HAHA ing SO LOUD it was beyond annoying. Like the actors weren’t doing anything on stage and there’s was a HA HA HAH HAHAH. They were laughing at parts that weren’t even funny. I heard more of voices than I did the show. I get it’s funny and you’re enjoying yourself, but we don’t need an ear piercing loudest belly laugh in the theatre. 

I wonder if the SAG/AFTRA strike ending means Ethan Slater will have to miss any performances so he can finish filming the Wicked duology.

I was in the balcony and the guys behind me, two separate parties, were HA HA HAAA HAHA ing SO LOUD it was beyond annoying. Like the actors weren’t doing anything on stage and there’s was a HA HA HAH HAHAH. They were laughing at parts that weren’t even funny. I heard more of voices than I did the show. I get it’s funny and you’re enjoying yourself, but we don’t need an ear piercing loudest belly laugh in the theatre.

They sound like plants which are very common at a new or struggling show. There were several both times I saw New York New York and it was awkward AF. 

Sutton Ross said: "I was in the balcony and the guys behind me, two separate parties, were HA HA HAAA HAHA ing SO LOUD it was beyond annoying. Like the actors weren’t doing anything on stage and there’s was a HA HA HAH HAHAH. They were laughing at parts that weren’t even funny. I heard more of voices than I did the show. I get it’s funny and you’re enjoying yourself, but we don’t need an ear piercing loudest belly laugh in the theatre.

They sound like plants which are very common at a new or struggling show. There were several both times I saw New York New York and it was awkward AF."

I saw someone on Reddit mention that there is a superfan that sees the show as often as he can who is autistic and has a similar laugh. Might be the same guy.

BorisTomashevsky said: "Now I wonder if things don’t come as easily for him when there isn’t a fast-talking/fast-moving character to play. In the concert for PBS, it was the man himself visibly uncomfortable with the floor being his. With Arthur, there’s a requisite “slower” delivery, and standing still and reacting rather than being the thing that’s reacted TO."

I think your theory on James Monroe Iglehart rings true to me.  As the Genie, he was easily able to command the stage and bring a great charisma to the role, but as Arthur it seemed to me he was getting lost in the shuffle a lot.  I think he was generally adequate for the role, but he just didn't have the same outsized presence I was expecting.

Took a few friends who had varying experiences with Monty Python and none of whom knew the musical, but all enjoyed it a lot.  I've only seen a regional production of the show and while I've seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail, I wouldn't say I necessarily know their style super well, but I thought this was a fairly good production of the musical.

The main issue that bothered me was the sound (I was front mezzanine).  When there were only a couple people singing at once, it seemed fine, but a lot of the lyrics in the big group numbers got lost (like all the Camelot rhymes), and it was very difficult to hear soloists over the ensemble/orchestra in those songs as well.  Leslie Kritzer in particular really needed her mic turned up.

Christopher Fitzgerald probably got the biggest laughs from me, just with his delivery of the simplest lines, but I also liked Ethan Slater's performance a lot, as well as Leslie Kritzer (who would've been great if I could've heard her better).  Michael Urie seems to be the most in the vein of "British humor" but I don't know if he's just doing an imitation of the original Monty Python characters or if it's something that actually rings true to people.

For the resolution of finding the grail:

I saw this Friday night, and we had a lovely evening! We were both familiar with the material from watching Monty Python growing up, and I also watched a touring production in NJ some years back. 

We sat Mezz Rear Left O 1, 3. Kinda tight and not the best view because of taller people in front of us in the next two rows. Got unlucky there. And as someone mentioned in a previous post, 

I pretty much enjoyed it all the whole way through, but for me, I realized this is the kind of show that once you've seen it once, it'll never be as funny as it was that time. That magic can't be recaptured. My partner, who had never seen it live, said he felt like Not Dead Yet was a little underwhelming/campy, but it steadily got better until Knights of the Round Table and then he was fully enjoying it.

We both really enjoyed Michael Urie's comedic chops. Ethan Slater was really good too, and there were several moments where I was making snarky jokes in my head over something that was happening on stage that related back to the cheating scandal. 

It seemed like the crowd was super into it and pumped! Lots of big reactions to the French Taunter + the joke between Arthur and Galahad, Percy in All Alone, You Won't Succeed on Broadway, and pretty much anything Lady of the Lake related (though I didn't always love her voice). I got the sense the audience really enjoyed it.

I'm curious about what Alex Brightman will do with the role, but I don't think I'm curious enough to go back and see it again. To me, this felt like a faithful revival and is a fun night out. 

Is Lancelot's final line about "in a thousand years, this will still be controversial" still the same, and does it get much of a response? That's a line that seems like it was a throwaway in 2005 but a heavier hitter now.

So Eric Idle attended Spamalot last night, and beside praising the cast and crew, confirmed something that many of us had speculated.

"The intention is for this Company to tour North America after Broadway so you may get your chance!"

A lot of people have mentioned how the set pretty much looked "tour ready", and it seems like that may be the case!

Just got back from this tonight. Not gonna lie, I went in thinking "I've heard this is bad, but it's Spamalot... how awful can it be?" Turns out... pretty awful. Ya'll, this might be the worst thing I've seen on Broadway in several years. I found it to be embarrassingly bad. The whole thing felt like a stale stamp of the original production, but the ink has faded. I know they made like 5 script updates, but that wasn't enough to stop me from scratching my head throughout most of the night. Even so much of the staging felt directly lifted from the original production. Going in, I was in the camp of "nobody asked for a Spamalot revival, but I'm curious to see how the material has been re-interpreted." And I have to say that I was so disappointed that it felt like zero effort was put into this at all.

As for the cast, there was only one person who elevated the material for me... Taran Killam... the person with the limited run. He at least made some choices that felt semi-fresh. Everyone else was woefully bad. I know people on here have been touting Leslie Kritzer as one of the only good things about the show, but for me, she was probably one of the worst. I'm usually a HUGE fan of hers, but I found her to be so flat in this. The costumes look like they were made by Spirit Halloween, and the props (save for maybe the cow) felt really dull.

How did this transfer?  I have so many questions.

I went last night and had a great time!  I sat in the rear mezzanine and had no issues hearing anything, though some people around me were complaining.  The only things I missed were some small bits that I couldn’t see from far away, and it was occasionally difficult to tell actors apart due to similar costuming.  

I saw the original production a couple years into its run and was a bit disappointed due to some lackluster performances, and enjoyed this production significantly more!  I found the entire cast to be incredibly strong, with standout performances from Kritzer, Killam, and Slater.  I also thought the set was very well done and found the use of projections to be quite effective.  Most of the audience seemed to be enjoying the show and was enthusiastic (though not obnoxiously so).

All in all, it was a fun show and I would see it again in a heartbeat (albeit from closer up)!  I can see it extending if they do some creative star casting for replacements.