SUNSET BLVD. Reviews — Page 9

Seb28 said: "greensgreens said: "Are Joe and Betty actually in love in this version? ."

Yes, all the lyrics are about that.

The "direction" is justsidelining the lyrics. And the characters.

"
You must be right. People have never used love/relationships to get ahead in their career. Or thought they were in love after a one night stand or two. And we must adhere blindly to the text without any subtext at all.


I’m still convinced they’re not totally in love so much as they are opportunistic. Betty is looking to get ahead career wise and Joe sees her as an escape from Norma.

I’m personally not interested in engaging in a discussion about the future of commercial theatre with you in a thread about one specific production. If you want to have that discussion, make a new thread or take your 19 post binges to Reddit where we can hide your incessant trashing of this production. (Yes, I counted. And that’s just what BWW will allow me to see in your profile.)

But if you want to know what I think about how the cardboard cutout; Pussycat Dolls picture; and gesturing to the show poster in Shubert Alley enhances the themes of Jamie Lloyd’s vision, I feel it speaks to the blatant artificiality of theatre as a comment on the Hollywood of the script. We’ve been watching bodies on stage and on screen in real time playing it all Deadly Serious, but they’re actually in on the joke and none of this is real. The illusions of the film world are no more reality than Tom Francis dying onstage every night and Nicole Scherzinger consuming his blood. They know who ALW is, where Nicole got her start, that they’re in a musical at all. It’s beyond meta and wink-wink, but it worked for me.

Updated On: 10/23/24 at 11:27 AM

ColorTheHours048 said: "what I think about the cardboard cutout; Pussycat Dolls picture; and gesturing to the show poster in Shubert Alley, I feel it speaks to the blatant artificiality of theatre"

Whatever works for you and thanks for your reply.

I think if a show needs this to make the audience understand this, something is wrong. It borders on disdain for the audience. There is a big difference between the artificiality of theatre and the story that the script is about. To me it speaks to the artificiality of this direction. And to the fear of traveling away from the suspension of disbelief, what theatre is essentially about.

Updated On: 10/23/24 at 12:13 PM

greensgreens said: "Seb28 said: "greensgreens said: "Are Joe and Betty actually in love in this version? ."

Yes, all the lyrics are about that.

The "direction" is justsidelining the lyrics. And the characters.

"
You must be right. People have never used love/relationships to get ahead in their career. Or thought they were in love after a one night stand or two.And we must adhere blindly to the text without any subtext at all.


I’m still convinced they’re not totally in love so much as they are opportunistic. Betty is looking to get ahead career wise and Joe sees her as an escape from Norma.



"

If you are suggesting that Betty's whole character, all the lyrics in the show, the songs and her declaration of love towards Joe are part of an "opportunistic plan", then it is still not right when the audience laughs at her words and wonders where the hell her words come from.

It's just bad direction.

Updated On: 10/23/24 at 12:25 PM

Breaking up all the arguing to say that the massive close-up shot of Artie crying a single tear was absolutely stunning. WHAT a face on that boy.

Seb28 said: "greensgreens said: "Seb28 said: "greensgreens said: "Are Joe and Betty actually in love in this version? ."

Yes, all the lyrics are about that.

The "direction" is justsidelining the lyrics. And the characters.

"
You must be right. People have never used love/relationships to get ahead in their career. Or thought they were in love after a one night stand or two.And we must adhere blindly to the text without any subtext at all.


I’m still convinced they’re not totally in love so much as they are opportunistic. Betty is looking to get ahead career wise and Joe sees her as an escape from Norma.



"

If you are suggesting that Betty's whole character, all the lyrics in the show, the songs and her declaration of love towardsJoeare part of an "opportunistic plan", then it is still not right when the audience laughs at her words and wonders where the hell her words comefrom.

It's just bad direction."

Nobody laughed at Betty at the performance I attended. I must’ve missed something. Just so I know, when was this happening? I saw an early preview so perhaps something was changed?

As for the character, Grace in interviews is pretty clear that this production’s intent is to make her a bit harder and opportunistic. However, folks have raised lots of great points here about the libretto and original character portrayals are not really supporting that decision.

As much as I love the show, I do agree the staging of the title song does get goofy in parts. The best I could come up with is they wanted a few moments of levity before Norma’s madness takes hold.

I love all this thoughtful discussion friends!!!

Has anyone tried in-person rush for this? Where were the seats?

I think, ultimately, this is a matter of priorities, and what people want the show to prioritize.

Betty being more opportunistic reinforces the bleakness of Hollywood and adds some interest to her character as an individual. But, as I said, it doesn't really gel with her actions in the libretto and her relationship with Joe loses any impact. It also lowers the stakes of the ending and you don't get that glimmer of hope before everything comes crashing down ("two people, both risking a kind of happy ending").
The Act II opening highlights Jamie Lloyd's vision and masterfully showcases the artificiality of Hollywood. But the gags and meta references also obscure the meaning of the song, both because it's hard to absorb the lyrics with so much going on, and because the audience is laughing over them much of the time. Ironically, as bloated with spectacle as the original production was, that moment has always been staged simply and is a good character moment for Joe. The reprise of that number creates a beautiful stage picture with the ensemble members, but it also obfuscates what should be a tense moment between Betty and Joe.

Sorry, but the title number is a total stinker lyrically and the melody is crunchy as hell. When I saw the 2017 revival, couldn't wait for it to end. Joe just dressing himself after a swim in the pool really put the focus on the song. This production was the first time I've enjoyed it. Whether that be due to the distraction of the staging or not, the number worked for me for the first time. Same with a few others that are typically just fluff getting us from WIth One Look to Goodbye. To me, Jamie knew where and when he needed to deploy more to make up for the lesser moments of the score and book.

For me, the distance between Joe and Betty was purposeful. This production's Joe is an opportunistic f*ckboy. Betty pulls him out of it at some points, but ultimately he sees her as a means of escaping Norma. Grace is excellent in her scenes especially with the magnifying effect of the screen. Her intensity/vulnerability really shone through.

It's baffling to me that people can't understand the concept/refuse to even engage in it. The concept is clear. The show is about the underbelly of Hollywood as much as it is about a faded star that it chewed up and spit out. Jamie Lloyd put making a movie on stage. The opening and end credits make that crystal clear. A framing device...novel I know.

At the end of the day, the word of mouth is overwhelmingly positive, sales are looking especially strong after opening. Nicole is likely walking away with the Tony. The haters will continue to crap all over the production (they're already repeating the same critiques over and over and over as though it isn't proving the point so many of us have been making.

greensgreens said: "Seb28 said: "greensgreens said: "Seb28 said: "greensgreens said: "Are Joe and Betty actually in love in this version? ."

Yes, all the lyrics are about that.

The "direction" is justsidelining the lyrics. And the characters.

"
You must be right. People have never used love/relationships to get ahead in their career. Or thought they were in love after a one night stand or two.And we must adhere blindly to the text without any subtext at all.


I’m still convinced they’re not totally in love so much as they are opportunistic. Betty is looking to get ahead career wise and Joe sees her as an escape from Norma.



"

If you are suggesting that Betty's whole character, all the lyrics in the show, the songs and her declaration of love towardsJoeare part of an "opportunistic plan", then it is still not right when the audience laughs at her words and wonders where the hell her words comefrom.

It's just bad direction."

Nobody laughed at Betty at the performance I attended. I must’ve missed something. Just so I know, when was this happening? I saw an early preview so perhaps something was changed?

As for the character, Grace in interviews is pretty clear that this production’s intent is to make her a bit harder and opportunistic. However, folks have raised lots of great points here about the libretto and original character portrayals are not really supporting that decision.

As much as I love the show, I do agree the staging of the title song does get goofy in parts. The best I could come up with is they wanted a few moments of levity before Norma’s madness takes hold.

I love all this thoughtful discussion friends!!!"

Nobody laughed at Betty at any of the 3 performances that I saw either, so I have no idea what some of these people are blabbering about.

kdogg36 said: "Seb28 said: "To me it shows they don't care. They care about seeing a popstar. Nothing else. Just like the director does. This is not saying they can't have that opinion, they can love it, it is just calling out facts."

I don't think you're going to get fruitful discussion when you express this kind of low-key contempt for those who like this production more than you did."

Exactly

PipingHotPiccolo said: "MusicalGuy3 said: "Mandy is giving her own wonderful/dazzling performance. Wow!"

Audios abound, and Mandy sounds good, but her delivery only confirms the bizarre manner with which Lloyd is directing these ladies. I land on the side of this hurting, undermining, the show as a whole, even if its entertaining as a concert, but to each their own.

Its funny how people insist something is great and "works" and "slays" but then cant back it up with any explanation/clarification. Enjoying a performance is one thing, explaining how it makes sense/elevates material/moves an audience, is another."

It has already been explained by multiple critics who gave it rave reviews, as well as by multiple posters on this board. There is no reason to further try to explain anything to certain haters in this board.

Matt Rogers said: "The authors disagree with you. How do you feel about that???"

I understand the tone of some of the 'haters' in this thread has been smug and obnoxious, but I have really tried to be even-keeled in my comments, give Jamie Lloyd credit for the very intentional choices he is making, and explain why some of them don't work for me. There really isn't a need to come at me like 'haha gotcha!!!'
As for your comment, I think ALW and the show's writers are clearly open to alternate interpretations of their work, as they should be. I also appreciate a lot of the big swings this production takes, even if I haven't talked about that here (my comments are not a full review, nor are they obligated to be). Also, on a practical level, ALW would be very foolish not to endorse a production of his that's got a lot of buzz behind it.