iluvtheatertrash said: "I don’t get it. Saw it in London and hated it. The track confirms for me that he’s a big reason why. He is so beyond bland, hanging on consonants, very speaky. Where’s that rich tenor sound? I don’t get it."
Which I think goes to prove that theater, as we all know, is full of subjectivity. Because quite honestly, I think his performance is good, and he has a good voice, but it doesn't make me forget the original renditions of it either.
I know he won the Olivier, but based solely on the Olivier performance my jaw didn't exactly drop while watching it. Just because he's strolling around in a chic, dark suit, camera following him into the theater doesn't necessarily take it to another level for me. Even though apparently that's how it is staged in the actual musical? I'll have to see it to have a better grasp on the overall impact. As others have noted, in context it is seemingly very effective. But for me, in a vacuum, outside of the musical itself, I don't find his vocals and interpretation of the song, alone, off the charts.
Based on the clips I've seen of the West End production, and the photos that have gone along with them, it's clearly done in a much more modern, provocative way. Dark. Minimalistic? Very tech-oriented with cameras, etc. It sounds amazing actually.
But IMO I don't think using this very different approach as a way to "crap" on the original, which is now four decades old and was done at a time when many (most?) musicals like this were still very traditional in scope, is completely fair either.
I think it's okay to appreciate both. And I think it's okay to prefer one over the other.
The original was a musical, for its time. And I remember that even back then there were those who didn't see it as their favorite ALW musical anyway.
But some of us enjoyed it. I saw Patti in London, and Glenn and Betty, in LA and on Broadway respectively. And enjoyed them all for their own unique contributions.
Now that being said, were the original iterations of this particular song landmark, tour de force performances for the actors who performed them? No.
But this actor's rendition didn't exactly knock me over either as tour de force, nor did it make me forget hearing this song for the first time, compliments of the other actors who performed it.
As for the song, is it deep? No. But is it horrible? Nope. Not IMO. But then again, here comes the subjectivity again.
Having grown up in Southern California, surrounded by the industry, I thought the sounds and the music in the show overall captured the feel of old Hollywood in many, very moving ways.
And I thought the lyrics to this particular song, while "horrible" and laughable to some, also captured the moody, fickle, vapid nature of the industry out here and provided some simple insight into what it takes for some to "make it" out here. No one is claiming it to be the most provocative, spellbinding song the the theater has ever seen. But it had its place in a musical that shows how vain and vapid Hollywood can be. Smoke and mirrors. Fantasy. Shallow.
After all, as was noted in Cy Coleman/David Zippel's City of Angels: "LA, truth to tell, is not much different than a pretty girl with the clap."
Updated On: 9/26/24 at 02:54 PM