binau said: "
"I wouldn't mind so much if this had a rewrite to set in the era Jamie Lloyd wanted it set in and Lloyd didn't have '1949' appear on the screen at the beginning. "
I do feel this discussion has been had - I completely get why people can't buy the show if they can't suspend disbelief of the time period. It's an abstract representation and Norma's character is more like faded pop star vibes than a literal silent film star. If you are trying to watch the production and literally believe that this production and Nicole's Norma Desmond is trying to portray the literal era with historical accuracy then there is simply no way to enjoy this production in my opinion. If you can't buy the concept then every single thing about it would seem wrong, and I understand why it would be impossible to get into in that scenario.
"
Yes, I guess I can't buy the concept at all. ALW, when he wrote the show (and even since, he said so in a recent interview with Michael Riedel before htis production became a thing), rejected Hal Prince's original idea of an update to Sunset and wanted it firmly set in its period as he saw no point in updating it.
But Jamie Lloyd wants to do the opposite and the production creates a giant hole in the middle by the writers and the director going in two completely different directions.
An example: they change her age to being 40, but they keep it set in 1950. This Norma, if this really is Norma (again, when I saw it I never felt like I was watching the character, only Nicole Scherzinger play some kind of parody of herself), must therefore have been a child star at most during the silent era (by being born in 1910)--The Jazz Singer came out in 1927.