SWEENEY TODD 2005 Broadway revival?- Page 2

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 2:28pm

Just to provide a counterexample, Joe -- I saw the show in New York with someone only tangentially familiar with the material and then saw the tour with someone who didn't know the show at all. Neither of them had trouble following the story.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 2:31pm

Yes...that is the question, Joe, isn't it? Not what the concept is...but what did this concept actually bring to the storytelling.

I love a good deconstructed piece of theatre. I just didn't think the piece was deconstructed enough...nor some of the directorial choices justified. I mean...that white baby coffin. And why were all of the inmates able to play the instruments so beautifully. Was this expressive arts therapy? Were these a group of people who cracked under the pressure of Julliard? I'm being glib, but these were choices that never seemed to have a real point. Nor did they illuminate the story of Sweeney Todd in any meaningful way. It was just kinda cool staging. Staging that, frankly, has been happening in and around this city for YEARS.

The death of the Beggar Woman made absolutely no impact because it was never made clear exactly who she was when he slashed her throat. Me? I would have had him slash Johanna's throat before she could escape. That would have truly been a horrifying moment. Also...that last Ballad of Sweeney Todd should never have happened. We should have just been left with Toby being strapped to a chair. But no...lights back up! Lets do a number!

I will, however, always give enormous credit to the cast. I thought they really were all terrific.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 2:35pm

JoeKv99, in an interview, John Doyle said that putting the show in Toby's mind was a way to have the actors play their instruments because they would be telling the story. He said when he does a production that doesn't have enough funding to have a full orchestra (as this originally did--remember, it started at a tiny theatre having no intention of coming to Broadway), the first step is to figure out a reason to have the actors play the instruments. As I said before, what I like in having the actors play the instruments is that it the actors have complete control over the performance. Setting it in Toby's head is, at its simplest, a reason to have the actors play the instruments. But it's more than just that. It adds a dark eerie feeling to everything in the show. To me, it felt much scarier than any other production of the show. The extra layer of darkness made the ending sequence one of the most thrilling things I had ever seen.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 2:51pm

The first time I saw the production live was on tour in Chicago. Aside from Judy Kaye and the guy playing Toby, it was a terrible night at the theatre. David Hess was awful. Many people around me didn't come back for the second act, and I nearly considered joining them. This is the full review I posted at the time: https://offbroadway.broadwayworld.com/board/readmessage.php?thread=964287

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 2:59pm

Davis Hess was...

Well, "awful" lets him off lightly, says I.

[ABB2357]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 3:04pm

I'm surprised to read such negative reactions here, since I remember everyone in New York was creaming over it at the time. At first I didn't want to go (not a Patti fan) but the reviews convinced me.

It was a great revival, totally fresh, and the concept worked. The overall effect was chilling - the audience actually gasped at the first notes because they sounded so unfamiliar with the smaller orchestrations. I thought Patti was great and the first actress to break the Lansbury mold of the role. Cerveris was both charismatic and creepy as hell.

I was sitting in the upper mezz at the O'Neill but the production still resonated despite being so intimate. I avoided seeing it on tour, especially after their performance on the Tonys looked miniscule in such a large space. Updated On: 4/27/11 at 03:04 PM

Posted: 4/27/11 at 4:15pm

But....having Toby tell the story doesn't add a dark eerie feeling....UNLESS you go in knowing he's (almost) the only one left alive at the end.

And yes, the beggar woman's death was troublesome- with the cast all doubling and tripling no one would know she was really Sweeney's wife.
Updated On: 4/27/11 at 04:15 PM

[Jake01]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 4:40pm

Just my opinion, newintown. I can't comment on what the show was like live, but Sarah Travis' work sounds gorgeous and truly creepy on the recording, and, to me at least, doesn't diminish the score in the slightest.

[kasim]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 6:05pm

I never saw the show before, and watched it for the first time. So granted i didnt have a previous one to go off of but i liked hte show

Not only that. Its not exactly THAT hard to follow. its not a really advance story line.

I will say this "style" of production seemed to work better for Company

[trentsketch]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 6:58pm

I liked the staging a lot more than I liked the actors as orchestra conceit. The orchestrations were good, but the same effect could have been achieved if a small pit was sitting on the side or back of the stage wearing doctor's coats.

The open casket center stage for the barber chair and buckets of blood for the murders provided a strong visual contrast to the clinical asylum-based costumes. Setting the whole thing as a production of Sweeney Todd in a mental hospital imagined by the man playing Toby was a great choice, too. And where else will you ever get to see Patti Lupone shake her booty while playing an oompah tuba?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 7:10pm

Did you really think that nobody on the entire Internet had seen it?

I don't really feel like getting into a debate/discussion that I feel like I've had a million times before, if people want detailed posts from me on this, they can search. But I will just say that I saw it often and loved it very much. It changed how I understood musical theater. I owe John Doyle infinite thanks for what he gave me that year.

Updated On: 4/27/11 at 07:10 PM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 7:11pm

I loved it. My sister, with very little knowledge of the show, was intrigued and moved....but will say only that she LIKED it.

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 4/27/11 at 10:14pm

For those who are saying it was totally incomprehensible to someone who didn't know the work prior, I went into it pretty much totally blind and I got it, as did my mother who had also never seen the show before and knew very little about it. Certain small moments were clarified by watching the DVD of the Hal Prince staging, but for the most part, neither of us had any issues understanding the piece.

That said, it's probably one of my favorite things I've seen in a theater to date. I saw the production four times, and each time I noticed new little things that hadn't been there the last time. The performances, particularly Manoel Felciano, Patti LuPone, and Michael Cerveris, became richer and richer every time and I loved every second of it. I'm aware that Doyle's concept is not everyone's cup of tea, but it really clicked for me. I credit that production with making me really fall in love with Sondheim...I knew some of his work up to that point, but not a lot of it, and after I saw that show I downloaded a bunch of the original cast albums of his shows and I never looked back. :)
Updated On: 4/27/11 at 10:14 PM

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 4/28/11 at 12:03am

Anyone else shocked that it's been so many years since that production?

I thought it was genius and saw it nine times. I just loved the notion that we were in essence being told a horror story from the mind of Toby. That said, at the time I'd never seen another production and aside from the more popular shows, wasn't familiar with it. I had no trouble following the story.

I personally know a lot of people that didn't like it, usually because they felt it just HAD to be told in the same way as the original production. I thought it was dumb argument.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/28/11 at 12:07am

I can never believe how much time it's been. Sometimes that feels sort of impossible.

[east side story]

Posted: 4/28/11 at 12:12am

Absolutely loved it. I believe I saw it four times during the show's run.

With that being said, had I not been familiar with the show or seen the Lansbury/Hearn DVD, I feel like I would have been completely lost. It was a production for musical fanatics, not the general public.

I adored Michael and Patti in their roles. I was very disappointed when LuPone lost to LaChanze at the Tonys that year. I saw the show right before the telecast, and LuPone delivered an unapologetically genius performance. I know it was not for everyone, but I thought she was stunning. And we all know she eventually got that elusive second Tony a few seasons later.

[Select a Member Name]

Posted: 4/28/11 at 12:22am

Extremely poorly directed and, in my experience, completely incomprehensible to anyone who was not thoroughly familiar with the show.

As someone who saw it without being familiar with it first, I completely understood it.

I saw the touring production in San Francisco and was absolutely mesmerized by it, as were my fellow classmates. It's one of my favorite theatre memories. It was so unlike anything I've seen before. It was beautiful. I loved it.

[Taryn]

Posted: 4/28/11 at 12:26am

I loved it, but I've found that it's not really a production that stuck with me. My strongest memories are actually of Molina's performance, which was the first Johanna performance I'd seen that I found truly intriguing.

[sondheimfan2]

Posted: 4/28/11 at 1:13pm

Well, I am surprised that so many people liked the concept. As I have said before, I didn't at all. In fact, I nodded off in the second act (perhaps the gin martini before the show has something to do with it) Seriously, I saw the first National tour with Lansbury and Hern, the "Tiny Todd" revival at Circle in the Square, as well as the Papermill production with Judy Kaye (I believe). Guess I just prefer the traditional staging for ST.

[CJ N2N]

Posted: 3/23/13 at 12:48pm

I love the cast album and find the whole concept and staging (from what I've read on these boards) fascinating. Hal Prince's staging was terrific (from what I've seen on the DVD), but this sounds so... Unique.

Can someone explain how "City on Fire" worked? And "Parlor Songs"?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 3/23/13 at 1:05pm

Loved it. The intimate, Brechtian mounting was incisive, compelling and very frightening. The musicianship served as choreography enhancing character and was as visually engaging as it was aurally (here it was character and storytelling, in Company it was random). Cerveris, Lupone and Manoel Feliciano were wonderful.

[Wishing Only Wounds]

Posted: 3/23/13 at 1:05pm

I wasn't a fan of the concept.I saw the tour and was underwhelmed. If I was not already familiar with the plot, I would have been extremely lost. The cast was great though.

[Jamie Pierce]

Posted: 3/23/13 at 1:40pm

Most captivating evening I've ever spent in the theatre. Went back 2 additional times and continued to feel the same. I liked Sweeney Todd and had seen various productions over the years but I would hardly say it was my favorite musical. But this production was just tremendous and (up to that point) I had never seen anything quite like it.
I was disappointed that they decided to continue the actors-as-musicians concept with Company because I didn't want it to become a gimmick (nor would I want to see the total elimination of the traditional orchestra). It was anything but gimmick-y in Sweeney Todd. It served the piece so well and brought it to a new level of theatricality which the materials lends itself to so beautifully. Just a perfect piece of theatre.
It would have won Best Revival and kept running had Harry Connick Jr and Co not come into town (although that was a pretty extraordinary revival as well but that's another thread...)

[Playbilly]

Posted: 3/23/13 at 2:52pm

I saw the Original production with Lansbury and Cariou, one of the first B'Way shows I ever saw. Remains one of the fullest, finest productions I've ever seen. The revival didn't have the full-bodied spectacle, but the intimacy was an appropriate replacement for size and scale. I can still hear the blood getting poured into the pails. Chilling.

( I went to the revival with someone who had no familiarity with the show, and she loved it. )

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 3/23/13 at 3:25pm

Still one of my favorite things I've ever seen. I adored this production, and I thought the cast was pretty terrific all around.