Sarah Jessica Parker as Charity — Page 3

Couldn't agree with you more on Walter and Wayne's work. Boring, boring, boring.

She was a great Charity, and yes, the revival was a fiasco...from the moment the cast was announced, it was slammed for even daring to exist. The fact that the original creators were gone did nothing to stop the constant moaning that Fosse and Verdon weren't doing this revival, so why was it even happening.

For those who went to the show expecting to see Applegate as Charity, like myself, the show was very enjoyable, as many posts reported. For those with the Verdon/Fosse glasses permanently affixed to their heads, it was impossible to like anything about the show, from cast to creative team to sets to costumes.

I had no trouble understanding the love for Verdon and Fosse. I don't think anyone was contesting the talents of either. The trouble was the posts damning the show before they had even laid eyes on it, simply because it wasn't the Verdon/Fosse show, so why bother doing it.

And then the inevitable reviews that spent 4 paragraphs comparing the show to the 1966 version, then one paragraph on how they hated this version.

So yes, it was a fiasco.

---

Emcee, I haven't heard enough of Ringwald's singing to decide how good of singer she is, but I know that Parker is better than her. I respect that you want to keep the integrity of musicals intact. I also think that the best possible effort should be made to cast people who are up to the demands of their roles. If Molly Ringwald really is that terrible of a singer, then that's too bad, but if there are reviews of her performance out there that people can read and the show still sells tickets, then that's that. I don't have a problem with anyone bitching about untalented people being cast in shows, I do it, too, but it seems like it's something that's going to happen from time to time no matter what, whether we're talking about famous people or just unknown theater actors.

---

SJP was interested in a PLAY at MTC at the time x-tina's contract was running out. That play obviously fell through. Reguardless, she was unavailible, remotely uninterested... required to train as a dancer, and over-all- out of the budget.

She was never formally offered the role for any/all of the reasons above.

Though she probably wouldnt have pulled the dancing off for a Broadway audience, she would easily be able to sell out the tour if she was interested. I am pretty confident that she has no interest in hotel life on tour, while her husband stays home.

To the person who said that Parker had studied singing and dancing, I say, that doesn't make someone have TALENT! Parker has absolutely no singing "talent" and most likely would NEVER be able to pull off the dancing. Why there's a three page thread about it, is the better question.

Agreed. Krakowski had the right idea.

---