Saw "Wicked" For The First Time on Broadway

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/22/08 at 7:36pm

Interesting. That's really all I can say. I had previously seen the show in Chicago a few years ago when it first opened there. I was sort of indifferent about it. While I was entertained, I didn't understand the whole "spectacle" aspect of it, but after seeing the show last night on Broadway, I totally do. The set is so intricate! I loved it. Just sitting in the house before it started I couldn't stop looking at all aspects of the set. Even the "chandeliers" in the Gershwin seemed appropriate for the show. The show itself was okay. To a first timer it probably was great, but to me, it just didn't seem to have any sort of spark. It seemed stale. Kendra was out last night, which sucks, she was who I was most looking forward to seeing - I love her voice. But the remaining cast was okay at best. Kerry Ellis had some great moments like "No Good Deed" and a lot of her book scenes just seemed very natural, but she lacked any sort of stage presence. I found myself watching the ensemble more than her. The same goes for the Glinda u/s (sorry I don't have the playbill by me). They didn't seem to spark or add anything new to the show. Aaron Tveit was fine as Fieyro, nothing new, but not bad. But again, I have to harp on the set. I didn't realize what I was missing in Chicago. The way the lights work and the sets are layered, it's quite beautiful. I didn't realize how many layers there were to each scene. I love how they bring down the bridge for some of the other scenes to add a sort of 'cap' to the roofs. I really want to see the show again - especially if they bump up Kyle Dean Massey. He has a spectacular voice. I kept looking for him in each of the ensemble scenes, but I couldn't locate him in most of them, which I guess could be a good thing?

[HBP]

Posted: 10/22/08 at 7:53pm

a very interesting take, and i agree that wicked fits in quite nicely at the gershwin. the lights/chandeliers are so unique and appropriate for the show, as you said. and the simplistic, tony-winning sets are a wonder to behold. kerry, although an amazing singer, is pretty dull as elphaba, and she struggles with the american accent... at least when i saw her. you didn't miss much with kendra. she's good for some great laughs, but they're in all the wrong places and it really takes away from an already troubled story. i havent seen aaron or any glinda understudies, but i've heard great things about lindsey k. northen and alli mauzey, was it one of them? katie adams is the standby, but i've heard she's a little lackluster in the role. i'm glad you enjoyed it, but i'd hold off getting tickets until a new (and hopefully fresh) pair of witches graces the gershwin, which should be rather soon, i think.
Updated On: 10/22/08 at 07:53 PM

[DefyGravity777]

Posted: 10/22/08 at 7:55pm

You most like saw Katie Adams as Glinda. She's the standby. IMO she is better than Kendra(Who I have seen 11 times). Sorry you didn't enjoy the show that much but you did enjoy the sets.

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/22/08 at 8:13pm

I saw the show first on Broadway with the original cast. The second time I saw it was in Denver during its 1st national tour. I enjoyed it in New York but not as much on tour. The missing set pieces and some different blocking took something away from the show for me. I had seen Kendra on The Tonight Show and wasn't crazy about her performance (They did One Short Day) When the show got here and I got to see her entire performance, I found her to be ok but the whole "fidgety" thing annoyed me a bit. The evening I saw it here in Denver Ms Block seemed to be walking through the part. I did not enjoy her performance at all. I have toyed with seeing it again on Broadway just so I could see the entire set again, but there are too many other things to see!

[legally_popular]

Posted: 10/22/08 at 9:32pm

Thanks for your thoughts, Rentboy. It was interesting to read your comparison about the sets.

I haven't seen the show in a long time. I'm with HBP, I'm waiting for a new pair of witches. Probably not "fresh" though, as Wicked loves to recycle and recycle.

And funny that you mentioned Alli Mauzey... you may get a chance to see her afterall... if what I've heard is true.

[bwayfan9]

Posted: 10/22/08 at 9:35pm

Wicked isn't the best show on broadway overall, but there is something about seeing wicked on broadway that is just magical. Glad to see you loved the set!!!!

[george95]

Posted: 10/22/08 at 10:20pm

You're right there is something about seeing a show in its "home" on Broadway, rather than on a tour--its one reason why I'm so glad I live in the tristate now and no longer Chicago :)

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/23/08 at 12:16am

Agreed - never knew how much I was missing. And yeah, I saw Katie Adams. She just seemed to do everything as scripted and didn't take any new, bold interesting chances - which I think can be said for all the leads.

One thing though, during the "I'm Not That Girl" scene - Elphaba is blatantly standing in the rain....um, what? Won't she melt? Also, the stage manager must have been sleeping during the show because a lot of missed cues. In the same scene Morrible goes to change the weather, but it had already been changed about 2 mins beforehand, so nothing happened - I was confused, ha.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/23/08 at 12:31am

And I feel like I should say - I'm just a fan of a great set. I don't mind simple or extravagant. I just was in awe of how detailed and whatnot it was. Like, for instance, in the wizard's scenes, the set wet all the way up into the rafters - like it extended past the proscenium and I liked that little detail. Also, in the bridge scene, the little flowers came up on the edge of the stage, just a nice touch. Now I can see why he's such a lauded designer - I never understood it after seeing the show in Chicago.