Scherzinger in SUNSET BLVD. Previews- Page 19

[Bwaygurl2]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 12:14pm

Auggie27 said: "I've seen modern dress versions ofAeschylus, Shakespeare, and - man of the hour, Wilder - since I was a teenager, not a word changed to match anachronistic properties or costuming, to interfere with the non-era specific world building. The conceit createsimmediacy, but it's constructed on a shared premise: text and physical manifestation of story elementsare by design contradictory, technically at odds, yet together suggesting "timelessness" in theme and emotional truth. It's that sharing - audiences as invited participants in a theatrical idea - that makes the stylization exciting. (The Lloyd Dolls House was thrilling for just this point.) All of this parsing of midcentury texture in the libretto (and screenplay) as oppositional to the use of 2024 tech just seems willfully resistant to the concept. Anyone can feel thus. But this is a time-honoredtradition, irony intended, and Lloyd is just the latest practitioner; he's not some text-disrespecting auteur diluting verisimilitude."

Excellent explanation. Thank you. 

[Bwaygurl2]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 12:22pm

Seb28 said:

Yes, I have seen it in London. Clearly the director thinks itneeds to. There isn't much else going on. I see it as creative poverty. And a certain contempt for the audiences. At least an underestimation of their intelligence and media literacy in my opinion."

Interesting. "Creative poverty?" This production is so different and unusual that it seems only a very creative director could come up with it. Creative poverty to me would be just doing something similar to what was done before.

I takes a certain respect (rather than contempt) for an audience to try something so different and unusual. Lloyd thinks his audience is smart enough to not be hung up on anachronisms and unliteral stagings. 

[JasonC3]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 1:15pm

Bwaygurl2 said: "It takes a certain respect (rather than contempt) for an audience to try something so different and unusual. Lloyd thinks his audience is smart enough to not be hung up on anachronisms and unliteral stagings."

Quite possibly, but let's be clear ... YOU think this is what Lloyd thinks unless somewhere he has come out and said this.

[OhHiii]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 1:15pm

Seb28 has had it out for this production since the very beginning. If you refuse to have an open mind for new interpretations, I fear theater is not for you. It's a living breathing thing. Anachronism being one of the most often-employed devices of theatricality. You can objectively dislike the production (if you actually see it), but the refusal to accept even the notion of the production is absurd. 

To say this production "underestimates the audience's intelligence" is the diametric opposite of what it actually does. It asks A LOT of the intelligence and imagination of the audience member. And for a large theater housing a pop star's Broadway debut, the audience was *silent* during quiet moments (save for coughing). The most well behaved audience I've sat in in years. They are along for the ride because Lloyd has set the rules of the production and sticks to them. That is theatricality at its finest and is very clearly satisfying many an audience member based on WOM alone. 

This production elevates the original material to the rafters. Completely peels back curtain on the text and score which could have been disastrous but somehow it's not. You often feel as though you're watching a new musical altogether. I just don't understand purists of Sunset Boulevard of all things...

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 1:42pm

Such drama! The critics of this production aren't necessarily purists or conservatives because they don't like the production. As Auggie27 said this style of post-modern direction has been around since the 1970's. The question is does the director's departure from the text illuminate it or is it arbitrary?

In Lloyd's case I felt it did illuminate the text around half of the time in a satisfying way. The rest felt like he was throwing tricks at the material and some of it stuck but others just collided and bounced off of it with a thud. But he keeps throwing stuff at it so quickly and relentlessly that it's hard to dwell on the thuds. 

Updated On: 10/19/24 at 01:42 PM

[chernjam]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 3:07pm

It's been a week since I saw this production - and having seen the revival, 2nd US Tour and 2017 revival over 12 times, Ithink it's fair to say I'm a mega-fan of this score.  And having continued to think back to a week ago, I think I can finally say it is much better to the previous incarnations.

One of the problems with the original was that they approached it almost with a reverence, taking Billy Wilder's observation ("the great thing is they didn't change it") as essential.  Granted we're talking over 30 years ago and the idea of the film being a "classic" meant a lot more then than it does now.  But even in 2017, as much as I enjoyed seeing the revival 4 times, hearing the score with a symphonic orchestra and some great performances (not the least of which was Close's impressive recreating the role) I worried it might be the last time it was ever on a NY stage.  It felt incredibly dated.  The crowd was mostly ALW fans, Close fans, curious people... but the musicalized re-staging of a film about a silent movie star discarded because of "talkies" definitely wasn't connecting.  And I hated to agree with Patti LuPone but for the first time for me, there were times I did feel it was slow.

Last Saturday, those 2 and a half hours flew.  Some have argued if you didn't know the story (move or previous musical) you'd be lost and I get the point, but I think that eventually this new vision where Norma's life has been defined by the popularity of throngs looking at her and her desperation for that again takes over that you can fill in the blanks and it would click.  And for me, that's where the tragedy, heartbreak and emotional connection really came together in a way I had never felt previously.  Like I've said previously, at the end I wanted Norma to kill Joe (never felt that before) and felt so much empathy for Norma and Max, which had never happened before.

Can't wait to get in to see this again

[Seb28]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 4:24pm

Bwaygurl2 said: "Interesting. "Creative poverty?" This production is so different and unusual that it seems only a very creative director could come up with it."

I miss the creativity. Breaking the 4th wall, twerking and mc hammer jokes, cardboard cut outs of the composer, jokes about the actor's real lives and filming stuff is as basic and uncreative as it can get. It reminds me of the little mermaid musical where flounder sings "she treats me like sashimi left over from last week". Some audience members may be bellowing but not me. It's just a concert of a wonderful score with some cheap jokes added.

Updated On: 10/19/24 at 04:24 PM

[Seb28]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 4:29pm

OhHiii said: "And for a large theater housing a pop star's Broadway debut, the audience was *silent* during quiet moments (save for coughing). "

Even the reviews of people who liked it say they didn't understand at least half of it. And that "with one look" was the first beautiful moment. Aside from the lyrics that don't fit the situation but they can look past that. And that they did laugh about trashing the show and the breaking of the 4th wall, the real life actor's jokes and the mc hammer jokes. That's what I meant with "It's clearly all that modern audiences need nowadays". And that's fine. Personally I need more creativity.

[Seb28]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 4:33pm

sinister teashop said: "In Lloyd's case I felt it did illuminate the text around half of the time in a satisfying way. The rest felt like he was throwing tricks at the material and some of it stuck but othersjust collided and bounced off of it with a thud. But he keeps throwing stuff at it so quickly and relentlessly that it's hard to dwell on the thuds."

So it didn't do that in a satisfying way for half of the time. But the stream of tricks and jokes kept you entertained. I read this in more reviews that are positive. I wouldn't consider this as positive. 

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 5:13pm

"Let's get a look at you."

[BETTY22]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 5:30pm

I was there last night - despite all the comp tickets given to press, the place was ON FIRE.

Audience response after act 2 opening and her two big numbers was amazing. 

[Dancingthrulife2]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 5:55pm

One thing I find confusing about Scherzinger’s performance is that during With One Look she is doing too much extra body movements. In context, Norma is supposed to be able to do all she sings “with one look,” but with the set design and concept of this production, her choices are actively working against the material, which I found to be extremely distracting in the performance I attended.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 6:28pm

Dancingthrulife2 said: "One thing I find confusing about Scherzinger’s performance is that during With One Look she is doing too much extra body movements. In context, Norma is supposed to be able to do all she sings “with one look,” but with the set design and concept of this production, her choices are actively working against the material, which I found to be extremely distracting in the performance I attended."

I loved this show but started to get a little trepidatious early in the first act as I too thought some of her expressions and undulating movements seemed over the top.  Luckily, for me, it settled down.  As much as I love the show, I actually think it would be better if the first part of the show was judiciously ‘pulled back’.

Despite those reservations, I absolutely loved the opening number of Act 2, which was clearly and intentionally over the top.  

[Seb28]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 7:55pm

Dancingthrulife2 said: "her choices are actively working against the material, which I found to be extremely distracting in the performance"

I am convinced that the director has no idea about the lyrics. Not a clue.

 

[SeanD2]

Posted: 10/19/24 at 8:07pm

Saw it today and found myself thinking fondly of Daniel Fish’s Oklahoma throughout the production. Fish took risks but still honored the text. Jamie Lloyd only honored his ego 

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 5:52am

I haven’t read any of your comments but boy am I ready to do so.

 

I saw this last night. It’s clearly a major event. It’s must see theatre. And I do have positive things to say. The projections were absolutely remarkable. Next level. The vocals were sensational. And there’s some really fantastic stuff here.


But I really didn’t get this. I know the show like the back of my hand and I’ve avoided reading or watching anything. The number out on the street has been spoiled since London and of course I knew Nicole would blow me away vocally. But nothing could have prepared me for how irreverent, over the top, and downright bizarre some of the choices were.

 

I went into this expecting high drama, a deadly serious musical of operatic proportions. There were certainly moments of that, but they were paired with elements of high camp, Tik Tok style humor, and some truly perplexing choices. Nicole’s performance in act one left me utterly speechless. It felt like a Twitter joke. She literally threw in a “periodt!” at one point while deep mugging in an extreme close up. I never expected that in a million years.

 

The energy was extremely palpable, the night was a bit of a thrill, and I’m glad I bought my ticket when I did. But I am really scratching my head over this one.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 5:58am

I forgot to add that the theatre was extremely warm (I was sweating for most of the show). I’ve seen over five hundred Broadway shows and I’ve never seen such pandemonium at intermission. Getting to the bathroom was like trying to get on the last life boat on the Titanic. It’s a major safety issue and they have to figure it out ASAP.

 

Also, after the death scene it sounded like someone started having a panic attack in the audience. Loudly gasping for air and almost wailing before slowly calming down. Pretty freaky.

 

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 6:23am

Has anyone gone yet with premium seats that included access to the lounge? I'm wondering how the experience was, especially the restroom set up (do you have to wait in a line?) and do you have to climb stairs to get to the lounge. Also it's not clear if this is an old existing lounge or the New Ambassador Lounge ?

[mshalo18]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 10:40am

FANtomFollies said: "Has anyone gone yet with premium seats that included access to the lounge? I'm wondering how the experience was, especially the restroom set up (do you have to wait in a line?) and do you have to climb stairs to get to the lounge. Also it's not clear ifthis is an old existing lounge or the New Ambassador Lounge?"

Word of advice- while I didn’t purchase club access (too expensive)- I would imagine trying to access it during intermission would be a nightmare, just based on the lobby setup of the St. James. If you’re wanting it simply for bathroom access due to difficulty using stairs, just use the accessible bathroom on the orchestra level a little past the merch counter. 

[chernjam]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 10:44am

TotallyEffed said: "I haven’t read any of your comments but boy am I ready to do so.



I saw this last night. It’s clearly a major event. It’s must see theatre. And I do have positive things to say. The projections were absolutely remarkable. Next level. The vocals were sensational. And there’s some really fantastic stuff here.


But I really didn’t get this. I know the show like the back of my hand and I’ve avoided reading or watching anything. The number outon the street has been spoiled since London and of course I knew Nicole would blow me away vocally. But nothing could have prepared me for how irreverent, over the top, and downright bizarre some of the choices were.



I went into this expecting high drama, a deadly serious musical of operatic proportions. There were certainly moments of that, but they were paired with elements of high camp, Tik Tok style humor, and some truly perplexing choices. Nicole’s performance in act one left me utterly speechless. It felt like a Twitter joke. She literally threw in a “periodt!” at one point while deep mugging in an extreme close up. I never expected that in a million years.



The energy was extremely palpable, the night was a bit of a thrill, and I’m glad I bought my ticket when I did. But I am really scratching my head over this one."

 

Can I gently propose that - this is exactly what makes it great theatre.  That you felt something incredibly impactful (it was an event) that you were thrilled by so many things and you're still trying to make sense of it?  Too often, especially these days, theatre has been so dumbed down that they not only put the dots in front of you, connect them and say "SEE ITS A GIRAFFE ISN'T THIS WONDERFUL."  What makes this so exciting is something that is known and familiar is being executed so incredibly and leaving people wondering what exactly they just experienced. 

[JasonC3]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 11:23am

TotallyEffed said: "I forgot to add that the theatre was extremely warm (I was sweating for most of the show)."


I've seen several comments to this effect. Because once my body heats up it doesn't cool down for a long time, I contacted SeatGeek, explained I had seen several posts about the theater being very warm, and asked to refund my ticket.

Given the performance I am to attend is heavily sold, I figured it would be no big deal. They went to the production team (supposedly) who informed them Lloyd actually specified the theater be kept cooler than usual and denied my request.

Sure doesn't sound like that is the case.

[JasonC3]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 11:34am

On another note, I find this review from All that Chat poster "Sergius" to be an apt summary based on my experience seeing the show in London:

"Strike a pose. As it was in London, this SUNSET BOULEVARD is delirious. Jamie Lloyd can now add schlock jock to his already impressive list of talents. The show was never more than a wan camp spectacle, but now it’s a thrilling one even as it mostly makes no sense. But Lloyd isn’t trying to convince you that it does. The entire presentation is a broad wink and as such it’s great fun. The show has three, maybe four, worthwhile moments and Lloyd giddily makes (set less) set pieces of each of them. His SUNSET BOULEVARD (yes, it’s his now) skillfully teeters between a take on the material and a take down of it. Once, only movie stars mugged for a camera, now everyone does and Norma—isn’t that Norma there beside you?—is everywhere. SUNSET BOULEVARD, never a good show, is now—and forever?—an eminently lunatic one."

https://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat_new/d.php?id=2607062

[Seb28]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 11:46am

chernjam said: "Can I gently propose that - this is exactly what makes it great theatre."

Can I gently propose that - that differs per person? Tik tok jokes and trashing the material is not for everyone. Everyone is different, there's people with respect and people who enjoy kicking at things. My opinion is that when there are certain beautiful and sincere moments, the director is basically doubting himself if he thinks that we need this 4th wall breaking, tik tok jokes, cardboard cut-outs, references to the actor's real lives, twerking and Mc Hammer references and cheap jokes. Even people who accept it, or even like this do not understand it. That doesn't make it great theatre for everyone.

 

 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 12:00pm

FWIW, I've seen this twice now. The theatre was at a perfectly comfortable temperature both times (at least if felt fine to me).

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 10/20/24 at 12:38pm

bwayphreak234 said: "FWIW, I've seen this twice now. The theatre was at a perfectly comfortable temperature both times (at least if felt fine to me)."

I haven't seen it yet, but I wonder if the seating section makes a difference? I would assume the upper levels may naturally be warmer than the orchestra section?