She's Back! CARRIE - First preview !!! - Page 38

[anothervodkastinger2]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 11:42am

Just filled out my survey from MCC on what I thought they could do to fix Carrie the Musical. Thought I'd post it here as well.

first i'd like to say I am a huge fan of the material (book, movie, original broadway production) and have been looking forward to this since it was announced. Sadly I don't think the creators feel the same way about Carrie. From what I saw they are afraid to tell the story of Carrie. In fact it hardly felt like she was in act one. I understand wanting to shy away from the "camp" which was the OBC but come on! This is camp! This is Stephen King (or had you forgotten). Stephen King is definitively not afraid to make you uncomfortable, uneasy, scared, or to make you laugh. Why are the creators so afraid to take the steps towards making this story work? it hardly feels like there is any mention of Carries powers. The opening shower scene is breezed over so quickly I almost forgot it happened. Margret White comes across as a nice laundry lady in your production which is yet another huge strike. Carrie is the living, breathing, walking embodiment of her sin. She may want to love her daughter, but she just can't. Instead you have this muddled weird relationship that makes no sense. Isn't Carrie supposed to be bullied at school and bullied at home so you get the sense that this poor girl never gets a break?? Instead this production has the most tepid bunch of kids trying so hard to be "bullies" but all the succeed in doing is pulling focus (and I mean pulling focus BAD in every single scene). Get rid of that dreadful "world according to chris" song, its the worst thing I've ever seen. And to be honest the actress play Chris did nothing to convince me she was the kind of person who would do something like that. None of the chorus did, but boy are they trying hard. The only person involved with this show who seems to understand Carrie is (thank God) Molly Ranson who is playing Carrie. I can't read another interview by that "director" where he is telling me he wanted to tell a story about an outsider. THEN WRITE A STORY ABOUT AN OUTSIDER!!! This is the ultimate story of revenge but he doesn't seem to have a clue cause the stakes are never high enough for anyone to believe the eventual outcome. I am coming back to see it again after opening and I really hope this production can get it together. but what i saw was the same creators making all the same mistakes they made the first time around. Changing some songs wasn't the answer, taking out the camp wasn't the answer, grow a set and tell the story of Carrie White and you'll have a great solid piece of theater

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 11:59am

After eight, I'm on the same page as you re what's acceptable or the norm in today's fashion at "formal" occasions.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 12:28pm

Ryan Landry produced an underground, non-musical show called "sCarrie" in Boston and Provincetown a few years back. Of course, it was campy like all of his troupe's shows, but it also had scares and dramatic moments.

Think of what somebody like a Charles Ludlam could do. Have you laughing one minute, then turn on a dime and devastate you. I think that is how Carrie could work on stage. Don't spend a lot of time fighting what it is in order to make it what you want it to be, so people will like it for the "right" reasons. I think the destruction can be done, not necessarily with firehouses and all that, but with creativity. Luckily, proms have a perfectly good reason to feature music in the background.

Margaret Cho played one of the mean girls in a few performances in Boston and Provincetown.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 12:35pm

Namo, I'm definitely guilty of wanting Carrie to be the way it was written or the way it is in the film. It worked for me then, so I want it to work on stage. For me, the special film effects created the scare, and so I figure it can't be done on stage, but I'm open to seeing something horrendous and scary on stage if it can be done.

btw-big Ludlam fan-saw every production at the Ridiculous Theater. Even auditioned for Quentin one time. lol.

[MSmith2]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 12:41pm

I did the survey too. It was not about fixing Carrie it was about what you thought about Carrie. Those are two very different things. Besides all the work on the show is clearly done if critics are coming now, which Riedel said yesterday.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 12:54pm

Namo - Charles Busch as Margaret White? (though he would have to have a bit of glam of course) lol

'I can't read another interview by that "director" where he is telling me he wanted to tell a story about an outsider. THEN WRITE A STORY ABOUT AN OUTSIDER!!!'

The book was about a girl who was an outsider as well as the revenge plot

[binau]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 8:18pm

Either Mazzie has toned down the way she performs "Eve Was Weak" or she was holding back on Friday because she is sick (I assume this is more likely considering all the performances she has missed) but this wont be good for critics....

Updated On: 2/25/12 at 08:18 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 2/25/12 at 9:27pm

yeah, EVE WAS WEAK had some head voice last night. Usually there's not a single trace of her head voice in that number.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 2/26/12 at 11:14am

I saw the show last night and really was surprised at how much I really, really enjoyed it. It definitely teeters a fine line between camp and drama at times, but this is mostly in the first act during scenes that its totally acceptable for. While I do agree Margaret should be played a little more abusive, that's really the only major thing I had an issue with in this production. It's not a perfect show by ANY means, but this is a pretty fantastic staging of it, all in all. Molly Ranson is BREATHTAKING. Probably the best female performance I've seen on a stage this year so far (and that includes Audra in PORGY). She's really incredible. Mazzie sounded sick, especially during "And Eve Was Weak," but she absolutely killed it during "When There's No One." Stunning and got a well-deserved extended applause from the audience.

I really can't wait to see this production again. I had a great time.

[TheColorOfFlame]

Posted: 2/26/12 at 1:27pm

@anothervodkastinger - great work. I completely agree. Really enjoyed that.

[defyingravity11]

Posted: 2/27/12 at 9:16pm

Apparently the blood drop projection did not work during the performance that Ben Brantley attended yesterday

[ljay889]

Posted: 2/27/12 at 9:20pm

^ If true, that's disastrous.

[Famebroadway2]

Posted: 2/27/12 at 10:58pm

HAHA really? Thats what they get for trying to use an imitation thats ridiculous.

[binau]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 12:27am

hope Marin was feeling better that performance...sick marin+failed projections probably don't make for a good review for Brantley considering he apparently isn't a big fan (see: "I hate ben").

Updated On: 2/28/12 at 12:27 AM

[whatacharacter]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 9:31am

So is the show frozen now, or are they still rehearsing and changing things?

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 9:58am

I think CARRIE getting a great review from Brantley was always going to be a long shot proposition; I sincerely doubt some kind of potential rave would have been thwarted completely by a projection mishap....

[MSmith2]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 10:32am

Fame... didn't you recently say: "You guys, COME ON! Why do these threads always have to turn so nasty? Don't we all love theater?"

Saying "HAHA that's what they get" or that they deserve to have a technical glitch when a major critic is in the house is one of the nastiest things I've seen on this thread with it's small but vocal group of gleefully nasty posters (including some who haven't even seen the show yet!). Based on the things I've been reading here, I'm not so sure that "we all" love theater. They may have made choices we don't agree with, but don't they deserve to have those choices they did make -- for better or worse -- seen by the critics when they come to the show? Whether it's to your liking or not, these people obviously worked their asses off and should have thier collective vision be the thing that critics review. Gimme a break!

[whatacharacter]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 10:40am

I just hope Mazzie is back in good voice!

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 11:23am

MSmith, the phrase is "we all love theater," not "we love all theater".

[AmeliaV82]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 11:41am

Does anyone have any more details about the alleged projector malfunction? Someone on ATC wrote a fairly long account of the production, stating he was at the same performance that Brantley was at, and didn’t mention anything about a malfunction during the blood ‘drop’. Can anyone shed any more light on it?

[MSmith2]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 12:00pm

Namo: Too funny. But still, gleefully malicious posting and vindictive wishes against something, even something we don't love, feels mercilessly destructive and antithetical to the idea of loving the form of the theater, and certainly contrary to the spirit.

[newintown]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 12:51pm

MSmith, newbs who try to fundamentally alter the nature of the discourse here are sometimes forced to listen to Alice Ripley sing "Meadowlark" over and over and over, à la A Clockwork Orange.

Just a warning.

[THDavis]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 1:06pm

I know this has passed already, but getting back to the whole "Why do people try to 'understand' or humanize people who do bad things arguement." I have to say that any actor who DOESN'T humanize monsters isn't much of an actor at all. We have to search for the underbelly of every beast to understand them.

[newintown]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 1:20pm

I think I know where you're coming from, Davis, but I have to say that sounds like standard simplified Acting 100 propaganda.

Sometimes the interesting part of a monster is their monstrosity, not their "humanity."

[MSmith2]

Posted: 2/28/12 at 1:46pm

New: I'm cofident in my ability to survive it.