South Pacific leads worth a revisit?- Page 2
South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
#25South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
Posted: 2/8/10 at 7:49am
I just don't get how one can sit through Olivo's act 2 and claim she shows no emotion. I've seen her performance from previews until recently. And she keeps getting better and better. She is in tears throughout the the A Boy Like That/I Have a Love scene, and we all know her much talked about "rape" scene. Thankfully the critics (including Brantley and Isherwood) and Tony voters agreed with me. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion, that is the beauty of theater. In my opinion, Hadyn Gwynne gave one of the most lifeless Tony nominated performances I've ever seen. Talk about walking through a performance!
Updated On: 2/8/10 at 07:49 AM
whitesnow
Swing Joined: 12/20/09
#26South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
Posted: 2/8/10 at 8:50am
Steven,
It's a nay....
you should wait untill april.
#27South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
Posted: 2/8/10 at 11:47am
ljay, I know many people who share the same opinion about Olivo, including my entire family who saw the show with me and close friends who saw her at different points throughout the run. Again, opinions, everyone has them.
My problem is that sure, she has the tears, she does the large gestures, but where is it coming from? I think it's a completely inconsistent performance with far too modern characterization. I thought she was still in Washington Heights singing about the lottery! And I found her too mean. Where's the heart? How do we fall in love with you if all you show is a gruff exterior? If you don't see even a glimmer of that, the audience, myself included, will not care, even if Anita is our favorite character ever.
~Steven
#28South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
Posted: 2/8/10 at 12:00pmAnita isn't supposed to be overly nice in act 1. She should have an edge to her, and with Karen it works because it makes the destruction of her character in act 2 more heartbreaking. I don't understand how she was too modern. I thought the point of this revival was to make it more modern, hench adding the Spanish.
"It's about the Benjamins, not the Bernsteins."-CapnHook
#29South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
Posted: 2/8/10 at 12:26pmSteven, yay from me. I say check him out because he's totally worth it.
"All our dreams can come true -- if we have the courage to pursue them." -- Walt Disney
We must have different Gods. My God said "do to others what you would have them do to you". Your God seems to have said "My Way or the Highway".
#30South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
Posted: 2/8/10 at 1:29pm
Olivo in In the Heights > Olivo in West Side Story
The only emotional performance in West Side Story belonged to Josefina Scaglione's beautiful Maria. Everyone else was either horrendous or laughable, including Karen Olivo. She didn't bewitch me one bit. Anita is my favorite role in musical theatre. Disappointing. That Tony belongs to Haydn Gwynne, who was brilliant in Billy Elliot.
Now, see, I liked Olivo just fine in Heights, but was blown away by her in WSS. In Heights, she was playing an underwritten role that gave her little to do but sing (which she did quite well, of course). WSS gave her a meaty role and a chance to show off her acting skills. I thought the arc she gave to Anita was spectacular, and as was mentioned, her scenes in act 2 are riveting.
Gwynne, on the other hand, bored the heck out of me. Nothing to do in act 2, and not even all that good in act 1. Her big song is a ripoff of a number in Chicago. Her understudy, Jayne Patterson, gave a better performance, in my opinion.
If they weren't going to give Olivo the Tony, it should have gone to Jennifer Damiano.
Updated On: 2/8/10 at 01:29 PM
#31South Pacific leads worth a revisit?
Posted: 2/8/10 at 4:54pm
I mean, clearly I'm in the minority since, well, Karen actually won the Tony, haha. But I know I'm not the only one who thinks she wasn't all that brilliant. I wanted to get blown away. I thought Josefina and the orchestra were far better than anything else in that show. Don't worry, I blame Laurents for everything wrong about it. :)
Alightinthedark, I know Anita isn't a bubbly character, but we're supposed to at least care about her. I thought Karen didn't give me anything to like about her, so when I saw her devastated in the second act, it came out of nowhere and I in turn didn't really care. I saw no love for Bernardo, I saw no passion in "America," no sisterly bond with Maria; she just seemed overly mean to me, almost antagonistic to everyone in the show. Now that's not one of Anita's traits.
While I understand trying to make the show more accessible to people now, the story is still set in the 1950s. The direction didn't take the show out of its era. I felt Karen gave a little too much head-shaking "O no he didn't" attitude that I don't think is appropriate for the time period. A little too much In the Heights. Now, if everyone acted modern-day, I'd understand, but she was the only one to appear like that and it threw me out of it whenever she said a sassy one-liner.
Come on, I know I'm not the only one to think any of this. It appears the ones who think along the same lines as I do are not members of BWW. :)
But above all, I blame Laurents for ruining his own classic.
~Steven
Videos