Sunset Boulevard Revival Broadway Thread- Page 29

[chernjam]

Posted: 3/12/17 at 4:00pm

Lot666 said: "
March 8 Performance: ****

March 9 Performance: *****

 

"

Lot - was well worth the wait to read your reviews!  And its a reminder of the great/challenging thing of live theatre... the hits/misses/ flubs/etc.  Your descriptions of what happened on Wednesday night was the reason I opted for Feb 4 (third preview) figuring everyone would be in top form still at that point.  But I'm glad you were able to experience Glenn on top form on Thursday night. 

I agree with most of your observations too - in terms of the improvements you notice live as opposed to the American Premiere Recording.  The entire focus of the Trevor Nunn production almost looked at Sunset and Norma as iconic... like they wanted to replicate the film on a live stage with a new score/etc.  But it really kept the characters emotionally distant.  Yes Close in 1994 was amazing to watch.  But I didn't really feel anything for this deluded old lady who seemed cold, arrogant and clueless.  Nor for Joe who seemed to get what was coming to him.

In this production, she is a fragile being - made fragile by giving her life to this fantasy and having that fantasy world turn on her - truths she's nowhere near ready to face or admit to herself.  Hence Max's "nurturing" the fantasy becomes understandable even while being contemptible.  He's an enabler.  Xavier's Joe I felt the desperation of his situation, and the whole how he became a "kept" man seemed more like incremental mis-steps, bad choices that came to a cross road on New Years Eve.  Norma didn't seem as calculating in this production as in the original.  You really felt she had attempted suicide - while in the original production I felt it was just an act she was pulling on Joe.  And his decision to stay with her - and his realization in Act II with "Sunset Boulevard" - all seemed to work so much more.  

 

I'm so looking forward to going back soon.  Had hoped to make it in this past Wednesday, but I'm picky about the seats and how much I want to pay for them... So I'm going to have to keep hunting :)

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/12/17 at 6:31pm

Updated On: 3/12/17 at 06:31 PM

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/12/17 at 6:35pm

chernjam said: "Lot - was well worth the wait to read your reviews!  And its a reminder of the great/challenging thing of live theatre... the hits/misses/ flubs/etc.  Your descriptions of what happened on Wednesday night was the reason I opted for Feb 4 (third preview) figuring everyone would be in top form still at that point.  But I'm glad you were able to experience Glenn on top form on Thursday night."

The experience of each evening could hardly have been more disparate. I, too, am quite happy that I decided to see the show more than once, as it would've been regrettable to have Wednesday as my only experience. (This is a lesson I learned with Love Never Dies in London; if you like a show, go, and go again, while you still have a chance.)

chernjam said: "In this production, she is a fragile being - made fragile by giving her life to this fantasy and having that fantasy world turn on her - truths she's nowhere near ready to face or admit to herself."

This is very true. On the L.A. recording, Norma comes across as more arrogant and domineering. While there are still traces of that in the revival, the character is infinitely more sympathetic in this production.

chernjam said: Hence Max's "nurturing" the fantasy becomes understandable even while being contemptible.  He's an enabler.

He is certainly an enabler, but his motivation makes him a sympathetic character as well, in my eyes. As played by Mr. Johanson, the depth of Max's feeling for Norma is more apparent than what I was able to divine from the L.A. cast recording and his actions come from a more compassionate place. 

chernjam said: I'm so looking forward to going back soon.  Had hoped to make it in this past Wednesday, but I'm picky about the seats and how much I want to pay for them... So I'm going to have to keep hunting :)"

We would've been at the same show!

I bought the t-shirt on Wednesday night and then bought the mug and poster when I went back on Thursday (I planned to stage door the first night and was concerned about crowd damage to the poster at the barricade). I wish they would have recorded the Thursday night performance, as it would've been a near-perfect show to go on permanent record.

I'll be back in NY for the April 29 show with my husband, who has never seen any production of Sunset Boulevard, or even listened to the complete recording. I'm hoping that Ms. Close's performance doesn't begin to suffer over time, as I really want him to have the experience I had on Thursday.

Updated On: 3/13/17 at 06:35 PM

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/12/17 at 6:46pm

I want to mention that I went and watched Betty sing With One Look on one of the you tube vids. I heard the vibrato and I realized that I heard it all along, but didn't think anything of it. I like it - it lets me hear her vocal chords at work. Without it, when the notes are just plain, they aren't as interesting to me.

btw - has anyone tried to go back to the theater at an off hour to purchase some merch?

Updated On: 3/12/17 at 06:46 PM

[Babe_Williams]

Posted: 3/12/17 at 7:45pm

muscle23ftl said: "Jane2 said: "Muscle said "don't agree...the score is not just "OK" I think "glorious" or "heavenly" work better for me :)"

Totally agree. This was one of the best scores I ever heard. Rarely do I love a score on first hearing.

 

I love that that happened to you. I actually didn't really like the score when I saw it on Broadway in 1995 with Buckley. To begin with, I dislike her voice. I remember Alan Campbell was amazing in it, but then between Buckley and Ripley, they kinda ruined the show for me. But I also didn't really care for the score. I remember I knew "With One Look" and "As If We Never Said Goodbye" because I had Barbra's "Back To Broadway" recording, and I remember a British singer called Dinah Carroll used to sing "The Perfect Year" and made it to the Eurochart with that song and I knew the melody. But then it took me many listens to get into the score...and of course when I saw this revival I knew every line, even the spoken ones...haha. But it makes it even more enjoyable. 

 

 

"

Laughing because that Barbra Back to Broadway CD was my first intro to Sunset too. 

[chernjam]

Posted: 3/12/17 at 10:23pm

Did they have the souvenier booklets out yet?

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 3/13/17 at 12:14am

That Barbra Broadway CD was my introduction to Sunset, Into The Woods, West Side Story, Phantom, and basically every single show she sings from, haha.

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/13/17 at 9:57am

chernjam said: "Did they have the souvenier booklets out yet?"

Still none, as of Thursday evening. As I was paying for my purchases, a woman next to me at the counter asked about programs and the employee told her that she could pre-order online, but they have no date for when the programs will arrive.

Updated On: 3/13/17 at 09:57 AM

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/13/17 at 10:07am

Jane2 said: "...has anyone tried to go back to the theater at an off hour to purchase some merch?"

I can't speak for the Palace because I was able to see the show twice, which provided sufficient opportunity to get everything I wanted. However, I also saw the Thursday matinee of Sunday In the Park while I was up there and I bought a t-shirt during the interval. I checked the manufacturer in the collar tag and, because it was made by a company that I had another shirt from, I bought an XL with the assumption that the fit would be similar. When I got back to my hotel later that afternoon, I (fortunately) tried it on and discovered that it was much too big. I tried calling the Hudson box office and got a recording, I tweeted them and got no response, and I finally decided to (literally) run back to the Hudson in the hope that someone would be there. Fortunately, a very nice security guard was outside and I explained my situation to him. He informed me that no one from the merchandise team was in at the time. It was currently 6:45 p.m. and I had a 7:00 p.m. curtain at Sunset Boulevard, so all I could do was wait and hope that someone got there in time for me to make it back up to the Palace. When he saw that I was going to wait, he invited me to come in out of the cold and actually went into the house and managed to find someone with a key to the merchandise cabinet. I was able to swap my XL for an L, I thanked the security guard profusely, and then got up to the Palace in plenty of time.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/13/17 at 10:43am

thanks Lot. When I worked at New World, that was basically our routine - let someone in as long as there was staff at the merch booth.

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/13/17 at 6:13pm

I just realized that I neglected to address a few production/design aspects in my earlier post.

In the original production, wasn't the car chase sequence done with projections? If so, why not use the same approach here? I thought the people-holding-lamps idea was cute, if not 100% effective, and have to wonder if projections would've done a better job.

I like the inclusion of dead-Joe-in-the-pool for the opening. Again, I suspect that the original effect was probably far superior, but if that was too extravagant to reproduce here, then I'm glad they went with the under-lit mannequin on wires rather than abandoning all suggestion of the pool. I do agree, however, with many who thought it odd that the body goes up to the ceiling and just hangs there for the rest of the show (true story: the woman seated next to me on Thursday evening asked at the interval if that was a real man they had suspended up there). Of course, it's done this way because there is literally no where else for the body to go because it hangs in front of the proscenium (whereas if it came from behind the proscenium it could be raised up into the flys).

I thought this could've been solved rather simply by immediately turning off the lights on the body when Joe says "...you've come to the right party" and snaps his fingers to turn on the spotlight over the upright bass player positioned up in his "bedroom" area. The audience's attention at that point is effectively draw over to stage left and the body could be quickly dropped back down into the "pool" in the dark. I think this would also make the end work better as well, because the current design where the body just floats down from the sky looks quite odd, especially with the photographers snapping pictures of the "pool" surface when the body hasn't even gotten there yet. If the body was kept down in the pit after the opening, the stage could go to black immediately after Joe falls into the pool, the body could quickly be raised to visible level in the darkness, and then the "watery" blue under-lighting could be faded up so that the floating body is briefly the only thing visible until finally turning the spotlights on the reporters/photographers.

When Max plays the organ, why not put something - anything! - in front of him? Would it really have been so difficult and/or expensive to shove a fake keyboard there for that scene?

The "Ghost Norma" idea was hit-and-miss for me, but I think the concept failed more often than it succeeded (am I correct that this character was not in the original production?). The only time it sort of worked was briefly during the New Year's Eve waltz, when Joe switched from "Ghost Norma" to real Norma in slow motion. Otherwise, it was an unnecessary distraction.

I very much liked the "rewind" sequence when Betty is en route to the mansion and Joe sits alone on the sofa, staring straight ahead while various vignettes depict nightmarish takes on earlier events in the story. Is this new for the revival?

Updated On: 3/13/17 at 06:13 PM

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 3/13/17 at 6:30pm

Lot666 said: "I very much liked the "rewind" sequence when Betty is en route to the mansion and Joe sits alone on the sofa, staring straight ahead while various vignettes depict nightmarish takes on earlier events in the story."

Agreed—I thought this was one of this production's most successful moments.

[chernjam]

Posted: 3/13/17 at 8:07pm

Lot666 said: "I just realized that I neglected to address a few production/design aspects in my earlier post.

In the original production, wasn't the car chase sequence done with projections? If so, why not use the same approach here? I thought the people-holding-lamps idea was cute, if not 100% effective, and have to wonder if projections would've done a better job.

In the original it was an incredibly sophisticated thing of projections, windows opening with the actors in it and moving.  It was very clever and unique but honestly, I wouldn't have cared had they just done a film sequence of it.  In any event, I think they're always sensitive to the criticism "why make the movie a staged musical" - and simply doing the projections would've brought that criticism to life again.  So I liked this approach... definitely a lot better than what I was prepared for reading some posts before hand.

I like the inclusion of dead-Joe-in-the-pool for the opening. Again, I suspect that the original effect was probably far superior, but if that was too extravagant to reproduce here, then I'm glad they went with the under-lit mannequin on wires rather than abandoning all suggestion of the pool. I do agree, however, with many who thought it odd that the body goes up to the ceiling and just hangs there for the rest of the show (true story: the woman seated next to me on Thursday evening asked at the interval if that was a real man they had suspended up there). Of course, it's done this way because there is literally no where else for the body to go because it hangs in front of the proscenium (whereas if it came from behind the proscenium it could be raised up into the flys).

I thought this could've been solved rather simply by immediately turning off the lights on the body when Joe says "...you've come to the right party" and snaps his fingers to turn on the spotlight over the upright bass player positioned up in his "bedroom" area. The audience's attention at that point is effectively draw over to stage left and the body could be quickly dropped back down into the "pool" in the dark. I think this would also make the end work better as well, because the current design where the body just floats down from the sky looks quite odd, especially with the photographers snapping pictures of the "pool" surface when the body hasn't even gotten there yet. If the body was kept down in the pit after the opening, the stage could go to black immediately after Joe falls into the pool, the body could quickly be raised to visible level in the darkness, and then the "watery" blue under-lighting could be faded up so that the floating body is briefly the only thing visible until finally turning the spotlights on the reporters/photographers.
 

I have to look back - last year in London they had a post-show Q & A with Lonnie Price where he answered questions and this was one of them.  I believe there was something about wanting that presence there throughout the show.


When Max plays the organ, why not put something - anything! - in front of him? Would it really have been so difficult and/or expensive to shove a fake keyboard there for that scene?

Agreed... They put a car on stage, I doubt a keyboard would've been difficult to do... 
The "Ghost Norma" idea was hit-and-miss for me, but I think the concept failed more often than it succeeded (am I correct that this character was not in the original production?). The only time it sort of worked was briefly during the New Year's Eve waltz, when Joe switched from "Ghost Norma" to real Norma in slow motion. Otherwise, it was an unnecessary distraction.
 

I honestly loved this addition.  Particularly during "The Perfect Year" which made the song that much more heartbreaking to me as you see Norma completely lost in her delusions there.  


I very much liked the "rewind" sequence when Betty is en route to the mansion and Joe sits alone on the sofa, staring straight ahead while various vignettes depict nightmarish takes on earlier events in the story. Is this new for the revival?

In the original production, a scrim came down, they had a projection of rain, and a car driving to the house simulating Betty coming to the house.  I can't remember for sure, but I believe in the 2nd US Tour, this was one of the additions they had made - which makes it a much more effective moment.  But yes, it makes the ending much more dramatic and climactic as you see the whole thing blowing up and Joe starting to realize it.

This all underlines to me a belief I always had about the original Sunset - and that is Trevor Nunn.  So many of the scenes were just missed opportunities or had people all standing around watching someone sing - rather than actually acting.  I think that's why Glenn was such a massive improvement from Patti - she is simply a phenomenal actress who knew how to act the role - not simply sing it in beautiful costumes on a spectacular set.  I also think that's why with each Norma (betty, elaine, rita moreno, petula clark) you kept gettin very different feelings and experiences of the show - because there was so little direction/focus - the Norma's all had a lot more free-reign to kind of play it however they wanted - which while great for the actresses, kind of shows how little Nunn brought to the original, especially compared to what Lonny has done here.

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 8:37am

chernjam said: "... I think they're always sensitive to the criticism "why make the movie a staged musical" - and simply doing the projections would've brought that criticism to life again."

You're right, the critics would likely have used such a cinematic nod against them.

chernjam said: "I have to look back - last year in London they had a post-show Q & A with Lonnie Price where he answered questions and this was one of them.  I believe there was something about wanting that presence there throughout the show."

If you can locate it, I'd like to see this interview!

chernjam said: "They put a car on stage, I doubt a keyboard would've been difficult to do... "

The absence of such a prop in the mansion scenes also makes Joe's comment about "the wind wheezing through that organ" an inexplicable reference to anyone who hasn't seen a previous production.

chernjam said: "In the original production, a scrim came down, they had a projection of rain, and a car driving to the house simulating Betty coming to the house.  I can't remember for sure, but I believe in the 2nd US Tour, this was one of the additions they had made - which makes it a much more effective moment.  But yes, it makes the ending much more dramatic and climactic as you see the whole thing blowing up and Joe starting to realize it.

For me, this is one of the few latter-day changes to the production that improved it (overall, I would still love to see the original design). I remember seeing footage of this sequence in the online trailer they released shortly after the previews started (it shows the script pages thrown by DeMille falling all around Joe on the sofa) and assuming it was something they'd compiled as a composite of sorts for advertising purposes. Consequently, it took me by surprise the first time I saw the show and it immediately made perfect sense to me. It's a very effective way to depict Joe's "OMG, what have I done?" moment.

[dianamorales]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 1:26pm

I saw it on the 10th. I loved it, but if it weren't for Glenn, it would have felt like a very good college production. Michael Xavier is really good, but his accent was very brit-trying-to-sound-American, which became distracting. The ensemble (with the exception of Katie Ladner) didn't do much for me, even though I liked This Time Next Year. Glenn really is a legend. I never knew too much about her- I knew who she was, but I don't think I've ever seen her in anything but 101 Dalmatians. She gave the best performance I had ever seen, on or off stage. I hate to be cliche, but the telephone scene and on was truly a masterclass in acting. Her voice was better than expected too. She came out and bowed 5 times- is that normal or did I just catch a great show?

What really won me over was the visuals. When the curtain dropped at the end of act 1 I audibly gasped. I also loved the black and white Norma floating around the stage, and of course the costumes were fabulous. Michael Xavier's entrance in act 2 was wonderful. However, the orchestra taking up at least half the stage bothered me. Also, I couldn't see the projections on the scrim from my seat (6th row right mezz). Overall a great great show!

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 1:33pm

When you talk about the "phone" scene, do you mean when Glenn calls Betty? 

I think unfortunately the 3 leads are trying to sound American and that can be a bit distracting, but the show is so powerful that I forget about that. I think Fred does a good job, but talks very slowly and controlled (maybe because he is faking an accent), Siobhan Dillon does a good job, but her line delivery suffers a bit too. But then again Alice Ripley was even worse than her and she is American.

[chernjam]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 1:45pm

dianamorales said: "I saw it on the 10th. I loved it, but if it weren't for Glenn, it would have felt like a very good college production. Michael Xavier is really good, but his accent was very brit-trying-to-sound-American, which became distracting. The ensemble (with the exception of Katie Ladner) didn't do much for me, even though I liked This Time Next Year. Glenn really is a legend. I never knew too much about her- I knew who she was, but I don't think I've ever seen her in anything but 101 Dalmatians. She gave the best performance I had ever seen, on or off stage. I hate to be cliche, but the telephone scene and on was truly a masterclass in acting. Her voice was better than expected too. She came out and bowed 5 times- is that normal or did I just catch a great show?

What really won me over was the visuals. When the curtain dropped at the end of act 1 I audibly gasped. I also loved the black and white Norma floating around the stage, and of course the costumes were fabulous. Michael Xavier's entrance in act 2 was wonderful. However, the orchestra taking up at least half the stage bothered me. Also, I couldn't see the projections on the scrim from my seat (6th row right mezz). Overall a great great show!

"

Glad you enjoyed it diana... In terms of the casts - at least the 4 leads - this, for me, was the strongest 4 I've seen live.  I liked Xavier much more than I expected after hearing all the early reports; Siobhan I thought was great and Fred's Max is very convincing.. . and Glenn is in a class of her own.  While I've seen great casts before - this 4 seems the most in-sync/consistent to me (i.e. like Muscle is saying I never liked Alice Ripley; Alan Campbell didn't really seem convincing to me - while George Hearn and Glenn were fantastic in the original)

 

[Babe_Williams]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 2:05pm

dianamorales said: " I never knew too much about her- I knew who she was, but I don't think I've ever seen her in anything but 101 Dalmatians. 
 

"

 

I just aged about 20 years reading this.

lol

[chernjam]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 2:26pm

Babe_Williams said: "dianamorales said: " I never knew too much about her- I knew who she was, but I don't think I've ever seen her in anything but 101 Dalmatians. 
 
"
I just aged about 20 years reading this.
lol

"

Hahahaha - I thought the same thing.  I wonder if I'm one of the few ones who first saw Glenn in "The World According to Garp" in theaters (which was highly inappropriate for me as I was a kid who's mom mistakenly thought it was a funny film because Robin Williams was in it :) - we still laugh at that)

[dianamorales]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 3:01pm

chernjam said: "Babe_Williams said: "dianamorales said: " I never knew too much about her- I knew who she was, but I don't think I've ever seen her in anything but 101 Dalmatians. 
 
"
I just aged about 20 years reading this.
lol

"

Hahahaha - I thought the same thing.  I wonder if I'm one of the few ones who first saw Glenn in "The World According to Garp" in theaters (which was highly inappropriate for me as I was a kid who's mom mistakenly thought it was a funny film because Robin Williams was in it :) - we still laugh at that)

 

"Admittedly, I should watch more movies!!

 

[Jshan05]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 3:09pm

Whoops-posted in the wrong thread. My bad, guys!

Updated On: 3/14/17 at 03:09 PM

[chernjam]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 7:58pm

RE: The visible, dead Joe Gillis - one theatregoer from London who went to the Director Q & A said:  
Isn't it a reminder that the story is being narrated to us by a dead man? Not that he dies at the end and this is all some kind of flashback, but that the dead man is actually telling us the story. Does the body descend just after he's shot? I guess that means from that point on he's no longer narrating and we're on our own to watch the final scene.

 

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 3/14/17 at 9:53pm

I think everyone should watch Dangerous Liaisons with Glenn Close, John Malkovich,  Michelle Pfeiffer, Uma Thurman, Keanu Reeves, Swoozie Kurtz and other big stars. It was amazing. Also of course Fatal Attraction was her biggest hit. And Evening and The House of Spirits with Glenn and Meryl Streep.

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/15/17 at 8:35am

chernjam said: "...Alan Campbell didn't really seem convincing to me - while George Hearn and Glenn were fantastic in the original)"

I can only judge based on the cast recording, but tor the most part I liked the way Mr. Campbell sang the role; I just thought he acted it like an old Hollywood gangster. The way he spoke lines like "...feeding her LIES, more LIES!" sounded overblown, like he was doing a parody.

I absolutely loved Mr. Hearn's performance of "The Greatest Star of All". The way he sang:

There was a Maharajah
who hanged himself with one of her discarded stockings
She's immortal, caught inside that flickering light beam
Is a youth which cannot fade

...gave me goosebumps. The "flickering light beam" line is, to me, one of the best lyrics in the show.

Updated On: 3/15/17 at 08:35 AM

[Lot666]

Posted: 3/15/17 at 8:38am

chernjam said: "RE: The visible, dead Joe Gillis - one theatregoer from London who went to the Director Q & A said:  
Isn't it a reminder that the story is being narrated to us by a dead man? Not that he dies at the end and this is all some kind of flashback, but that the dead man is actually telling us the story. Does the body descend just after he's shot? I guess that means from that point on he's no longer narrating and we're on our own to watch the final scene."

I don't know, I still think my staging of the body-in-the-pool would be more effective.