Susan Egan seems a bit old to play Millie. Dontcha think?

[thebigkrakowski]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:04pm

[catcher]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:09pm

I thought the same thing. Did they look at her face and see her wrinkles? Fresh-faces kids don't have that many lines!

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:15pm

If her voice sounds younger, than the casting directors don't care! That's why they have make up. I personally think Darcie should go to Broadway and play Millie someday.

[rlbgbc]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:20pm

I was campaigning for Britney, Christina, or Pink.

[Craig]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:23pm

that picture does nothing to flatter her.. In person she looks quite young. Not Sutton-young.. but on stage, Susan will look just great as Millie.... not to mention, she will sing the S@#$% out of it..

[robyn525600]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:27pm

She looks young from the stage. Besides, make-up can do miracles! : )

[DavidMegg]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:36pm

I agree that the picture on that site is horrible...
Here's one that hopefully will change people's minds.

[thebigkrakowski]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:54pm

That's sooooo airbrushed. C'mon!

[DavidMegg]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 3:56pm

agreed. But from stage, what's the difference?!

[Elphie]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 4:00pm

Susan Egan has a youthful voice and make up can do a lot. I think she is very pretty and talented and will be a great Millie. Any Millie who is directly replacing Sutton is going to get a lot of mixed reviews. I met Susan Egan after I saw Beauty and the Beast during the previews- probably about 10 years ago. She was very sweet and had so much energy even to her fans. May be I will see Susan in it.

[Madame X]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 4:10pm

That's what makeup is for! Although I did think the same thing...

[robyn525600]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 4:14pm

I just saw her as Sally Bowles in CABARET and she is BRILLIANT - I'm sure she will be a great Millie.

[Craig]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 4:17pm

I'll also add that I think Susan's acting will be great for the role - she has a great gift at delivering sarcasm and dry wit, which many of Millie's jokes are in tone...

[BrdwyThtr]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 4:33pm

Susan will be great! I wish her all the luck.

[robbiej]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 4:49pm

'Any Millie who is directly replacing Sutton is going to get a lot of mixed reviews.'

Really? First of all, although I think a lot of the critics thought Sutton was hard-working, I don't remember them being out-and-out raves (perhaps some). Secondly, I can't imagine that the major critics are going to come back to see MILLIE with Susan Egan as the replacement. She's not a big enough name and the show isn't regarded highly enough for that to happen.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

[Craig]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 4:57pm

I wouldn't be surprised to see it reviewed again. Susan got great reviews in Cabaret when she was in it the first time and Millie hasn't really be re-reviewed in quite some time (in fact.. has it since it opened?)

we shall see, I suppose...

[Kev]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 5:04pm

Well if it can't be the amazing Darcie Roberts, the equally impressive Susan Egan is a divine choice. I honestly don't think she'll be open to mixed/compared-to-Sutton reviews. It'd be different if say someone was replacing Harvey in Hairspray. Sutton is exactly carrying the show, it's still going swell, and while she is solid, I think many will be pleased for some new blood.

[robbiej]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 5:12pm

Question about Susan's reviews for CABARET, Craig:

Although I heard wonderful things about her Sally, did critics re-review it for her or was it just time to re-review or was there a big name coming in as the Emcee? I don't even remember the re-review of that time period.

My other question (and I truly don't mean this to sound snarky) is:

Is it customary for critics who gave it a mixed-to-negative review (a la Brantley) to go back and rereview if it's not a huge star coming in? Truly just wondering.

[Craig]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 5:19pm

Robbie -

I don't remember the reason Cabaret was re-reviewed to be honest..just that it was. I don't think ANY reviewer is ever obligated to re-review or even really review a show..are they?

While I agree someone who gave the show a tepid review the first time might not be inclined to review it again.. with a fresh lead, they might be more inclined to revisit it (or you could argue inclined to still not care)

Susan's status as a star or not a star I think plays second to the fact that the show has been on bway for what, 2 years about and the lead has always been Sutton.. so with a new lead, that is "news" - whoever is stepping in.

Sorry for the ambiguity...

[Madame X]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 5:33pm

Millie was semi-re-reviewed when Delta came aboard I believe..

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 6:16pm

Makeup isn't a form of airbrushing a picture?, lol.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 6:20pm

I'm with Robbie all the way here.

Sutton didn't get unanimous raves. Major critics touted her talent yet thought her performance too self-conscious and in-your-face.

But doesn't a show built around a fresh-faced ingenue need ... an ingenue--who's truly fresh?

More critically, does anyone think Susan Egan -- barely out of her black nail polish when she puts on the flapper duds -- will be a potent draw? I love B'way using its own, but Egan's had maximum exposure--and her moment as virginal Millie might've been shortly after BELLE.

Most people here are too young to remember, but NO, NO, NANETTE had this issue. They were looking for a "Susan Watson" type -- because wholesome soubrette Watson -- the Egan of the 60s, having been in FANTASTIKS, etc -- was too old for Nanette. Well, on the road they fired their "Susan Watson type" -- Carol Demas -- and hired the 35ish Watson herself. It was her last major appearance, and she got away with it because the show also had Helen Gallagher, Ruby Keeler, Bobby Van, Patsy Kelly. Maybe MILLIE's the same, now that its deck is stacked with real draws (theater and TV names) Uggams and Burke.

To me, finding a NEW Sutton would've been better for the biz, better for the show. Better even for Egan? Wasn't Sally a chance to tell b'way she'd grown up, wasn't anymore a blushing Nanette/Millie? If I were her agent, I'd tell Egan to move on, and play ... a woman.

Updated On: 12/12/03 at 06:20 PM

[Craig]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 7:31pm

As Susan even said in my interview with her.. She's not the first person people think of when casting. She was away for a few years from Broadway, and casting directors (and audiences) have short "memories". While it would be great for Susan to play "adult" roles - I still contend she will be a great Millie and will further her career than NOT doing it and waiting for something else...

[Al Dente]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 7:35pm

Again, this doesn't surprise me... lately, all "they" seem to be doing is scraping the bottom of the talent barrel. Susan Egan could not be more WRONG/OLD for this role! How lazy are the powers that be getting? This is ridiculous.

[Bway_Mill_Fan]

Posted: 12/12/03 at 7:58pm

i'm sorry but did i miss something?(the 1st post by TBK didnt show) is this confirmed?