Sweeney Todd - who's seen it? — Page 2

Okay, I got back from seeing it yesterday... and Tom, I hear you keep repeating "without an orchestra". Part of what made this show so brilliant was the fact that it was just, what, 10 people? And they were all on stage together playing, singing, and acting their hearts out all at once. Didn't you notice how intense it was to look at an actor who was really acting with their intrument? And as for not acting direct to each other, well its part of the symbolism in the show. To me, i think the reason the characters acted to the audience most of the time instead of to each other kind of has to do with the fact that they're all really detatched from each other. It brings a whole new gloomy and dark aspect to each character. They rarely made eye contact with each other, but the story is so dark - why should they? It makes perfect sense to me. Its definitely not a show for everyone, but its so different that it is worth a second look with a more open mind.

Updated On: 1/1/06 at 03:52 PM

Hi all,

I understand what you are saying, but I dont think that the original sets were overblown or distracting in any way. I think they created the perfect atmosphere. I think the credit goes to sondheim who's lyrics and music (as well as the book) were so brilliant that the story could be told in many different ways and still come through. There are obviously many shows that wouldnt work in this manner as we all know, but I could see many of sondheim's shows told in this way as they are all so character driven. I just feel that for me it was more effective with the sets and orchestra, and in no way did it distract from the production. To me it really made 19th century London come alive and enhance the story.

Anyway Im glad people really enjoyed the production. It still is one of my favorite musicals!

Tom