Sweet Charity review from May 31

[bunchamuncha]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 9:42am

Well I finally saw it. It was a show I really wanted to leave after the first act, but I wanted so desperately for Christina Applegate to save it. Unfortunately she falls short.
I went to this show because of Applegate. She's not a huge star, she hasn't done all that much (I was embarassed for her that she put ANCHORMAN and SURVIVING CHRISTMAS in her bio) but she has a certain charm to her.
She looks the part and is a great comedienne but that's not enough. When she first starts "singing" (it's more song speak than outright singing) I cringed and thought oh crap, please don't let me leave this theater hating her. And I don't start liking her until her comedic flair during and after the "If My Friends Could See Me Now" scene. Her hiding in the closet scene was brilliant. I still liked her but I think only because I liked her going into the show. I kept wondering whether or not she audtioned for Roxie Hart in the film and now I know why Jane Krakowski passed on this.
Denis O'Hare channels Robin Williams a little too much and I never buy him as a love interest for Charity. Applegate mugs a little too much but you forgive her, but it's just such a mish mosh of a show (the choreography left the dancers so sweaty, it was distractingly gross) and all the dance numbers reminded me of the film "Down with Love"
And quite frankly Applegate just never gets to sink her teeth into very much very often.
Like I said, I would have left after the first act, but I am an Applegate fan. But as far as musical theater goes, this was not very good, I'd only recommend it if you really like Applegate and even then, the show stinks, but you root for her anyway.

[uncageg]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 10:51am

I saw the show last Thursday the 26th. Out of the 4 shows I saw it was a favorite. I thought the show was wonderful. A nice little throwback to older more traditional musicals. And I think Applegate did a great job. She is no big belter but that's fine. She can carry a tune and she can handle the choreography. And I am pulling for her at the Tonys! I think she deserves the nomination. It just baffles me as to what more people want out of her! She's terrific. I would see this show again and again if I had the chance!

[Princeton78]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:12pm

I'm so sorry you didn't enjoy the best revival to hit Broadway this year. Maybe a repeat viewing will be necessary.

[ken8631]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:16pm

Wife and I thought it was great, surprised and pleased with Christina.

[Glebb]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:21pm

My dog was thrilled with Applegate.
I hated the show.

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:29pm

bunchamuncha - COULDNT AGREE WITH YOU MORE! The just isnt very winning at all...and Princeton...tsk, tsk :) of course LA CAGE is the best revival of the year!

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:31pm

nobody has it out for miss applegate. she would never have been cast on her stage merits. she was cast because of her name and she's doing ok but she does not deserve to be nominated, much less win.
she moves well but she reminds me of someone in a jazzercise class. Updated On: 6/1/05 at 12:31 PM

[baddadnpa]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:32pm

If this was a stronger year for lead actress roles, Christina would not have been nominated.

[Akbar-n-Jeff]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:39pm

Yeah, it's not an inspired revival of a not-so-hot show. Yeah, Christina is charming but really not all THAT fabulous, and yeah, LA CAGE is more splendiferous and will probably win the Tony based on Mitchell and the Cagelles.

So why are more and more people flocking to CHARITY ($620,00 gross last week) while LA CAGE is sinking lower and lower? ($383,000)

Updated On: 6/1/05 at 12:39 PM

[ken8631]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:44pm

Too see Christina!

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:46pm

Because people like sh*t! Pure and simple. Give 'em american gladiators, bachelors, and fear factors and they are happy.

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:57pm

Here's the answer:
LA CAGE is now considered to be "too gay", while SWEET CHARITY offers a healthy serving of T & A (though the hot CHARITY commercial makes the show seem far racier than it really is).

Updated On: 6/1/05 at 12:57 PM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 12:59pm

Hmmm... Christina did not "sing speak" anything when I saw her in the show. She sang and danced and made for a delightful and bubbly Charity. I found her Charity to be entertaining, funny and sympathetic. If people truly liked sh*t, then we would still have Dracula, Good Vibrations, Laughing Room Only and Brooklyn would be playing to packed houses. As I've said before, this was the first time I ever saw Sweet Charity and actually liked it. O'Hare was the one who underwhelmed me in this show. Same schtick, different show.

[justme2]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 1:11pm

"If people truly liked sh*t, then we would still have Dracula, Good Vibrations, Laughing Room Only and Brooklyn would be playing to packed houses."

LOL.....very, very well said, Mister Matt.

[Princeton78]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 1:35pm

Well said Mr. Matt..

And LaCageAuxFollesFan2...please don't ever put words in my mouth again. Thanks!

[bunchamuncha]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 1:49pm

I personally haven't seen LaCage b/c it just seems "dated" which sounds odd, but it's like watching the movie Birdcage, so dated.
I wasn't going to see Charity b/c I was expecting a masterpiece, I just wanted to be entertained. And I liked Applegate, but just felt she didn't get showcased enough of me to say "yeah, she hit it out of the park" she plays a sympathetic character, but not a ditz, that you just can't help but to root for.
And I don't think you can compare reality television to broadway, perhaps American Idol, which is why I think people don't flock to the All Shook Up's, Good Vibrations and upcoming Lennon, why pay $100 when we can watch it on tv, to me that stuff is cheap and just unoriginal.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 3:15pm

"why pay $100 when we can watch it on tv"

We can watch it on tv? Since when? I've never seen a revision of Twelfth Night set in small-town America in the 50s set to Elvis songs on tv. People pay to see live performances of music they already love. The crap closes and the non-crap keeps running. Whether or not one person likes the show, the masses decide what keeps running and what does not. I often hear people complaining about the jukebox musicals and how they should all go away blah blah blah. But who are we to discriminate shows produced for general audiences? To say that these shows do not deserve a Broadway run is to promote censorship. Sorry to rant, but it's just so elitist. I love Mamma Mia and I'm glad it's there. So do my friends and family. Why should they not be allowed to see something that they love?

Excuse the digression, but I had to get that off my chest.

[ljay889]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 3:19pm

Some of you are rude ignorant fools.

Take Charity for what it is - a charming, light, adorable show, with a bubbly talented lead, and a classic score.

[twogaab2]

Posted: 6/1/05 at 3:52pm

I enjoyed this revival (and esp Mrs Applegate) enormously.