THE MUSIC MAN Previews — Page 13

They're apparently rehearsing at the theater now.

I'm so curious to know what the cast list will be tonight.

ACL2006 said: "They're apparently rehearsing at the theater now."

I guess Hugh is ok if he was at the Winter Garden this afternoon

ACL2006 said: "Anyone going tonight, can we get an u/s report? I think it's guaranteed that Kathy Voytko will be Marian all week."

I'm not there, but I saw an image posted with these cast changes:

Olin Britt will be played by -> Lance Roberts

Ewart Dunlop -> Branch Woodman

Marian Paroo -> Kathy Voytko

Oliver Hix -> Ryan Worsing

Ethel Toffelmeier -> Sherisse Springer

Constable Locke -> Sean Montgomery

Grace Shinn -> Emily Jewel Hoder

Ensemble -> Maria Briggs

Updated On: 12/26/21 at 07:50 PM

Jordan Catalano said: "Wow. Not nearly as “bad” as I imagined it would be tonight."

It looks like musical director Patrick Vaccariello is also out tonight. Jim Laev is conducting the orchestra.

I was there tonight and can confirm those replacements for the performance.

The production is… fine. But it’s hard for me not to say I was underwhelmed. My mother felt the same. It just lacks an exciting spark, and the lengthy dance sequences weigh the show down rather than propel it forward. Jackman is giving you The Greatest Conman, a warm charmer whose redemption is assured the minute he reveals himself on the train. It works decently, I guess, but it’s an oddly one-note performance. Whether he’s making a pool table out to be the work of Satan or he’s confessing to a child he’s a charlatan, it’s all sort of the same.

It’s also strange seeing esteemed performers like Houdyshell, Mays, and Hensley in these thankless supporting roles. They’re not great showcases for any of their considerable talents. Houdyshell fares the best, but it’s a role she could do in her sleep. Mays is unrecognizable, which made me wish his impeccable character work was put to better use. Hensley barely registers at all as Marcellus, and “Shipoopi” (with its awkward new lyrics) is kind of a dud.

Voytko was fabulous as Marian. Just a really lovely performance. The real slam-dunk of the production for me, honestly.


The production is plenty lavish, I thought… I just don’t particularly like the design concept. The red clapboard false proscenium / drop is particularly puzzling to me- and it’s used a lot. It feels like something from another show entirely.


I’m willing to chalk up some of my reservations due to the cast being exhausted and through the wringer this week. Maybe that spark will come when folks are rested, Sutton has returned, and everyone is healthy. But I don’t think my production issues- Jackman’s conception of Hill, the dance sequences, some design choices, will change.

Updated On: 12/27/21 at 12:43 AM

If I'm understanding what I've read, the tap stuff is in the curtain call. Some people thought they were tapping in the little clip of Shipoopi but I didn't hear taps, only the ensemble making noise by slapping their hand on their costumes.

And the show has plenty of time to make fixes and knowing Jerry Zaks, they will. And it's been a tumultuous first week. As to the "thankless" roles - no. I'd like anyone to watch Paul Ford and Hermione Gingold in the film and tell me those are thankless roles.

Kad said: "I was there tonight and can confirm those replacements for the performance.

The production is… fine. But it’s hard for me not to say I was underwhelmed. My mother felt the same. It just lacks an exciting spark, and the lengthy dance sequences weigh the show down rather than propel it forward. Jackman is giving you The Greatest Conman, a warm charmer whose redemption is assured the minute he reveals himself on the train. It works decently, I guess, but it’s an oddly one-note performance. Whether he’s making a pool table out to be the work of Satan or he’s confessing to a child he’s a charlatan, it’s all sort of the same.

.....

But I don’t think my production issues- Jackman’s conception of Hill, the dance sequences, some design choices, will change."

Re Jackman's performance, do you think it's an inherent problem with Jackman's "likable" persona which made it difficult for the audience (or you, at least) to buy into the idea he could ever really con these folks? Or was it a matter of there just not being enough difference between his performance of "Hill as fake charmer" vs "Hill as sincere charmer". It's hard to fix the first problem, but perhaps something can be done with the second. Then again, the story doesn't really want that change-over to be completely obvious either. A challenge, to be sure.

SueFB said: "Kad said: "I was there tonight and can confirm those replacements for the performance.

The production is… fine. But it’s hard for me not to say I was underwhelmed. My mother felt the same. It just lacks an exciting spark, and the lengthy dance sequences weigh the show down rather than propel it forward. Jackman is giving you The Greatest Conman, a warm charmer whose redemption is assured the minute he reveals himself on the train. It works decently, I guess, but it’s an oddly one-note performance. Whether he’s making a pool table out to be the work of Satan or he’s confessing to a child he’s a charlatan, it’s all sort of the same.

.....

But I don’t think my production issues- Jackman’s conception of Hill, the dance sequences, some design choices, will change."

Re Jackman's performance, do you think it's an inherent problem with Jackman's "likable" persona which made it difficult for the audience (or you, at least) to buy into the idea he could ever really con these folks? Or was it a matter of there just not being enough difference between his performance of "Hill as fake charmer" vs "Hill as sincere charmer". It's hard to fix the first problem, but perhaps something can be done with the second. Then again, the story doesn't really want that change-over to be completely obvious either. A challenge, to be sure.

"

Again, may I cite Hugh Jackman's portrayal of the very likable real-life character Frank Tassone in BAD EDUCATION. Tassone was highly regarded by the Long Island school where he was a hardworking school administrator who charmed everyone (including the community where the school he led reached fourth in national ranking), Behind the charming facade was someone who led a double life and who committed fraud under the nose of the school board ( the biggest crime in the history of the US national school system and for which he eventually served time). Hugh's portrayal earned some of the best reviews of his career & an EMMY nomination for acting. Another early role was Deception where he was a smooth-talking & sophisticated New York (supposed-to-be) lawyer who conned Ewan McGregor into facilitating a major bank fraud by enticing him to the seedy side of the Manhattan night life. And there was Woody Allen's Scoop where he hid his serial killer life behind the facade of a very charming heir of an English lord.

A fraudster need not look like an ordinary looking man, to be believable as someone with criminal intent.

I'm not questioning Jackman's ability to play the role. I actually don't think that Frank Tassone is a good comparison, a charming liar who is never redeemed. To me, the better comparison is Charlie Kenton - maybe not a fraud, but a 2-bit huckster - and a true a**hole - before gaining redemption in the end. But we digress.

My question was addressed to somebody who has seen THIS performance, such as the person whose comments I quoted.

Kad said: "I don’t think it’s Jackman’s persona- he’s certainly a capable actor. Instead of the Robert Preston model of Hill- the slick, fast talker who fleeces you before you know what happened and leaves you thinking it was your idea- Jackman is a warm, charming, makes you feel like center of the world take. It’s a valid interpretation, but it makes his eventual epiphany carry less weight because he’s… functionally the same as he was."

Thank you! I wonder if they sense any problem there and will try to adjust that, or if that's just the plan.

BWAY Baby2 said: "A valid interpretation could be that Hill is a huckster- and a conman fraud- but he is able to fully rationalize his behavior and feel okay about it. Perhaps the final epiphany is not as dramatic- but coming to terms with your deceptions and realizing that you can be a better person is also believable."

It’s not written that way though. Valid as the idea is, the show isn’t designed to work with that in mind. It needs the change as Preston did it, the show is designed around it. A more subtle change needs different writing to make us aware it’s happening because unless we actually see it, we are robbed off the moment

SueFB said: "I'm not questioning Jackman's ability to play the role. I actually don't think that Frank Tassone is a good comparison, a charming liar who is never redeemed. To me, the better comparison is Charlie Kenton - maybe not a fraud, but a 2-bit huckster - and a true a**hole - before gaining redemption in the end. But we digress.

My question was addressed to somebody who has seen THIS performance, such as the person whose comments I quoted."

Kenton was not a fraudster who led a double life & who committed fraud. Tassone did get some form of redemption when he was in jail ( not shown in the movie , but in real life) as he was allowed early parole because of his good behavior. He was also allowed to make restitution from his pension payments & by doing tutorials while in jail.

I have seen the film version many times and have followed & contributed to the discussions here since the revival was in development. On this board (since its beginning in 2003 - where I was one of the earliest members) I believe we are allowed to put in our thoughts if we believe they might make some form of contribution to the continuing exchange.

Updated On: 12/30/21 at 08:27 PM