Posted: 4/1/16 at 12:32am
Seems like a show that will be revived/revised in 20 years off-Broadway and finally be what it should have been all along.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 12:35am
Yeah, I would never expect them to actually cut it down to 100 minutes. That was just the approximate length I feel the story could reasonably support. As you say, it's a slim Children's book. I wouldn't expect a novella to be stretched out to unnecessary length were you adapting more adult material either.
I love the idea of seeing this staged at Circle in the Square too (sans chorus).
Posted: 4/1/16 at 12:58am
Mr. Nowack said: "Seems like a show that will be revived/revised in 20 years off-Broadway and finally be what it should have been all along.
"
Ouch. That sounds painful. I usually agree with Whizzers reviews. I may skip this one but I was really looking forward to it.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 6:52am
I have to ask since it's a Nicholaw show, but is there a tap number??
Posted: 4/1/16 at 7:23am
There is actually not a tap number, surprising as that may be! The biggest production number comes almost near the end of act one at a carnival. At least in that number the ensemble members are the carnival workers and it makes a little more sense why they're onstage dancing.
In the other numbers the just kind of appear for no apparent reason; the style of dance informed more by ballet than tap.
The off-Broadway revival in 20 years comment is spot on. One of the things I said to a friend while exiting the theater was, you know how at the MUFTI talkbacks the original production's creative team sing a frequent refrain: this show was meant to be small, but as the Broadway process went along it just kept getting bigger and bigger until we didn't recognize it anymore. Now that we see it in MUFTI we remember our goals when we set out to create the piece and this is how it was supposed to be.
Updated On: 4/1/16 at 07:23 AM
Posted: 4/1/16 at 8:26am
Whizzer, what did you think of the finale sequence? Without giving anything away just was wondering if you were fan or not......I was very much not.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 9:25am
coaster, I'll put a SLIGHT SPOILER tag to explain the question before answering it********************
The show ends with a ballet/dance sequence that catapults the story about 80 years into the future. We see young Winnie reach adulthood, get married, have a child, age and finally pass away, all through dance.
I didn't mind the sequence because I think it was nicely staged and not overly choreographed like all of unnecessary the dance sections that preceded it. I wasn't completely won over by it, but if I hadn't seen any or much dance before the final ballet I think I would have enjoyed it much more. It would have felt more like being treated to the dream ballet in Carousel rather than just like feeling like more of the same we had seen all evening.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 9:44am
WhizzerMarvin said: "I normally wouldn't complain about the sound at a first preview because I know those adjustments need to be made once bodies are in the seats, but I fear the problem of over amplification may have been intentional tonight. The sound was so loud that I couldn't hear it coming from the pit or the singer's mouths, but only from the speakers. I mean Carolee has a pretty powerful voice. When I can see her belting from the stage and can only hear the sound a split second later out of the speakers there's a problem. "
That must be their response to American Psycho. Apparently the Tuck Everlasting team complained that American Psycho is too loud, and that it can be heard from inside the Broadhurst.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 9:57am
it was cute. act two was much better than act one.
the finale sequence was, in my opinion, the BEST part of the show....The choreography was beautiful and not over the top (compared to the previous 2+ hours...) The dancing told the story, without the necessity of lyrics or dialogue. (every other time choreography was feature, they had SOMEONE singing the "story" of the musical number, and then the ensemble came in and supported it with dance.... over the top and unnecessary.)
Set was gorgeous, but Major sight line issues I imagine. they have tweeking to do.
I would go back and see it again, but I would hesitate before sending friends or family.
A photo posted by David Goldstein (@davidgoldsteindesigns) on Mar 31, 2016 at 6:20pm PDT
Updated On: 4/1/16 at 09:57 AM
Posted: 4/1/16 at 10:47am
I was at the show last night. I liked it more after Act 2 and thought the final ballet was beautiful (which to me reminded of the opening of the film Up told through dance).
The music just didn’t click much to me. It’s the type of score you forget the minute you’ve heard it. Thankfully it is peppy and mostly inoffensive, but I thought the orchestrations sounded rather thin and the sound mix was off, though from the mezz it was not nearly as bad as Whizzer heard.
I loved the design. I thought it was quite whimsical, and very appropriate for the material.
The biggest issue is that there just isn’t much conflict to the story. It’s all pleasant enough, but there isn’t much to be too invested in.
Overall, it reminded me a lot of Big Fish (though Big Fish had a better score). Both took very whimsical source materials and didn’t quite get as creative as I would have liked. I’d have been curious to see what someone like Alex Timbers would have done with the material. I thought Andrew Kennan-Bolger was likeable, but that the real star here was Sara Charles Lewis who I thought was a great new talent. Carolee was lovely and I really enjoyed Terrence Mann who had my favorite song of the night that opened Act 2. I’m going back for the final preview so I’ll be curious to see how the show changes between now and then.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 12:37pm
WhizzerMarvin said: "Yeah, I would never expect them to actually cut it down to 100 minutes. That was just the approximate length I feel the story could reasonably support. As you say, it's a slim Children's book. I wouldn't expect a novella to be stretched out to unnecessary length were you adapting more adult material either."
There have been several short stories and novellas adapted to longer musical forms for both children (A Year with Frog and Toad, every Disney film/musical) and adults (Guys and Dolls, The Light in the Piazza, Violet, James Joyce's The Dead, many others), so I don't see why this couldn't be done for Tuck.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 12:42pm
Hmm...well I would actually argue that a novella or short story is the 'right' length to adapt to a Broadway musical. Most musicals adapted from a full length novel have to cut things from the story to fit a 2-3 hour running time.
I think the issue is that TUCK may be 'padded' with unnecessary material that doesn't do anything to enhance the story.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 12:52pm
I guess it all does all depend on the particular novel or novella/short story. I should amend my statement to say with this particular book that 100 minutes seems the proper amount of time to get through the story. I the film version is only 90 minutes itself.
Tuck's story is so slight and delicate that the padding bloats the piece and weighs it down, IMO, rather than elevating it to something more.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 6:50pm
I wanted to add some mroe thoughts from last night. Let me preface by saying I was planning on skipping this one until reviews came out, but I won the lottery last night, and couldn't say no to a $40 first preview. Tickets were in Row AA, my feet were literally under the lip of the stage. The seats are very closer, and the stage is pretty high-I'm 6'1, and, seated, the stage was up to my neck. However, I felt this was a great palce to watch the show. Because I didn't have a full stage view, I wasn't as bothered as some on here by how Casey turned this little show into spectacle, because I couldn't see it. I was able to focus on the performances of the principals, led by the amazing Sarah Charles Lewis, who has a bear of a part, considering she is doing it 8 shows a week at 11 years old. The last 10 minutes might top my year as the most touching 10 minutes on Broadway right now, literally the first 10 minutes of Up as a dream ballet. That close, you could see that the whole cast was truly in tears as the sequence progressed, as were many of us in the front of the room. Point: This might be a good one to see up close, to give it a Fun Home type perspective.
This is still a work in progress, there was still a tech table in the back of the orchestra, and lights were being programmed as the show went on. I am excited to see what they do with this over the next few weeks. However, judging by reactions at the stage door, people were loving it.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 7:40pm
I guessed the Story of Curious and Matilda very early on.
Posted: 4/1/16 at 8:38pm
question for those who have been to see this --
I bought a ticket last week for row BB, seat 107, which at the time on the seating chart appeared to be the front row, dead center.
Looking at the seating chart now on telecharge, it appears that AA is the front row, BB is the 2nd row, but the center few seats in each of those rows aren't there. Row BB seems to jump from seat 105 to seat 110.
Does the set now protrude out into those center seats? I'm wondering if the ticket I'm looking at right now is for a seat that no longer exists?
I will call Telecharge to verify next week, but just wondering if anyone who's physically been in the theatre this week can report. Thanks!
Updated On: 4/1/16 at 08:38 PM
Posted: 4/1/16 at 10:57pm
Whizzer, can I ask you a silly question I've always wondered? You've said many times that you revisit some shows in late previews. If you're going to revisit them, wouldn't it be better to go after the shows open to see the final product? Or is there something good about late previews that is no longer there after a show opens, like maybe cheaper tickets? I never get to go to previews, that's why I wonder.
Updated On: 4/1/16 at 10:57 PM
Posted: 4/1/16 at 11:39pm
@Eliza2:
The front row is AA; AA and BB are actually on the orchestra pit, with the 11 piece pit under the stage. There are seats missing, as the conductor is in the center of these two rows, AA is 4 seats on each side, BB is 6 seats on each side, so I think B107 is now a seat kill. I heard rumblings of some people who were reseated from what they had originally purchased, probably from this conductor cut-out which was not confirmed until the show moved in.
TL;DR: The seating chart on telecharge is the accurate layout of the room right now, with the back 2 rows of the center orchestra killed for tech staff.
Posted: 4/2/16 at 12:14am
Saw the Friday night performance and enjoyed it very much. For frame of reference I found Big Fish and Finding Neverland insufferable and think Hamilton is the best musical down the pike since A Chorus Line. I thought the design work was fantastic and found the choreographic conceit of the ensemble a welcome bit of ingenuity that came full circle and paid off in the final dance sequence. The audience tonight had a large contingent of school kids and they ate it up and cheered it on. Show started at 8:08 and final curtain wrung down at 10:10. Based on previous posts could they have cut 30 minutes over night?What a great season for musicals considering how anemic the last two seasons have been. Speaking of anemic the A/C was on low -many playbills fanning and actors sweating. I would be interested in hearing what workhas been done since the Atlanta try out.
Posted: 4/2/16 at 12:50am
The A/C for the whole Shubert cluster, from the majestic, warping around, through the alley, back down to the Golden, is on the fritz. They are hoping to fix it by Tuesday, but they seemed uncertain of that timeline.
The show Thursday started 8:08, ended 10:20, and intermission was a few minutes long than it should have been. Perhaps first night extra applause and slower scenic transitions accounts for the rest of the time difference.
Posted: 4/2/16 at 1:00am
Jakeevan942 said: "The A/C for the whole Shubert cluster, from the majestic, warping around, through the alley, back down to the Golden, is on the fritz. They are hoping to fix it by Tuesday, but they seemed uncertain of that timeline."
That's not entirely accurate. All the theaters on that "block" are being connected to the same central cooling system, and they are still working on the installation. Initially they were saying completion wouldn't be until the end of April, so it's surprising they'll be finished sometime next week. However, it has become almost unbearable in those theaters and the Shuberts and productions are losing money due to the number of refunds being requested and the amount of past dates being issued.
Posted: 4/2/16 at 3:43am
Eliza2 said: "question for those who have been to see this --
I bought a ticket last week for row BB, seat 107, which at the time on the seating chart appeared to be the front row, dead center.
Looking at the seating chart now on telecharge, it appears that AA is the front row, BB is the 2nd row, but the center few seats in each of those rows aren't there. Row BB seems to jump from seat 105 to seat 110.
Does the set now protrude out into those center seats? I'm wondering if the ticket I'm looking at right now is for a seat that no longer exists?
I will call Telecharge to verify next week, but just wondering if anyone who's physically been in the theatre this week can report. Thanks!
"
SAME HERE. Now, I'm pissed off because Telecharge has yet to reach out and/or offer a refund...
Posted: 4/2/16 at 10:03am
Those seats are missing where the conductor opening is to conduct the orchestra . AA and BB sit over the regular orchestra opening so I guess they are sitting over them now.
Posted: 4/2/16 at 10:26am
helvizz, not a silly question- usually the final week of previews sees a show "frozen," meaning no more changes will be made and the show is ready for the critics to see at press previews before opening. You are seeing the final, post-opening show, even though it is technically still a preview. If I sense I show will change a lot in previews I may try to see it several times, and yes the prices are at least minimally cheaper.
I'll be seeing the final preview of Tuck with their $19.75 deal and look forward to seeing what (if anything) they change.
Posted: 4/2/16 at 10:33am
Whizzer -- I was having a conversation with someone recently about previews, and how much a show 'really' changes during them. I think we on this board who occasionally see a first preview, have come to learn to be a little disappointed because, the truth is, most shows on Broadway these days 'don't' really change that much during previews. Maybe some, but not usually as much as they should. I assume that is partly because shows are so technically complicated these days, its costly and time consuming to make major shifts to the play.
Since you see so many early previews, I would love to hear your thoughts on this. I know SHUFFLE ALONG has taken the unprecedented step of building time off into the preview process, and many changes have been made -- but can you cite some other examples of shows you have seen that have REALLY made substantial alterations? I can't even remember the last show that for example added a 'new' song during previews. Usually when changes are made, it seems they are just cuts.
Updated On: 4/2/16 at 10:33 AM
