TUCK EVERLASTING Previews- Page 9

[SueBee06]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 1:56pm

I agree with so much said here. It was a pleasant enough show although boring in parts - not awful but not great and definitely needs a lot of work. The book of the show had some complete clunkers that didn't land at all. As much as the end ballet was touching, I wanted it cut in half. I found myself saying, "WE GET IT. SHE AGES AND HAS A LIFE." I felt beat over the head with it. It frustrated me to the point where I lost most of the good feelings I had toward earlier moments in the show. And I say this without having read the book, but I would have liked to have seen the moment she decides not to drink the water or even a moment where she makes the conscious decision to move on with her life. Maybe I missed something, but the only sense I got that she didn't just flat out forget what happened completely was when she pulled the music box out again at the end. 

I saw it last night and there were also obvious mistakes that happened (and a couple of things dropped in the wings by the sound of it).

It'll probably tour fairly well - completely inoffensive in every way and fine for entire families to see.

Posted: 4/16/16 at 5:07pm

Wow! Some very critical comments here.   I think a show like this -- and like Bright Star -- need to be viewed with an open mind.  I think there is a lot of great stuff here, though clearly it needs work, and they ARE working on it.  I'm rooting for it and think it is going to be a show geared toward younger audiences.  It's great when kids are introduced to theater at a young age (wish I was) -- this is a book near and dear to many young peoples' hearts.  They still have 10 days to opening night.  Give them a chance to get it right.  There's still time.  

[Scarlet Leigh]

Posted: 4/17/16 at 2:10am

Saw the show this afternoon with my $20 seats. I feel like a lot of what I would have to say has already been covered. Is the show terrible? No. Is it great? No. I would call it... above average.

What makes me a little sad though is that there came a point in act two, right around the song "Time" I realized how good a plot and book this show actually had, if only they would have just toned things down a bit. It's a simple book and really REALLY would have been stronger with more simple staging. Just having Miles and Winnie talking at the table and then the simple ballet between father and son was a really beautiful moment. Then came the entire chorus to ruin it all. That chorus does that often in this show. Another notable 'who invited them?' moment is in "Top of the World." Why, when you are trying to direct attention up into the tree, do you have so much movement below it? And then the ONE time they WERE called for in Mae's solo number, why are they in their weird ethereal forest folk outfits instead of in some kind of party attire to set the scene to the flashback she described for us just moments before? Why not put them into something to show a bit of a difference in setting and time? Just, confusion all around with them.

Act One was SO short that it was almost jarring when it ended. Nothing had really HAPPENED yet. I would have liked to have maybe seen The Man in the Yellow Suit's number here instead of at the top of act 2. Could add a little time onto the noticeably short act and give some kind of tension to have us thinking about into intermission. It certainly nods to that's the direction we are going into but it's so fast you don't really get a moment to let it sink in before blackout.

Usually shows are looking to trim OFF time. I think this show really could benefit from 10 extra minutes somewhere. Maybe to explain the Man in the Yellow Suit's backstory. Not even explain it better, just explain it AT ALL. From reading the book, I of course know who he is. If I didn't though, man would I have been confused. He just rants that his grandmother told him stories. Does it imply that his grandmother is Miles' wife? Is that Miles grandson? And if not that, then who was his grandmother? HOW did she know about the Tucks to tell him? It's all very unclear, implied, and the resolution of it all very rushed.

The end ballet however was of course lovely. You could feel the emotion in the room and in one case hear it. There was a point during the ballet I was able to hear someone weeping and audibly cry out a distressed "NO!" from the back of the mezzanine. No words but MAN did it really grab your heart and squeeze.

[TFMH18]

Posted: 4/17/16 at 12:21pm

"I think a show like this -- and like Bright Star -- need to be viewed with an open mind."

To compare this drudgery to Bright Star is insulting to the latter. 

[ggallen]

Posted: 4/17/16 at 5:07pm

Funny you brought up Bright Star as I mentioned that in my blog when discussing Tuck Everlasting. 

 

"There is another original show that opened on Broadway this year (Bright Star) that also has issues in the book and the score, but there is a fire in that show that allows it to transcend. Even though Tuck Everlasting has been worked out of town before coming to NYC, it feels very flat to me as if it doesn't quite achieve the wonder and magic it's wanting to convey."

 

I was NOT a fan of Tuck Everlasting & could't get past the flaws.

 

http://gregory-g-allen.blogspot.com/2016/04/will-tuck-last-forever-on-broadway.html

 

[Queen of the Night]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 12:02am

QueenAlice said: "Jordan, that is a GREAT suggestion. And it would be an unexpected visual that would have a very striking impact, especially after the "movement of life" ballet that ends the show.

it would also be true to the musical's theme of time. The ensemble is initially costumed in clothing from around 1812, seemingly because that is the moment the Tucks first met. To have it end with the characters in clothing 200 years later would be very powerful.

 

"

I saw the show tonight and seems that Nicholaw heard your suggestion. They do now appear in modern clothes at the end.

 

i thought the show was sweet and will appeal to families. I have never read the book but the story seemed pretty cohesive to me. They must have taken out some of the dancing that earlier posters commented on. There still is a lot of dancing but not excessive. The score isn't particularly memorable although it does serve the story well enough. The performances were all quite good. Sarah Charles Lewis is amazing, she has such poise for someone so young. She has quite a lovely voice and seems to be growing into her part well and holds her own against the adults on the stage. Carolee Carmello and Michael Park were touching and funny as Mae and Angus Tuck. Andrew Keenan-Bolger is a ball of energy as Jesse. I didn't find his relationship with Winnie to be creepy, they make it very clear that he wants to wait until Winnie is 17 so they can be together. Terrence Mann is over-the-top as usual and looks like he's having fun. I found his character more crazy than sinister, but he is definitely entertaining. The sets and costumes are beautiful. 

I enjoyed it and think it will at least last through the summer as people will take their kids to see it.

 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 12:14am

Really??? Casey, call me! I got more suggestions for ya!

[uncageg]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 12:26am

Inwas there last night also. Didn't notice the change of clothing at the end. 

I think this may appeal to moms and their young daughters. Were the dancers supposed to represent something? I agree that they were not needed during the tree scene. I enjoyed the wheel song and Everlasting. Mike Wartella was a standout. It was  fun seeing his comic side since the last I saw him was in "rent".

I didn't read the book and think I saw the movie. It is a beautiful story and it was nice to look at.

[Ptesan]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 12:15pm

Saw it last week and agree with most.  It was no bueno for me- glad I had the $19.75 ticket.  I saw FN and felt that production was tighter- overall better story.  Tuck's set was beautiful and the toad was charming but I could've skipped this show.  By the time it got to the ballet at the end I felt like I was being held hostage.

[wolfwriter2]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 12:19pm

uncageg said: "Were the dancers supposed to represent something? I agree that they were not needed during the tree scene."

We thought because of their, often circular movement, that they represented a clock, but whether we were right or wrong, we didn't get the point.

 

[uncageg]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 12:39pm

wolfwriter2 said: "uncageg said: "Were the dancers supposed to represent something? I agree that they were not needed during the tree scene."

We thought because of their, often circular movement, that they represented a clock, but whether we were right or wrong, we didn't get the point."

 

I can now see why you thought that with the passage of time being a theme and the reference to a clock in the song. (Wheels, I think)

 

[mpkie]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 11:50pm

I was highly anticipating this, since I loved the book Tuck as a kid, so I'm happy I got in with the National Book Month deal. I truly applaud the show for making that happen.

I really wanted to be whisked away by the whimsy but I knew this production wouldn't likely be able to pull that off. None of the actors sold their stories to me, although I thought the man in the yellow did great in his solo and I warmed up a lot to the show-invented character of Hugo.

Most of it dragged and the first act was just a noisy and visual mess, and there was no heart. The score, lyrics, and delivery... zZzz. In the second act, there was a bit more heart -- I thought Miles' song about time was moving, but went on too long, and so was The Wheel... which went on for too long.

The two most entertaining moments were when the shotgun "went off" and the lady next to me jumped up/screamed. And at the end when the toad "jumped out" and the lady next to me... jumped up/screamed. I was entertained but it was not because of the show.

While it was a snoozefest for me, I thought it was endearing when I heard some young girls talking during intermission: "OOOOH I hope she drinks it. Do you think she'll drink it?" Yeah, it's definitely for kids only. I would suggest this only for preteens and under.

I would cut out all the dancers from most of the scenes; they were distracting and added no value to the storytelling. The ending ballet was touching, simple, and beautifully done; I think it would have been an interesting format to weave into the entire show.

Instead I tried enjoy the stage design -- not the most inventive but still very nice to look at -- and the technical aspects, like the mechanical tracks, the boat on the lake (which moved oddly....), the tree, etc.

** SPOILER **

I probably need to re-read the source material but I felt like the book's storytelling was much more deft with some use of dramatic irony (e.g. the immortal toad that only the reader knew about). Also, they fully acted out Winnie growing up, having children, etc. In the book, all you get was the Tucks coming upon her tombstone, which actually shocked me as a kid! Like, how could you not try to live forever???

The show also does not tell the audience the part where the spring has now dried up/ no longer exists, which was felt like a big deal to me when I read it.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/19/16 at 11:59pm

What are the chances any of the featured actors will win a tony to continue the nicholaw streak.

[mpkie]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 12:11am

Getting off-topic but holy crap! I just realized that the reason The Man In the Yellow Suit looked so familiar to me was because he plays Mr. Whispers in Sense8! It's the only other thing I've seen him in... love that he plays a children's story cookie cutter villain on stage AND a terrible, evil, homicidal villain in a scifi thriller/drama, which is most certainly not suitable for children! Fun!

[TFMH18]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 4:28pm

I saw this about a week ago and I've now had some time to formulate my thoughts on why I so virulently disliked it. Much to the dismay of those who hate on these message boards, I actually don't like writing negatively about shows, and I appreciate all of the proverbial blood, sweat and tears that go into putting up a show. That being said, I actively hated this show. 

The all-encompassing disappointment, I think, is that the source material's story is so beautiful and, in the right hands, could have been a fantastic musical (a fountain of everlasting youth? It practically writes itself). Unfortunately, the team assembled missed the mark-- big time. 

I'm not even sure which is weaker; the trite and underdeveloped book or the homogenous songs lacking in both melody and emotion? Add in the incongruous staging (seriously, this is an intimate story, why in the world is there this overblown choreography at every turn?), and I found myself seriously considering walking out at intermission, which I have never before done in my life. 

Anyway, the whole thing bums me out because I am a fan of the original book, as well as many involved on the cast and creative sides. But, yeah, a major misstep. 

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 4:55pm

Has anyone been to multiple previews to see if they fixed anything? They open in five days and I'm assuming the critics will be seeing the show soon. 

[Scarlet Leigh]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 5:36pm

Call_me_jorge said: "What are the chances any of the featured actors will win a tony to continue the nicholaw streak."

 

Not good. I mean I can see them getting nominations and likely Terrence Mann is the best CHANCE at it but compared to the other feature actors of the season, especially the ones over in Hamilton, the role is very one note. He's a bad guy. That's kinda it. Oh he plays it well, don't get me wrong, and his number at the top of act 2 was some of the better fun to be had in the show but the role is no Genie or Shakespeare or even a Nostradamus. Other then that, I mean MAYBE Carolee might steal a featured actress slot somehow but again, the role does nothing to really show off what she can do.

 

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 6:11pm

Just saw the matinee and I was underwhelmed.  It was long and that ballet was tedious.  There were a number of lovely moments, but overall.It was meh at best.

 

I REALLY wanted to see Winnie at 17 make the grown up choice not to drink...or at least talk to Jessie one more time.

 

Bright Star was SO much better than this.

 

Updated On: 4/25/16 at 06:11 PM

[mpkie]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 8:38pm

dramamama611 said: "I REALLY wanted to see Winnie at 17 make the grown up choice not to drink...or at least talk to Jessie one more time.
 

Perhaps. It doesn't happen in the book. It ends with her using the vial on the toad, considers she can always use the spring later if she changes her mind, and the story picks up with the Tucks decades later. Her final decision as an older Winnie certainly gets lost in the show. In the book, you have to infer that she permanently chose to not drink from the spring, now knowing that the spring no longer exists (there was always the possibility that it dried up/was destroyed before she had a chance to). Not even sure why they had Andrew Keenan-Bolger come back on stage while Winnie was 17 (he seemed out of place). Seems useless for him to appear to witness her falling for someone else... They shouldn't have brought Jesse back out... to show how distant the Tucks were in time.
 

"Bright Star was SO much better than this."


True.

Updated On: 4/20/16 at 08:38 PM

[TFMH18]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 8:43pm

"Bright Star was SO much better than this."
 

The two shouldn't even be compared as it implies there are similarities and a likeness between the two. Bright Star is moving in its earnest simplicity. This... Is not that. 

[mpkie]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 8:48pm

TFMH18 said: "The all-encompassing disappointment, I think, is that the source material's story is so beautiful and, in the right hands, could have been a fantastic musical (a fountain of everlasting youth? It practically writes itself). Unfortunately, the team assembled missed the mark-- big time. "

This. I definitely didn't hate it. We considered that for less than $20 a ticket, it would have been a fine  enough nap if we decided to take one right then and there in the theater. If I paid the actual seat's non-discounted cost, I'm sure I'd have a different stance.

The show made me question whether because I was an adult, I couldn't appreciate or enjoy the childish superficiality of the show, and whether it was the childish mind of my younger self that read a lot more into a simple children's book than there actually was. But then I'm fairly certain the original story was actually wonderful and well told.

[thedrybandit]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 9:58pm

I saw it with my girlfriend and two of our friends last night, and overall, we all really enjoyed it. It was a very nostalgic show, but we all felt the choreography was weird. The dancers should have been cut back to scenes they were really needed, and the ballet at the end was just awkward. The tension in the theater was palpable as everyone was thinking "Is this really happening?" The couple next to me I could feel just shaking with laughter, and I'm sure they could do the same, especially when the fake baby was brought out. I couldn't contain it. Too many tone changes, too fast. I love Casey Nicholaw, but he made some huge mis-steps with the ending.

Gorgeous score and great visuals though. Hopefully they have some more changes in store for it before it opens.

(Seriously, Casey. Cut the ballet.)

Edit: Also, Andrew KB bumped his head on the attic set piece so loudly that it practically echoed, even without his mic turned up. I could hear it perfectly and I was all the way in the mezzanine. Live theater is the best.

Updated On: 4/20/16 at 09:58 PM

[Scarlet Leigh]

Posted: 4/20/16 at 10:57pm

I actually liked having Jesse coming out on stage to see her at 17 but they used it the wrong way. He was in a very poor spot and came and went so fast you might have missed him if you were not quick enough. But I like that it showed that he was still thinking of her and hopeful that the choice she was going to make would be him, only to face the reality that Winnie has grown up and will keep growing up. One of the few changes I did like.

In the book, they Tuck's COULDN'T come back for her right away because in another huge change from the book (which I just realized I don't think anyone has brought up yet) Ma Tuck is actually held accountable for killing a man and is going to be hung. You know rather then what happened here where rather then put in some much needed tension and conflict, they just give Ma a free pass. They have to break her out and go on the run or their secret would be revealed when she doesn't die. One of the reasons the Tucks only come back after she has died. But I do agree that showing some of Winnie's dilemma over the spring at the age of 17 would have been nice in the ballet. Something with her like going to the spring, Jesse watching as she fights over it internally then Hugo appears and she chooses him instead of the spring, Jesse sort of realizing he's going to be alone forever and perhaps finally succumbing to the same dread of everlasting life his family had for years. Wow, the more I talk about changes I would have liked to see in this, the more I realize how dark the story really can be and how much better it would have been if they went more dark with it rather than happy colorful pretty dancing fun time.

[Marianne2]

Posted: 4/23/16 at 5:52pm

I saw this today.  I agree that it was just okay. Now that I am listening to An American in Paris,  the music is forgettable.  And I didn't get why the man in the yellow suit wanted to find the Tucks. And it felt like Constable Joe and Hugo were just thrown in.  I mean, obviously Hugo did end up serving a purpose,  but it was too late to care about him. While I love ballet, the end did last a little too long. 

[Leaf Coneybear]

Posted: 4/23/16 at 6:11pm

I'm seeing it this summer and wanted to know how the rear mezz seats are? I'm a very short person but with prices on Broadway I don't really have a choice!