The Boy From Oz- age appropriate?

[BillyLawlor]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 10:14am

What ages are The Boy From Oz appropriate for? Which parts are inappropriate in the show? For kids, I mean.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 10:17am

The whole show is inappropriate for audiences of all ages.

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 10:19am

Well, there is the suicide scene.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 10:50am

As I posted here before on this recurring topic, my 12 1/2 year old son was fascinated to learn that the girl who played Dorothy and kept Margaret O'Brian from decapitating the last snowman in St. Louis grew into such a tortured grown-up (who'd opt to pack a red sequined cowl neck for a night on the town in Hong Kong). But boys of all ages have been fascinated with that evolution for decades. The suicide is nothing compared to what happens in Les Miz or Phantom (or Lion King, for that matter-and luckily, Peter Allen never performed with faux African Art puppets.)

"Mr.Babcock, knowledge is power!"

[BillyLawlor]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 10:51am

I didn't know that there was a scene that showed the suicide. I thought it was brought up in relation to Peter hiding his feelings toward the end. It didn't say anything about a suicide scene in the synopsis on the album.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 10:55am

It's a shadow on the back wall, and a gun-shot. Don't worry about it. Poor Jud is harder to watch in Oklahoma. Seriously. If the kid would enjoy Hugh and all the pop songs, take him or her. Tons were there the Sunday matinee I took my kid. 12 seeems right. But it won't destroy a savvy 10 or 11 year old either. Unless you're a home-schooling fundamentalist, the show is tamer than much of prime time. The gay stuff is considerably milder than any episode of WILL AND GRACE. Whatever one thinks of its quality, be assured it's a mostly benevolent entertainment.

"Mr Babcock, knowledge is power!"

Updated On: 12/25/03 at 10:55 AM

[BillyLawlor]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 11:34am

Now that my question has been answered- Thank you, Auggie..What did you think of the show otherwise? Worth the money? Would you be so gracious as to give a short review?

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 11:45am

I have provided an incendiary review here, from my perspective (about the craft that's lacking in shoe-horning the Allen songbook into a rambling book, in an arbitrary MAMA MIA fashion that illuminates neither Allen's psyche nor his times). But if you check a couple of decades of theater-going experiences at the door, you won't be bored. Some folks at this board have taken me on, demanding that I admit how accomplished Jackman is, and ultimately how entertaining the show is. I acknowledge both.

Hugh is the event, a 2003 season cliche that must be uttered with some regularity. He gives unstintingly, sings winningly, is seldom off stage, and because he's introduced as a child (an unusually talented kid plays him as a boy, stopping the show with "Name In Lights"), and "reunites" with his inner child self at the end, even a grouch like me ended up moved. The show is star and music driven, and most book scenes have been edited so that they whiz past without letting you contemplate how dreary and shallow they are. The Judy/Liza stuff is strictly by the numbers tv bio -- again, it won't shock or damage a child who has seen any 11 minutes of Access Hollywood. Minimal cursing, and even minimal camp--considering Judy Garland is a supporting role. My son wasn't all that enchanted, but enjoyed the music, and learned a lot about an actor's versatility seeing his beloved Wolverine carry an evening of musical theater.

Updated On: 12/25/03 at 11:45 AM

[Phantom2]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 11:57am

The boy who plays the young Peter Allen, Mitchel David Federan is excellent. It's worth it to see Isabel Keating (Judy Garland) and Stephanie Block (Liza Minnelli) step back in time. What amazing women. Not to mention Hugh Jackman, but I can't say enough nice stuff about this talented man and awesome guy.

Updated On: 12/25/03 at 11:57 AM

[Dollypop]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 7:52pm

There's no denying that Hugh Jackman gives a stunning performance in THE BOY FROM DOZE. The cast that supports him is also top-notch. The problem here is the structure of the show. Anyone who knows anything about theater understands that CONFLICT is needed to keep a plot going. The creative staff of this show has ignored any form of dramatic conflict. Instead of focusing in on the marriage of a gay man to an entertainment superstar, they opt for a banal "and then I wrote" approach to the material. I found myself bored during most of THE BOY FROM DOZE, and I'm not a big fan of Peter Allen's music. In my mind, the show's a turkey.

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 12/25/03 at 9:43pm

Not to mention Mitchel is from my hometown...

[Phantom2]

Posted: 12/26/03 at 12:23am

The music is great, the costumes are great, the choreography is great, the cast is great. In other words, the production is (fill in the blank).

Sorry, you don't agree Dollypop. Everything is not about conflict.

Updated On: 12/26/03 at 12:23 AM