The Color Purple-How Was The Original Broadway Production Received?

I always wanted to do a poll to see if people preferred LaChanze or Erivo as Celie notwithstanding how some here feel about Erivo personally now.

Believe it or not, I saw the original run with Fantasia as Celie and it's one of the most genuine and raw performances I've ever seen. SOBBED at "I Am Here."



Hate on it haters.

I thought the revival was absolute crud x

I liked the original production a lot when I first saw it, particularly the brilliant first half. (The songs descend into contemporary pop territory about halfway through, which I thought was a huge shame.) La Chanze was lovely and heartbreaking, but the original Shug was a weak singer and weak partner for Celie (one could have missed the amazing lesbian love story at the show's heart if you weren't paying attention), and not a single other performance stands out in my memory banks from the show that night. The sets by the great John Lee Beatty were only halfway there, lots of skeletal doorways against black and white images of cotton fields as I recall. Still, the CD from the OBC got plenty of repeat plays until about 2016.

What the revival had that the original was missing was this: a huge visual IDEA! Now the show was all about a specific community telling a story almost as sacred as a Church Service. The unit set of diagonal planks and mismatched chairs was effortlessly evocative. And the new performances by every single blessed member of the company, now stripped of all the white characters, along with all the cliches of a standard broadway staging, just blew the roof off of the theater and made the hairs on our neck stand on end.

And Cynthia Erivo? Where La Chanze was beautifully sympathetic, Cynthia was a FORCE OF NATURE. Her every movement and note commanded your attention, long before her earth shattering "I Am Here" finished up the evening. Her performance, along with LuPone's Evita, Streisand's Fanny and Angela Lansbury's Mrs. Lovett, will go down as one for the ages.

Someone in a Tree2 said:

"And the new performances by every single blessed member of the company, nowstripped of all the white characters, along with all thecliches of a standardbroadway staging, just blew the roof off ofthe theater and made the hairs on our neck stand on end.

And Cynthia Erivo? Where La Chanze was beautifullysympathetic, Cynthia was a FORCE OF NATURE. Her every movement and note commanded your attention, long before her earth shattering "I Am Here" finished up the evening. Her performance, along with LuPone's Evita, Streisand's Fanny and AngelaLansbury's Mrs. Lovett, will go down as one for the ages."



The original didn't have any white characters either. It was an all black cast. But yes, I'd say that the supporting actors were stronger in the revival, minus Jennifer Hudson's acting. Wish I could've seen it with Heather Headley!!!

Is this the first time John Doyle's work has ever been spoken of positively on this forum :P?

"Is this the first time John Doyle's work has ever been spoken of positively on this forum :P?"

Let's take stock, shall we? Doyle got raves here and elsewhere for his B'way revivals of SWEENEY TODD (tuba-playing Mrs. Lovett), COMPANY (Bobby learns to play the piano), and THE COLOR PURPLE (no onstage instruments). Off Broadway, he got raves for his revival of PASSION at CSC.

On the debit side, BWW posters were mixed for THE VISIT on Bway, as well as for ROAD SHOW Off Bway. His PACIFIC OVERTURES at CSC was pretty much panned everywhere, right?

Having seen LaChanze , Fantasia and Ervivo. All were great in their own way but Fantasia just had the rawness and the guts that for me brought the character to another level. But like I said loved all three.

I’ll never understand the love for this musical. Even through the audition process, hearing most of the mediocre music sung over and over, myself and so many others were amazed that it was actually going to be on a Broadway stage. The first few performances were just laughably bad and then things got cut and trimmed and it became less laughably bad and just boring. It lacks any warmth and emotion that made the book one of the best ever written and the film, one of the best American films of all time. As for Fantasia, she was (and I use this word very selectively) a revelation. She was outstanding and showed that someone could take that horribly written role and do something great with it.

As for the revival, the casts were all very good and unfortunately that still proves that a good cast can make people not realize the immense flaws in this musical. If you just look at it for what it is, it’s an AWFUL musical that really gives people the opportunity to shine.

Updated On: 6/12/18 at 05:48 PM

I saw the original production either towards the end of previews, or shortly after it opened, and disliked it immensely. As someone who has always liked LaChanze, I found her performance forgettable. The one thing I liked was the set and costume design. I absolutely hated the church ladies, and that might be why I found myself disengaged in the evening's proceedings early on. They were so over-the-top obnoxious. One of my high school classmates was a replacement, but I could not bring myself to return to see the show.

I saw the revival with trepidation, and was surprised at how taken I was with the show. So much so, I saw the production several times including the final performance. Cynthia Erivo was wonderful each and every time I saw her. I found myself teary-eyed as if it were the first time seeing this production.

After seeing the tour in Baltimore in October 2017, it reminded me just how special the revival cast was. Some of the leads paled in comparison to their Broadway counterparts. I thought Mister (Gavin Gregory) was excellent. All that being said, I have tickets to see the touring production again when it plays the Kennedy Center this summer.

Updated On: 6/12/18 at 07:36 PM

kasim said: "It was pretty popular when it came out if I recall, I never saw it or the tour but I didnt really like the movie so thats probably why. Dunno.

Feels soo weird when there is already a revival 7 years later, I assume that more has to do with the theatre no longe wanting it and another theatre does?

Was much changed between the musical and the revivaL?"



Well, 10 years at least on Broadway.

The show has a lot of moments that allow for showing off. That said, it was and it is an awful musical. It is obviously imagined for the page, not the stage.

I saw both and still wonder why the "by the numbers" adaptation is so liked, aside from these women belting their souls out.