"So, wait. Is there no schoolyard scene when Florence sees the girls for the first time? Or the contract scene where they are taught how to walk in heels? They just skip over all of that?!"
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
Sorry Diva- There is no contract sign where they are taught to walk in heels. There is a brief scene in a schoolyard. Florence sees them, hands them contracts, tells their parents to sign them and tells Shirley, "I'm gonna make you a star." Shirley responds, "I already am a star!"
Then the sign of 6 months later comes down. It happened so quickly I forgot about it. It was rather ludicrous too. I mean these four Black girls just trusted this strange White woman to make them stars for no reason?
Of course this is all brought back at the end when Shirley tells Florence, "You made us stars," and Florence answers, "You already were stars!"
Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco.
Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!
Ha I pray it's Louie Louie, just so everyone can see the crazy wig the guy gets to wear. For the record he also plays the blind son and the gay press agent!
Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco.
Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!
Sounds like the re-writes consisted of some strange cuts that make no sense.
Oh well.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
Hey Buff...Theatrediva isn't the only person who is done with you...I know of at least three others including myself who wish you would abandon this board and keep your opinions isolated to your all-knowing, self-important blog. Oh, and no need for your false plattitudes, you can thank me with your silence.
For someone who wants to use the "that's not what this thread is about" line, you sure have a way of highjacking the thread.
Back to the subject.
Who went tonight?
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
Oh lord. I was there. I don't think there is any saving this one. Whizzer's post is 100% correct. It is just a complete mess. I will say that Beth Leavel is giving a heroic performance, but other than that, there is just nothing good to say about this train wreck.
Based on the comments found in this thread, it seems the fatal mistake was in not making Greenberg's life and career compelling; but rather it seems they just used it as an excuse to string some familiar hits together. Wrong!
Also, back in the 80s I saw a few productions directed by Sheldon Epps ('Blues in the Night' being one) and I thought ALL of them were poorly conceived and directed.
Beth Leavel needs to fire her agent for getting her involved with this hot mess of a show. I thought I would enjoy the music at least, but needless to say this show was a complete waste of my time. I'm sorry I wasn't there the same night as Whizzer, because I was certainly entertained by his recap.
Well it's not like her agent was holding a gun to her head. She could have turned it down.
"If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it." -Stephen Colbert
I've no doubt that if I had seen BIY I'd very likely be saying things like “she should fire her agent,” etc., but since I'm on the outside... as far as a career move, it was her first chance to get her name over the title – at least on Broadway – (did she?) and be the one who carries the show. The critics (assuming they'll blast it) will leave her unscathed (trust me). She picked up a nice paycheck for a couple of months, was treated like a leading lady, gained a major upgrade in her billing, got to belt out a tune (I assume) or two, and be introduced to audiences outside the theater community. I can't help but remember the days when I saw tons of early previews of new Broadway and OB musicals, I would be horrified by some of the roles certain wonderful musical comedy actors had agreed to do. It's much easier now that I'm not watching such things much anymore. I'll leave the 1st night shocks and dispatches to you guys! It's been an enjoyable thread, and bound to get even better.
Thanks for the clarification. Idiotic me, I knew she was over-the-title, I what I meant to say was top billing. She does have that, yes? Or is she billed as a member of an ensemble?
After reading all the horrible reports on this and another thread (which should have been placed in this one), I was pleasantly suprised that the show turned out to be an amiable and entertaining show. It's definitely no train wreck, just a competent paint by numbers show biz rise and fall tale, just like "Buddy," " Jersey Boys, " et al. I found it an agreeable way to spend a couple of hours.
The show is too long. They could cut out some of the non Shirelles songs, and be better for it. There also needs to to be a scene showing how the group got to be famous.
The show has heart. I cared about the character of Flo. I thought her story was interesting, certainly interesting enough to be the center of the show, as the creators obviously desired. I thought Beth Leavel gave a very fine, well thought-out performance.