The Wild Party Opens This Week- Page 4

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 9:08pm

Brantley Loves Foster, Pasquale, et all - Dislikes The Show

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/17/theater/review-the-wild-party-with-sutton-foster-as-a-louche-jazz-baby.html?ref=theater

 

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 9:12pm

I only know this show via Cast Recording, but I thought "Queenie Was a Blonde" and "Out of the Blue" were the most interesting part of the show (not as good as "Queenie Wazza Blonde" / "Marie Is Tricky" / "Wild Party", but still) and I am absolutely devastated that I will never hear Sutton's "Out of the Blue"!

 

I simply wish this cast could do the Broadway version - let them soar (and get Joshua Henry back!)

[Margo319]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 9:17pm

Can anyone tell me a running time for this?  The NYT article mentions it being two hours.  

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 10:31pm

Twenty

I use the term "naughty version" instead of bootleg and it works fine.

I saw the Crazy Mandy version and loved it. Never saw this version but have the CD. I have to admit that like many CD's I own, I have never listened to it. I intend to rectify that error over the weekend .

[Kad]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 10:44pm

Saw this tonight. It's a very strong production of a show that simply doesn't have a lot going for it. 

Joaquina Kalukango is a revelation. More of her onstage, stat! 

Miriam Shor stops the show with her number- a pity that after that, she becomes an ensemble member. 

Pasquale is the greatest male voice we have in musical theatre, and continues to show it off to great effect. 

Props have to be given to Ryan Steele, who is hard to take your eyes off of in the ensemble. 

Sutton, somewhat miscast and her role is diminished by Lippa's ill-advised and illogical revisions. 

The opening of the show now does not coherently work. I'm shocked such a regressive change was allowed to happen under the watchful eyes of Tesori and Leigh Silverman. 

The show sidelines the interesting side characters and flattens its main characters, all to focus on a fairly pedestrian and uninvolving melodramatic romance. Rearranging the opening can't resolve the fact that there's a lot of running just to stay in the same place in this show.

[broadwayboy223]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 10:45pm

So disappointing that How Did we Come To This is cut. Such a great song. Whoever was encouraging these strange cuts should feel ashamed.  

[Margo319]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 10:53pm

Running time?

[broadwayboy223]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:03pm

Is this supposed to be going to Broadway?

[Kad]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:16pm

It's two hours with intermission.

[Owen22]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:16pm

Dear God, that ridiculous new song at the end for Queenie is NOT what that show needed.

[Margo319]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:19pm

Thanks so much Kad!

[somethingwicked]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:20pm

It seems fairly clear to me the real motivation behind getting rid of "Out Of The Blue" and "How Did We Come To This?" was to placate Sutton Foster's voice. She sounds great in the show, by most accounts, but she dropped out of a benefit as recently as last week because of bronchitis that's plagued her for almost a month. Immediately before that, she canceled a string of concert appearances for the same reason. You're telling me it's a creatively-motivated coincidence two of her character's huge numbers have been cut in the wake of all that, with one of them conveniently replaced by an introspective ballad? I don't buy it.

Lippa wrote Queenie around the very specific parameters of Julia Murney's voice, so the vocal demands of the role are exceptional for anyone, let alone someone recovering from a vocal impairment (especially someone like Foster who doesn't typically sing this way to begin with.)

Updated On: 7/16/15 at 11:20 PM

[broadwayboy223]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:34pm

^Really? I've always thought Sutton was a great high belter. Although she uses more of a mix the higher she goes. I've just noticed that over time Suttons voice has gone through some interesting changes. When she was in Millie her voice/flowed much better and her vibrato was fast and thrilling and consistent. Lately and in recent years her vibrato has gotten slower and she tries to straight tone into vibrato but it sounds harder and a little more wobble like. Her voice also seems a little tighter. Anyone else have similar thoughts? Side note: I highly doubt it was just Suttons vocal health that made Lippa cut the songs. There was probably a list of terrible reasons he had to cut them and maybe Sutton's vocal health was just another reason.

[somethingwicked]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:38pm

When I say the kind of singing in the show is not Sutton's forte, I primarily refer to the consistently intense vocal stamina required. She has a terrific high belt, to be sure, but most shows she's done have really only had one big number where she's had to sing that way ("Gimme Gimme" in Thoroughly Modern Millie, "Astonishing" in Little Women, "Show Off" in The Drowsy Chaperone, etc.)

As originally written, Queenie has song after song after song that are all like that. "Out Of The Blue," "Raise The Roof," "Maybe I Like It This Way," and "How Did We Come To This?" are all full-fledged eleven o'clock numbers in their own right. That's something she's never had to navigate before.

Updated On: 7/16/15 at 11:38 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/16/15 at 11:58pm

I felt Sutton wouldn't have the sultriness to pull off "Out of the Blue" but damn I really wanted to hear that song live!

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:20am

I don't doubt that Lippa changed the opening to further differentiate from the LaChiusa version (although, the horn opening was one of my favorite parts of this score, and one of the only era-appropriate sections.)

[Kad]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:29am

The horn remains, playing "Queenie Was a Blonde." It just segues into "A Wild, Wild Party"- which makes no sense as staged and presented here. 

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:34am

Why on earth would you play a motif from the score that no longer remains part of the show? Curiouser and curiouser...

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:35am

The illadvised changes to the top of the score were made long before Foster came down with bronchitis.  Once again, terrific actors trapped in a mediocre musical.

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:38am

Once again, why could they not have done the LaChiusa version?

[Kad]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:49am

"Why on earth would you play a motif from the score that no longer remains part of the show? Curiouser and curiouser..."

 The motif is repeated- and sung- throughout the show. As are some other cut motifs. It's a rather sloppy revision.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:52am

Whizzer, I take back what I said! I saw the show tonight, and I was just perplexed. 

There's no way the changes were made for Foster. No composer is going to rearrange an entire show for Foster. The tickets were already sold, etc. If she had dropped out, we'd all still have been there. 

The changes made no sense. The ending is terrible. The beginning is terrible. It's based off an epic poem which has the opening line "Queenie was a blonde." So to not have that open the show is just stupid. 

Having listened to the original recording for years, I was interested to hear the book and see the show as a whole. I was surprised at how sung-through it was. And at some of the recitative I didn't know existed. (Maybe it didn't exist prior to this?) 

Overall I was disappointed. The story is not engaging. I have no clue why Black wants Queenie or why Burrs is ****-faced drunk or why Kate want Burrs. It's all very surface. The direction felt very static - Let's cross to center stage and talk. 

The main 4 performances were all a little scattered. On paper, I was sooooooo excited to hear Pasquale sing "What is it About Her?" But he just didn't have the insanity I wanted. He didn't delve into craziness like I wanted. Sure, he was trying for it, but I wasn't convinced that this was just an erratic person. Foster was indeed miscast, but given it's Encores I'm glad she was playing outside of her type. Her voice just didn't suite the music. It needed a big voice to suit everyone else, and she's a musical comedy girl. The Kate, I thought, was pretty great. I was into her. Black..... My only thing with him is: let me get to know the melody first before you riff around the melody. And then in the sections where he didn't riff like crazy he was just uninteresting. 

The choreography was pretty okay. There were some moments - like "Life of the Party" - where it felt very out of place. 

Overall, I just don't think it's a great show. It's some great songs, but in the context of the show they just aren't so great. 

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 1:02am

He's had fifteen years to revise the show - there is absolutely no excuse. I am very disappointed about this. It seems that Lippa woke up on the 25th of June and was like "I think now is the right time to revise "The Wild Party" for Encores!"

 

However, the pictures look exquisite - with the picture of Foster and Pasquale and the knife reminds me of  Collette and Patankin, especially with Foster in the bathrobe. And that clip of Pasquale jumping on the bed makes me think about how great he would be at "Marie Is Tricky". God this cast is to die for and I'm so upset.

Updated On: 7/17/15 at 01:02 AM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 1:50am

Totally. And I think, as someone who invested $25, that I'm not mad I went by any means. It's an awesome cast with some glorious vocals. But, I think, nowadays with Encores, it's like "Will this transfer?" And this one is just a dud in that regard. I feel bad for Lippa because he's been successful, but not. And this is just another nail in the coffin. Some terrible, terrible revisions were made to an otherwise incredible score. This might have reawaken the regional rights. But not now. 

[SmoothLover]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 3:48am

"Whizzer, I take back what I said! I saw the show tonight, and I was just perplexed. 
There's no way the changes were made for Foster. No composer is going to rearrange an entire show for Foster. The tickets were already sold, etc. If she had dropped out, we'd all still have been there. 
The changes made no sense. The ending is terrible. The beginning is terrible. It's based off an epic poem which has the opening line "Queenie was a blonde." So to not have that open the show is just stupid. 
Having listened to the original recording for years, I was interested to hear the book and see the show as a whole. I was surprised at how sung-through it was. And at some of the recitative I didn't know existed. (Maybe it didn't exist prior to this?) 
Overall I was disappointed. The story is not engaging. I have no clue why Black wants Queenie or why Burrs is ****-faced drunk or why Kate want Burrs. It's all very surface. The direction felt very static - Let's cross to center stage and talk. 
The main 4 performances were all a little scattered. On paper, I was sooooooo excited to hear Pasquale sing "What is it About Her?" But he just didn't have the insanity I wanted. He didn't delve into craziness like I wanted. Sure, he was trying for it, but I wasn't convinced that this was just an erratic person. Foster was indeed miscast, but given it's Encores I'm glad she was playing outside of her type. Her voice just didn't suite the music. It needed a big voice to suit everyone else, and she's a musical comedy girl. The Kate, I thought, was pretty great. I was into her. Black..... My only thing with him is: let me get to know the melody first before you riff around the melody. And then in the sections where he didn't riff like crazy he was just uninteresting. 
The choreography was pretty okay. There were some moments - like "Life of the Party" - where it felt very out of place. 
Overall, I just don't think it's a great show. It's some great songs, but in the context of the show they just aren't so great. "

 Felt the same way about the choreography. It was serviceable but nothing memorable.