#26
Posted: 1/11/12 at 5:05pm
Tickets are now also available at the CTG website. Many good orchestra seats for the days I looked at were already gone though most seats at the Ahmanson are not bad anyway.
Victoria Clark will be Sally in Los Angeles Follies — Page 2
#27
Posted: 1/11/12 at 6:24pm
Let the Bernadette Peters trashing begin, before Victoria Clark even goes on stage...
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#28
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:14pm
^ Exactly. Kind of irritating.
#29
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:16pm
"...but Bernadette's performance was puzzling, to say the least..."
I agree completely WWII. I saw the show this past weekend. I thought "In Buddy's Eyes" showed promise. But the rest of her performance was so overwrought and weepy, I couldn't understand her choices. She milked "Losing My Mind" like he was in a high school production. She started the song crying and progressed to the point that she was literally squatting on the stage, croaking the song out while wiping tears from her face.
Other than her performance, I thought the production, and all the other performers, were brilliant. So I can't wait to see this production pulled into place with a proper Sally.
I agree completely WWII. I saw the show this past weekend. I thought "In Buddy's Eyes" showed promise. But the rest of her performance was so overwrought and weepy, I couldn't understand her choices. She milked "Losing My Mind" like he was in a high school production. She started the song crying and progressed to the point that she was literally squatting on the stage, croaking the song out while wiping tears from her face.
Other than her performance, I thought the production, and all the other performers, were brilliant. So I can't wait to see this production pulled into place with a proper Sally.
Art has a double face, of expression and illusion.
#30
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:27pm
I saw Clark play Sally at Encores and I saw Bernadette in DC and I thought Clark gave the better performance. Overwrought and weepy, as artscallion said, is exactly what I thought of Peters.
#31
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:34pm
I'm sorry, the fact that you didn't like a performance doesn't mean that the performer wasn't "proper".
But it's not like trashing Peters isn't popular on BWW - I pretty much feel it is the general consensus that a monkey could pull off any performance better than her.
But it's not like trashing Peters isn't popular on BWW - I pretty much feel it is the general consensus that a monkey could pull off any performance better than her.
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#32
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:37pm
The Peters trashing actually seems fairly recent to me. Patti LuPone has been getting trashed here by some since day one, LOL.
Updated On: 1/11/12 at 07:37 PM
#33
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:38pm
I guess I'm in the minority because I love Bernadette's Sally, although she does overdo it at times. Vicki Clark is a phenomenal talent herself and I'm thrilled for her.
#34
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:44pm
The Peters trashing actually seems fairly recent to me. Patti LuPone has been getting trashed here by some since day one, LOL.
Whether she's successful or not, Peters is one of the few Broadway stars that will never give you the performance you were expecting from her. I know that must be infuriating to some, but I rather see someone from her caliber explore and risk and get it wrong, than a calculated performance like...you know, other Broadway stars usually give.
Whether she's successful or not, Peters is one of the few Broadway stars that will never give you the performance you were expecting from her. I know that must be infuriating to some, but I rather see someone from her caliber explore and risk and get it wrong, than a calculated performance like...you know, other Broadway stars usually give.
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#35
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:50pm
"...I'm sorry, the fact that you didn't like a performance doesn't mean that the performer wasn't "proper". ..."
Proper's in the eye of the beholder, Blaxx. So, um yeah...in my opinion, it does. Since when does an educated audience member not get to express whether they thought a performer/performance was proper to the role? I thought that's what this site was for...to discuss how we felt about shows and performers. Didn't know BP was hands off.
I never come on BWW to bash any performer. So don't lump me in with your serial bashers. I just saw this production this weekend and had strong and specific feelings about it. Just because you don't like hearing them, or because there's been a glut of the same opinion lately, doesn't mean my opinions aren't valid.
Proper's in the eye of the beholder, Blaxx. So, um yeah...in my opinion, it does. Since when does an educated audience member not get to express whether they thought a performer/performance was proper to the role? I thought that's what this site was for...to discuss how we felt about shows and performers. Didn't know BP was hands off.
I never come on BWW to bash any performer. So don't lump me in with your serial bashers. I just saw this production this weekend and had strong and specific feelings about it. Just because you don't like hearing them, or because there's been a glut of the same opinion lately, doesn't mean my opinions aren't valid.
Art has a double face, of expression and illusion.
Updated On: 1/11/12 at 07:50 PM
#36
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:51pm
I should say that I actually like Bernadette Peters- I thought she was fantastic in A Little Night Music, and I love her performances on the Sunday/Into the Woods recordings. But I just didn't enjoy her work in this production.
I am a firm believer in serendipity- all the random pieces coming together in one wonderful moment, when suddenly you see what their purpose was all along.
#37
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:53pm
Proper's in the eye of the beholder, Blaxx.
It's blaxx for you, love. You're right, of course, it's great you'll get to finally enjoy the show with a "proper" performer for the role.
It's blaxx for you, love. You're right, of course, it's great you'll get to finally enjoy the show with a "proper" performer for the role.
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#38
Posted: 1/11/12 at 7:53pm
Same with me WW. I've loved her in many things. I'm not a BP hater in the least. I just thought she was awful in Follies.
Art has a double face, of expression and illusion.
#39
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:04pm
, but I rather see someone from her caliber explore and risk and get it wrong, than a calculated performance like...you know, other Broadway stars usually give.
I TOTALLY agree.
I TOTALLY agree.
#40
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:05pm
Your problem is with my word choice? Really?
Merriam-Webster
proper: marked by suitability, rightness, or appropriateness : fit
Merriam-Webster
proper: marked by suitability, rightness, or appropriateness : fit
Art has a double face, of expression and illusion.
#41
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:19pm
I did say you were right (look up). If you don't think Peters is suitable, right or appropriate for the role, then you'll soon have Clark who is obviously all that and more. I just rather watch an "awful" uncalculated performance from a risk taker, is all.
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#42
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:26pm
I don't get how this became a discussion about calculated and uncalculated performances, or what exactly that even means in this context.
#43
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:29pm
It's nothing, love. I was just addressing how Clark's performance magically became better than Peter's, even before she starts. But I see that a lot of posters found Peters so awful, that they think even Miss Piggy could do better.
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#44
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:32pm
Well, Clark has performed the role before, albeit in a concert-style setting. It isn't as if people are just assuming.
I am a firm believer in serendipity- all the random pieces coming together in one wonderful moment, when suddenly you see what their purpose was all along.
#45
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:32pm
Well, some of us have seen her play the role already. Shrug a dug dug.
#46
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:34pm
Well, Clark has performed the role before, albeit in a concert-style setting. It isn't as if people are just assuming.
I'm sure a few here are assuming, but anyhow...
I'm sure a few here are assuming, but anyhow...
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#47
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:35pm
I saw Clark LIVE in the Encores! concert, and I much prefer Bernadette's performance. But I DO think Clark has it in her to deliver a wonderful Sally in a full scale production.
#48
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:35pm
The thread you're reading must have different posts than the one I'm reading, blaxx.
Updated On: 1/11/12 at 08:35 PM
#49
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:38pm
Well, b***h better be the 8th wonder, or else I'll pay you a visit, PRS!
Listen, I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it is "artistic". - JANICE
#50
Posted: 1/11/12 at 8:42pm
I mean, clearly it's all subjective. I didn't NOT want to like Peters in the role when I saw it in DC, but I just didn't care for almost any of the choices she made. And even though Bernadette had the longer rehearsal period, had more performances under her belt and had the benefit of a full production around her, I still liked Clark better at Encores.
But seriously, I don't see much "bashing" of Peters in this thread, certainly not enough to warrant all these noses out of joint.
But seriously, I don't see much "bashing" of Peters in this thread, certainly not enough to warrant all these noses out of joint.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95