WEST SIDE STORY (2019 Revival) Preview Thread- Page 11

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 6:17pm

joevitus said: "poisonivy2 said: "joevitus said: "Impossible2 said: "How is being a decent person considered a part of the 'Liberal Agenda'?"

By having an agenda that's liberal? I think the phrase is directed at one who wears one politics on one's sleeve. Something, in art, that mostly happens with people on the left, not the right, though obviously in social interaction and politics, there are many whohave a Conservative Agenda. WSS, despite a conventional storyline,has a liberal agenda; Company, despite an unconventional storyline, really doesn't."

Did you ever read Ayn Rand? Or among critics, Arlene Croce or Terry Teachout? So saying that people in the arts don't have an obvious conservative agenda is nonsense."

*Sigh* Yes, but have you ever heard of the exception that proves the rule. By and large artists are liberals. I'd think you'd be in agreement with me that this is a good thing.

My point, just to be clear, is that one can have a liberal agenda as one can have a conservative agenda. Moreoften, if a work ofart has a political agenda, it isa liberal one, whereas in other facets of life, there's more parity between the two. This is not aknock on liberals or a liberal agenda. I'm a liberal. Proud to be. But saying "liberal agenda" isn't to parrot some made up propaganda term from the right, even if they try to use it as a political bogeyman. WSS has a liberal agenda. So? It's a beautiful one: to increase tolerance and decrease bigotry. Nothing wrong with that. But that is a liberal/progressive viewpoint, not a conservative/traditional one."

This might be true of NY Theater. But it's definitely not true in Hollywood. You would be shocked at the homophobia and racism in Hollywood. I know at least five MAJOR leading men who are gay but have not come out because of the rampant homophobia in the business as well as some major directors and industry figures who are extremely right-wing.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 7:21pm

poisonivy2 said: "I know at least five MAJOR leading men who are gay but have not come out because of the rampant homophobia in the business as well as some major directors and industry figures who are extremely right-wing."

You know them or do you know only of the unverified rumor and speculation that follows them?

[Rosette3]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 8:37pm

Soooo.... back to topic of WSS previews. Here a video of Isaac Powell's speech from first preview.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B5_DHjdFJGA/?igshid=6ayrwifrs53h

Updated On: 12/12/19 at 08:37 PM

[bisous3]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 10:38pm

Quoting my friend's Facebook status: “not only was the show absolutely awful, they do not announce at any time before the performance  that you many not leave to use the restroom! We stood in line outside for 35 minutes in the cold to get in…only to have our actual tickets not work, we had to then get back in line once again! No time to use the restroom. Two of us got up halfway through and went out the back between numbers only to be told once out that we were not allowed to go back in . $1000 for four tickets and we were not allowed to go back in and claim our belongings! They ruined one of my favorite shows. It was awful."

Updated On: 12/12/19 at 10:38 PM

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:00pm

This is a revelatory production: required viewing for any serious theatergoer.

As much as I’ve always adored Leonard Bernstein’s music, appreciated Jerome Robbins’ choreography, and to an extent, Stephen Sondheim’s (lesser) contribution, I’ve never fully embraced West Side Story. So often it just felt silly: The idea of dangerous gangs doing pirouettes is just...at the very least, unbelievable. This is the first time that i’ve felt that the verisimilitude of the plot was reflected in the production itself. The revised choreography - nodding heavily and respectfully  to Robbins - adds to that sense of reality. 

Disregard the complaints about missing songs; the objections about who was cast; and the absence of the original choreography. Once again this incredibly talented director has excavated an American masterpiece and shown what the piece could be, at its best: scary, sexual, dangerous, and utterly affecting. 

Not enough has been said about the cast so far, so I feel it is important to note how uniquely this is an ensemble performance.  The leads were all very impressive but, to their credit, never stole the spotlight from their colleagues: such a remarkable feat. 
 
I’ve been pretty unimpressed with most of the shows this year, off and on Broadway, but am elated to have ended the year with this remarkable production.

Updated On: 12/13/19 at 11:00 PM

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:02pm

QueenAlice said: "Since when has there not been a scene where Anita has been assaulted?”

 

It’s called the TAUNTING scene. It’s meant to be stopped before it gets out of hand. The feeling of “woah that almost got ugly” is not there because it did get ugly. They all and out RAPE her. It’s a rape scene.  It’s jarring. 

 

[LuPita2]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:13pm

A rape scene is disgusting and completely unnecessary. Considering Amar's casting, it makes it even more nauseating. 

Disregard the complaints about missing songs; the objections about who was cast; and the absence of the original choreography.

No one has to disregard anything, including the disgusting monster who was cast. People can also miss the original choreography. Feel free to have an opinion, but don't tell other people how to feel. Thanks. 

[JBroadway]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:24pm

My view of the screen was slightly cut off during the taunting scene, so feel to correct me if I’m wrong — only if you saw the show, obviously — but I did not get the sense that it was turned into an actual rape scene. My sense was that it was staged in a more disturbingly realistic way, but still stopped short of Anita actually getting raped. From what I could see, it seemed like one of the Jets got on top of her, but then was interrupted by Doc or whoever. Which is not so far off from what is actually supposed to happen in the text. It may be called the “taunting scene,” but the way it’s written and usually played suggests that “taunting” is something of a euphemism, no? Aren’t we meant to assume that the jets try to rape her?

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:30pm

J:

My view was also a little off (middle orchestra stage right) so, like you, I didn’t have the best visual but your impression was the same that I had. A jet was partially stripped and, unwittingly it seemed, forced upon Anita but both were almost entirely clothed when Doc entered. It was fairly consistent with other productions I’ve seen before.

If someone had a better view, I’d certainly defer. I’ll be returning in February and will chose my seats better then (center of any section is better than closer up, btw).

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:36pm

Hmm sounds like the traditional staging of the taunt. As I've mentioned, Laurents was the first to really intensify the scene in the 09 revival, cutting the live orchestration, and in early previews even having A-Rab fully drop his pants. The scene is always uncomfortable, and I will never forget Karen Olivo's blood-curdling screams. I remember some feeling that the 2008 staging was closer to an actual rape, rather than an attempt.

If you're curious, a clip of the 2009 staging is on Youtube, but it appears to be from out of town, as the live orchestration during the taunt is still there. Some were not happy Laurents cut the orchestration on Broadway, but it did make the scene more realistic, in my opinion. As the run continued, the scene did seem to keep getting more intense, especially as Olivo's performance evolved.  

Updated On: 12/12/19 at 11:36 PM

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:52pm

ljay:

I hope that you see this production and post your thoughts. Olivo’s performance is the only thing that stands out from the Laurents’ production, and this is the first production I’ve seen since where I didn’t think “I miss Karen...”

[NYCblurb]

Posted: 12/12/19 at 11:58pm

Found his CRUCIBLE to be a thrilling night at the theater!

[IronMan]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 12:41am

I saw it tonight, and several hours later I'm still devastated.  I went in expecting a disaster (tried my best to avoid any spoilers, but knew about the major cuts) and it took me a short while to understand what this production was trying to say.  

SEE THIS SHOW.  You might love or hate it, but you sure as hell won't be bored.  I'd go on with a detailed review, but... I'll just say that Isaac Powell should get every award.  

I'd pay full price to see it again, and I haven't felt that way in years. 
 

[IronMan]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 12:41am

double post

Updated On: 12/13/19 at 12:41 AM

[Dan6]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 1:00am

Play Esq. said: "J:

My view was also a little off (middle orchestra stage right) so, like you, I didn’t have the best visual but your impression was the same that I had. A jet was partially stripped and, unwittingly it seemed, forced upon Anita but both were almost entirely clothed when Doc entered. It was fairly consistent with other productions I’ve seen before.

If someone had a better view, I’d certainly defer. I’ll be returning in February and will chose my seats better then (center of any section is better than closer up, btw). "

Just got tickets in March for orchestra left (stage right), J10-12. Should I see if Telecharge will let me exchange for right side of the house? Or center orchestra somewhat further back (where it gets within my price range)? I think someone said earlier on this thread that from right orchestra they missed most of One Hand, One Heart, so it sounds like the sides might be screwed either way. 

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 1:24am

I sat B10 (which is front row) orchestra left, and I did miss quite a bit of One Hand One Heart, but I missed a lot of stuff in general that happened upstage so not sure what the view from row J would be.  It's definitely a pick your poison kind of situation, and I don't think the orchestra was raked very much though I could be wrong.

But about the production… I'm definitely in the camp of thinking this was amazing.  I agree for the most part with Play Esq. I wasn't a super big fan of the traditional show (though granted I've only seen a repertory production and a college production, and I've never seen the movie) because it seemed too elegant? despite the undertones of the message that it seemed to be trying to get across, which I think had a lot to do with the Jerome Robbins choreography.  If you liked how the Daniel Fish Oklahoma peeled back the layers to really show the grittiness of the show, I think you'd like this as well.  It seems much more rooted in the real world with more authenticity in the anger of the two gangs and the violence between them.  The choreography only adds to it, and while I feel like it did deviate from the storytelling in some parts (Cool in particular, though I felt that a bit about the original choreography too), I thought it was a fantastic update to what we’d see today.

The two leads do have incredible chemistry, and when Isaac Powell sang Maria, I really did believe that he had fallen in love with her at a glance.  I really enjoyed the way he played Tony (though I’m assuming van Hove had a hand in that too) since former Tonys I’ve seen have been more of pacifists that are pushed into an act of violence, whereas Isaac has that cockiness of a gang member and just seems rougher around the edges to really remind you that he’s still in a street gang facing enormous discrimination.  I’d say at this point it’s definitely his Tony (ha!) to lose.

I rather liked Yesenia Ayala as Anita as well, and while she didn’t steal the show like in other productions, I think her scenes really seemed more grounded in authenticity as well (which is a common thread throughout this whole production), and I almost felt that she had a bit more agency in the way that she was portrayed.  I definitely second JBroadway and others who have said there’s never the actual act of rape but it’s obvious that’s the direction it’s headed (though I could only see it through the video screen as well so it may be different seeing the actual action).

The projections were rather hit or miss for me.  They had some really beautiful shots, like an aerial view of the gym, and some superimposed images.  But I think they could’ve really worked with turning the projector off for some scenes where there was just a pointless scrolling background or in A Boy Like That where it was just distracting.  And the scenes where it would display the same characters we see in front of us doing something completely different just seemed jarring and unnecessary.

Long post, but all this to say that I really loved the direction this went, and I think it’s very timely and true to its story.  I didn’t miss any of the cuts and don’t really see a way they could be added in (maybe Maria singing a verse of I Feel Pretty to herself without the orchestra before Chino comes to give her the news?).  It’s definitely in great shape, and while I’m sure they’ll be changing some things, I could see this opening next week and still do extremely well.

Also, there’s A LOT of rain.  More than I expected.  No splash zone, thankfully since the stage does a good job of catching it all, but wow is there a lot of water in this theater (I was almost surprised that it wasn’t raining outside when I walked out).

[Mike Barrett]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 8:28am

Im frankly THRILLED this is getting such great reviews. Especially after all the nasty posters on here wrote this thing off and told anyone who thought it had a chance at being good how stupid they were. Karma rocks! Can't wait to catch this one. 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 8:30am

IronMan said: "I'd pay full price to see it again, and I haven't felt that wayin years."

Same here! I was at the first preview Tuesday night, and I have not been able to stop thinking about this production since then. I will definitely be making at least a couple return visits.

 

[Ledaero]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 9:59am

JBroadway said: "My view of the screen was slightly cut off during the taunting scene, so feel to correct me if I’m wrong — only if you saw the show, obviously — but I did not get the sense that it was turned into an actual rape scene. My sense was that it was staged in a more disturbingly realistic way, but still stopped short of Anita actually getting raped. From what I could see, it seemed like one of the Jets got on top of her, but then was interrupted by Doc or whoever. Which is not so far off from what is actually supposed to happen in the text. It may be called the “taunting scene,” but the way it’s written and usually played suggests that “taunting” is something of a euphemism, no? Aren’t we meant to assume that the jets try to rape her?

I actually got the sense that it was an actual rape, which I've never seen before in a production of WSS. My view was also obscured so I could very well be wrong, but I thought Baby John was thrusting on top of Anita when the camera angle was them on the ground as Doc stops it. 

 

[soulgrrl]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 10:25am

Sorry for the lengthy post but there was alot to process with this show.  This was a bit of a mixed bag for me. Saw the show on Wednesday with four other adult members of my family.  Three of the four absolutely hated the show. We also wound up in a huge group of theatergoers waiting for their cars in a nearby parking garage post show and the universal sentiment was a strong condemnation of the show.  Many just didn't like this new modern take. I didn't think it was awful but I was surprised how very polarizing this was for the crowd.

The biggest through line amongst the group was how much they disliked the use of video projections throughout the show. Most felt they come to see a show for the live theater experience, not to be split on whether to watch what was on screen or the live action on stage.  I thought the use of video was clever and effective at times but felt way overplayed.  Definitely think they need to dial back it's usage and make the images more static.  It felt dizzying and distracting at times as they were often panning throughout these bleak blocks (more on that later). 

In addition, the cavernous stage with no set pieces besides what we all called the hole in wall (literally)...way in the back was not a hit.  Many called it lazy creative and made the setting feel too sterile at times. The consensus was we didn't mind stripping back on the staging but most didn't love how bare and stark everything felt.   It didn't help that whole scenes were taking place and you could only see the actors visually on the 'screen' rather than them being up front and center. 

In terms of the acting, Isaac Powell was the standout of the show.  He was earnest while also feeling real.  He doesn't quite have a booming voice with much raw power (sometimes he was drowned out by Maria) but it was still compelling and effectual.   Can't say that I loved Shereen Pimentel's Maria.  Her vocals were a bit too operatic for my taste and didn't always seamlessly align with Isaac's more dulcet tones.  

I was disappointed in Amar's Bernado's, Riff and Anita.  Their performance just didn't quite resonate for me.  The roles felt too big for them imo.  Amar should have never been cast in the role.  Misconduct aside, I'm not sure why they brought him on, given he was almost universally panned in Carousel.  He was very wooden and  I didn't buy him for one second as a newly arrived Puerto Rican immigrant to NYC.  The actress who played Anita was a bit of letdown for me as well.  That role should have been in a class all by itself but the actress felt middling for the most part.  She held up for the assault scene but honestly, she got lost throughout most of the show and felt like she was just another ensemble member.  

On the plus side, I did think the dancers were absolutely amazing and the choreography was terrific. I couldn't really tell what was new or old but I thought fusing hip hop, latin, modern and more felt very contemporary.  The piece done for the Rumble and Gee, Officer Krupke was outstanding. I did love how the show interpreted police violence, racism and classism through dance and the writing.  

There were also a couple things that really irked me.  Being a Latinx New Yorker, I thought the accents were just atrocious.  It probably won't bother most people seeing the show - but I thought it was distracting and inexcusable especially with the wide pool of talent in this city. Would have liked to see authentic representations linguistically given the criticisms of the show in the past.  Amar, Anita and Maria butchered their accents.  

I also really struggled with the backdrops used in the videos.  The majority of the backplates were industrial locations far on the west side.  You didn't get a vivid portrait of the neighborhood these groups were fighting for because the visualizations were all factory laden. There were no tenements or pre-war buildings where families would actually live so that added a lack of authenticity and sterility to the show. I couldn't help but think about how well In the Heights brought Washington Heights alive in that show.  For a show called WEST SIDE story, it felt like there was a chasm between what the actors were saying and what we were seeing.  I note this because the projections were used so prominently throughout the show.  If you're going to use this visual medium, then it should have been more organic especially with no set pieces.  

Lastly, there's alot of testoterone happening in this show.  Streamlining so much of the musical while simultaneously showcasing the alpha men felt disconcerting.  Losing I Feel Pretty minimized the voices of the women even more.  Further, with the actresses playing Anita/Maria not quite dominating and flexing their acting chops until their penultimate scenes, their narratives waned at times.   I felt like I got real sense of Tony's head space repeatedly but the women often vanished.  The director did us no favors by stationing the women in that hole in the wall where they were not visible except via video when we 'meet' them for the first time.  

I don't know if this show is going to be a critical darling or take a drubbing but it wasn't quite the experience I'd hope it would be.  Onwards to the Spielberg take.... 

note...I did wonder if there were any warnings for people who may be triggered by the sexual violence in the show and how the gun was displayed in a scene.  Both scenes were very intense.  Without revealing much, there were audible gasps at one point when the gun was brandished.  Several people were uncomfortable.  I'm not sure how the show should handle but I do think there should be a heads up before people see the show.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 12:39pm

Can anyone shed some light on if the "taunting" scene was originally meant to be an attempted rape? PalJoey, perhaps?

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 2:03pm

In the original film, the taunting still ends with Baby John being tossed on top of Anita before Doc breaks It up. It’s not as graphic as the 2009 staging, but I think it’s still meant to signify a sexual assault.

[joevitus]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 2:05pm

SporkGoddess said: "Can anyoneshed some light on if the "taunting" scene was originally meant to be an attempted rape? PalJoey, perhaps?"

I mean, what else would it be? Why would Doc have to stop them, and why would Anita have the response she has if it wasn't? 

[orph3us]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 2:47pm

Ugh I'm so upset I won't be able to see this soon. WSS is one of my favorite musicals and it's about time it's reimagined. Not that the original isn't good, I just want to see a new spin SO BADLY. Praying it's still open this summer and I can try to make the shlep.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 12/13/19 at 2:50pm

The "taunting" scene is an attempted rape. If Doc doesn't jump in and stop it, the rape happens. Originally, Anita is being held down against her will and Baby John is put on top of her, or is attempted to be put on her.