What Happened to GYPSY?- Page 2

[Theatrical Landladies]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 5:31am

Patti is a powerhouse and overall we enjoyed the performances however agree that both sets and costumes were terrible and there were some really odd directorial decisions. Can anyone explain why the orchestra was revealed in ALL I NEED IS THE GIRL and then again for part of ROSE'S TURN? For us it was just a distraction. It worked well in the overture but should remain hidden from then on (we think).
The puppet lamb was terrible and it made no sense in the style of the show to have a puppeteer rushing round the stage making lamby noises!

[scaryclowns223]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 6:47am

Wow, it seems like the one major complaint (other than the set) is about directorial choices.

Should be interesting to see if Laurents gets smashed by critics.

If he does, I would see producers being very very hesitant about him directing this very high-profile West Side Story revival.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 7:21am

"The puppet lamb was terrible and it made no sense in the style of the show to have a puppeteer rushing round the stage making lamby noises! "

You are kidding, right? A puppeteer? Is he/she on stage for Little Lamb?

Oh, and I thought the point of this revival was to get Patti a Tony. Period.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 7:34am

Can anyone explain why the orchestra was revealed in ALL I NEED IS THE GIRL and then again for part of ROSE'S TURN? For us it was just a distraction.

I felt the reason for revealing the Orchestra in the two numbers you mentioned above was because they are really fantasy sequences, with characters being given the opportunity to live out their performance dreams, so it really works there in my opinion.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 7:42am

If he does, I would see producers being very very hesitant about him directing this very high-profile West Side Story revival.

Laurents is the reason the WEST SIDE STORY revival is happening. Of course he is going to direct it. He has a specific vision for the revival of his musical.

He won't get smashed by critics for GYPSY. What he helps create with LuPone, Gaines, Larkin, and Benanti's fresh characterizations make up for any set design issues, which he really has very little control over.

Yes, the sets are cheap, and the miming of opening the window looks silly, but the weight of the performances here outweigh the lack of scenery.

[puppetman2]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 12:08pm

Which big production number do they use? When I saw the original Broadway production with Merman there was a bug Christmas number with show girls having big ornaments on their boobs. This was also in the first tour. Then I heard that it was changed to a Garden of Eden number.
What is it now?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 12:17pm

They do THE GARDEN OF EDEN, which I believe is the original, but it is hardly a big production number, just Gypsy and the six older girls in skimpy costumes and apple trees on their heads.
The Lansbury revival was the only one I've seen that had a "big" number, the had more showgirls and the boys were in it too in fig leaves.
Revive that!

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 12:30pm

There were boys in the "Garden of Eden" in the Tyne Daly revival as well.

[Alphadog2]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 2:10pm

I saw it last night, and totally agree about the odd directorial choices as well as the fact that it was obvious that there was budgetary skimping on the design. I thought the whole affair was kind of "meh," but I'm one of the few people who think "Gypsy" is an overrated musical to begin with. I know, I know, so shoot me.

oh -

And that #*(!&@!)_# lamb puppet that seemed to wander in from Avenue Q! I kept waiting for it to burst into "The Internet is for Porn." Updated On: 3/7/08 at 02:10 PM

[puppetman2]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 5:20pm

The Christmas number was the original. I saw Merman's Gypsy shortly after it opened on Broadway with it. The Garden of Eden replaced it after the original run.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 6:33pm

Ah yes, The Christmas number!
Thanks for the corrections.
I don't remember the boys in Tyne's version, my mind is going.

[sally1112]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 7:24pm

Your argument looses me here, "Except for LuPone's singing," that in and of itself is a reason for a revival.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 10:00pm

Well I would have rather heard her in a concert than sit thru the awful pacing of this production.

[bk]

Posted: 3/8/08 at 12:42am

Ah, the laziest word usage of the era - looses for loses. Aside from that, Patti is not reason to revive a show that was revived less than five years ago, which itself was a revival of the revival of ten years prior to that. But, if it makes some people happy, then more power to those producers, and especially to Patti, who IS a powerhouse.