What happened to the 1989 Sweeney Todd Revival?- Page 2

[Pgenre]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 12:18am

I agree with Gotham pretty much wholeheartedly on the CIS SWEENEY.

And Circle In The Square will never top the ROCKY HORROR experience, which was pretty f*cking awesome thanks to David Rockwell and Chris Ashley.

And Alice Ripley's t*ts weren't bad either. Nor were Joan Jett's amazing guitar riffs. And "Science Fiction, Double Feature" has never been better thanks to Daphne Rubin Vega. Raul - a star was born.

If 3PO couldn't work there, nothing could. How about the Raul Julia version? I heard that was pretty incredible and a good (AND innovative) use of the space.

P

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 12:53am

AT teh time of the 1989 production Sondheim was quoted as saying he originally envisioned the piece to be done in a small intimate theatre with minimal production values - in the style of a melodrama presented in the provinces. It was Hal Prince's concept to do the original on an epic scale.

It seems funny now because one of the big complaints some people had about the 1979 production was that it was overproduced with the huge set and the factory machinery going into action every time someone was killed. (I thought it worked very well.) Suddenly when it was done small and intimate everyone thought it looked "cheap" and underproduced. (I thought it also worked well, in a different way.) The point is it showed that SWEENEY is such a rich piece it can be done large or done small and still work.

[beltingbaritone]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:06am

The biggest problem I found with the revival (Gunton in particular) is that Sweeney Todd is not a comedy. It was meant to be scary. Yes, it has it's comedic moments, however there were moments that I felt were played for laughs that shouldn't have been. Unlike the 2005 revival which I felt captured the real horror of the piece.

I just found the whole cast to be underwhelming.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:15am

The problem that I have with Circle in the Square is that it feels like I'm in an arena. I feel like I'm in Madison Square Garden and right after the performance, they are going to pull up the floor so Ice Capades or the Knicks can have the venue. I've never felt comfortable in that theater.

[binau]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:23am

"however there were moments that I felt were played for laughs that shouldn't have been"

Can you give some examples of this?

With the premise that Sweeney Todd isn't a comedy, out of curiosity how do you feel about the film :P?

[morosco]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:46am

Here's a link to Frank Rich's review of the 1989 production.

...Ms. Schulman has played down the simplistically stated ideology of 'Sweeney Todd' by removing Mr. Prince's Brechtian theatrical trappings and with them any trace of Brechtian alienation. We are instead asked to identify point-blank with Sweeney and his partner in crime, the pie-baking Mrs. Lovett (Beth Fowler), as tragic figures caught in conundrums of sex and death. The characters' universal internal demons, rather than the remote demons of their Dickensian London, are center stage.
Review/Theater; New 'Sweeney' With a New Message

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:53am

Also, I saw the final performance of the non-eq tour and having seen hundreds of these productions over the last twenty years I can tell you this was hands-down THE BEST,

I too saw the final non-eq performance. Are you in the Binghamton area?

[tenorboyo]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 2:06am

what scene had a bear on stage?

[Gothampc]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 2:10am

"Ms. Schulman has played down the simplistically"

Now I remember what the problem was: Directed by Susan Schulman, Broadway's most boring director.

Look at her other work:

The Secret Garden (mediocre production of what should have been breathtaking)

The Sound of Music (blandest version of a guaranteed hit).

Little Women (another boring production)

[binau]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 2:13am

"what scene had a bear on stage?"

I c what u did thar.

[gypsy4]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 10:33am

I find that SWEENEY is a dark comedy all the way even though it's dark the whole main focus is hillarious Killing men for revenge and turning there remains in to Meat pies and listen to A little priest how can you not call that comical. the show has it's funny and dark moments but I do find that there is two different concepts you can take with it.

first one: larger scale sets, an orchestration of 30,elaborate costumes,a big cast with a comical taste.

second concept: sets to the bare minimum, simple costumes,small orchestra 5+,smalle cast of 15-20 with a dark emotional taste.

and either way i think you could do something in between.

[matineeidol2013]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 4:10pm

gothampc: im not trying to stir conflict here, but what didnt you like about her production of "Secret Garden"? I thought it was pretty breath taking personally...

[beltingbaritone]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 6:52pm

Like I said, Sweeney Todd does have it's time to be funny. However, the Original and 2005 Revival were chilling, at least to me. The 1989 Revival played to much for the laughs.

"With the premise that Sweeney Todd isn't a comedy, out of curiosity how do you feel about the film :P?"

Well, I don't know about you, but I though it was pretty scary when he killed Pirelli. =) I liked the movie because it was different and it worked for me. Some people would kick me in the shins for saying that.

[binau]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 7:42pm

I also love the movie, and it was different and I also thought it did work, and it was genuinely thrilling at times too (Judge's death was such catharsis :P). I did expect you to like it, though, because people complain it lacks humour (so if you don't think Sweeney is an all-out comedy you'd enjoy it more)..

But again are there any specific instances you remember in the 89 revival that the actors were 'going for laughs' when they shouldn't have?

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 7:47pm

The movie is the best version of the story ever, as far as I'm concerned.

[gypsy4]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 8:15pm

I did like the darker approach with the film and that last scene with Toby always gives me the chills.

[darquegk]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 8:24pm

Sweeney DOES work as a comedy, but you have to decide to do it such a way, or it comes across as "failing." During a recent community theatre production with a cast made up entirely of musical theater majors and opera studenst under the age of 25, audiences laughed uproariously at the show, while there were few moments of gasps or tears. After a few days, we decided to embrace it as a comedy, realizing we could never truly be "scary" to an audience weaned on the very Gothic film version.

We got standing ovations every night, and occasional moments of humor got thirty seconds of show-interrupting applause, during which Sweeney (very much the straight man of the show), had to struggle to remain stoic and stone-faced.

[beltingbaritone]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 9:00pm

The moment I remember most is the Johanna Quartet when Sweeney kills his victims, he did it with a wink to the audience, so to speak. I mean, I think it's slightly humorous, especially when the last customer comes in with other people. Howevever, it just seemed so untruthful on Gunton's part specifically. There were other moments when he just seemed to be more for the laughs as opposed to the chills.

[SweeneyPhanatic]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 10:02pm

Since the original production was mentioned earlier, I'll ask my question here: What was changed, set-wise, for the touring production that was taped for TV? I've seen some photos of the set from the Broadway production in the published libretto, and it seems to me that there is more at either side of the stage, and above.

In regards to the Doyle production: I saw the Hess/Kaye tour, and then the Non-Equity tour (Atlanta and Savannah, GA, if you care). Both times I absolutely LOVED what I was seeing. I didn't always love what I heard from the actors, but I can forgive it simply because of the quality of the overall performances. I enjoyed it more the first time, but I think that's typical of any theatrical experience (which I what I would call my first exposure to the production). Also, the acoustics in the theatre in Savannah were beyond terrible, and if I hadn't known the show as well as I do, I wouldn't have understood much. The best part were the middle-school girls in front of me who clearly only knew the movie, and watched the whole show with "WTF?" all over their faces.

But yeah: original set vs. tour on video set...

[lakezurich]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 10:21pm

Are there any pictures of the '89 revival?

[Pgenre]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 11:19pm

TheatreFan4, yes indeed. Born and raised. Front row on the aisle has been in my family for decades. Did you think it was among the best of those touring monstrosities or not? I think the MISS SAIGON tour was also quite well done, as was CABARET and CHICAGO. The rest have been quite lackluster the last decade or so. The EVITA from the late 80s was absolutely perfect, as was TOMMY from the 90s. Any non-eq favorites?

P

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 11:29pm

I loved it. Sadly I have only been around long enough for the mostly lack luster seasons. I have no idea HOW 'Miss Saigon' AND 'Evita' would fit into the Forum. I've talked so a worker for the league & she told me that it's needed the load-in door had to be increased in size for 'Mamma Mia' to even fit. We are also getting new seats & light anchors. Are you seeing 'Ave. Q' when is comes in October?

Lake:

They are taken from my Libretto so the quality isn't that great.



Updated On: 8/30/09 at 11:29 PM

[Pgenre]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 11:51pm

I am very intimate with that space insofar as its limitations and the tours that have come in have had to further scale back on occasion to accomodate the space. A shame, really. Its a movie house.

Not to be rude, but AVE Q is one of a handful of shows I absolutely abhor so I doubt I shall be going to that. I think one or two of the others this season are ones I may find time to see and I have tickets to all of them so I may find myself so moved on sunday nights soon. We shall see. It's not like it was, I'll tell you that. P.S. I've been going since I was 5 so it's not like I'm ancient. :)

P

[Gothampc]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 11:54pm

"what didnt you like about her production of "Secret Garden"?"

Overall I don't think it showed much imagination and some of the acting was mediocre for a Broadway production.

She let Mandy Patinkin bombast all over the stage. I think she was too afraid of him to pull his performance in. I think Rebecca Luker was somewhat wooden in her role. Robert Westenberg didn't find a lot of depth in his character. Daisy Eagan and the supporting cast were great, pros like Alison Fraser stole the show from the leads.

The set was uninspired. After all, it was 1991, not 1951. In the age of Cats, Phantom and Les Miz, couldn't we have a little magic to the set?

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 8/31/09 at 12:04am

LOL. Well I am only 17. I take what I can get since I rarely get to New York.

I look at all the posters for past seasons in the recital hall & I was in awh of how the majority of the tours fit. I was told that there is VERY little wing AND fly space. I could see in the wings during the final performance of 'Ain't Misbehavin' & it was cramped as hell even with the unit set.