Who saw FOLLIES in 2001?- Page 2

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/10/05 at 10:14pm

I had the privilege of seeing the original.I am glad it was revived so my wife could see it this time around. Nothing compares to the original

[Glebb]

Posted: 10/10/05 at 10:20pm

Oh to have seen the original!

I liked London Act I and both acts in NYC.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/10/05 at 10:25pm

I wonder if this is in the Lincoln Center Archives or if it was too early for it

[goldenboy]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 2:00am

Saw 4 productions of Follies:


The Original
London.
2001
and
Los Angeles with Patti Duke and Vicki Carr.
and boy am I sorry I missed papermill.!

The original didn't have an intermission and to my 14 yr old taste was quite a bore. It was 3 hours of arguing couples and music that just wouldn't stop. Please make it stop. Get me out of the theatre. I felt like I was in the middle of a marital squabble and could not get out. The lack of intermission really hurt it. I also think it was overproduced.

London, was a delight! it was more upbeat and magical as someone on here pointed out and it was an entirely different show. I was hooked. The four leads were quite good: Rigg, McKenzie, Daniel Massey and some other guy. Young Buddy was Evan Pappas who became the lead in "My Favorite Year." I remember him being quite wonderful.
And Eartha Kitt singing I'm Still Here! Amazing night of musical theatre. I find the lighter concept works well with the dark material. Oh and there WAS an intermission.

The 2001 revival was lackluster. It was a dark show made darker by the set and the concept. Danner and Ivey couldn't sing. And I cared not a lick for either one of their characters.
I remember Danner being snooty and annoying. The men were iminently forgetable . Who were they again? In spite of good performances by Polly Bergen, Betty Garret and Marni Nixon,the show was a wasted opportunity. Much like the current revival of Fiddler on the Roof. Both directed by misguided British directors. (Not all British directors are misguided; just these two)

The L.A. production wasn't perfect but it had heart and was quite enjoyable. Patti Duke as Phyllis was really interesting and hit the right emotional notes even though she couldn't remember her lyrics to Lucie is Juicie. This became funny as the chorus boys fed her the lyrics. Ah the magic of live theatre. Vicki Carr was quite effective as Sally mirroring the original casting of hiring a woman known for her singing. Donna McKechnie sang the Hell out of Im still here and was very effective but a tad too young it (alright she's not young, but she looked it) Harry Groener was excellent as Buddy and Bob Gunton right as Ben. It was great to see some of Broadway and Hollywoods brightest struting their stuff: Carole Lawrence, Stella Stevens, Carole Cook and Ken Page, etc. Again this concept was a lighter approach and that seems to suit the material better. Light on dark not dark on dark.

If I'm not mistaken, the Paper Mill production was light on dark too.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 2:42am

I too am interested in the behind-the-scenes drama that prevented the Papermill production from coming to Broadway...anybody? PM if you don't want to post it :)

[Glebb]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 7:35am

Interesting, I didn't care for the characters at all in London and Delores (did Kitt replace her?) really annoyed me.

I thought Ivey and Danner good singers, not great but I didn't think the show called for greater voices (sort of like Desiree in ALNM). Come to think of it Ivey and Danner were operatic compared to Applegate in Charity.

[Mamie]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 8:39am

I agree with Glebb about Ivey and Danner's voices. I thought their singing was right on for the characters they were playing. I could see them being good singers when they were young chorus girls, but not so much now. Had they EVER been terrific singers, they wouldn't have left the business. Right?

The men in the leads (Treat Williams and Gregory Harrison) always felt like stunt casting to me. A couple of TV/movie 'names' that just shouldn't have been there. Watching Williams made me regret even more that I had missed Gene Nelson.


(My big disclaimer here is that I had a crush on Gene Nelson in the old movies when I was a little girl and I've never really gotten over it. And I almost idolize Blythe Danner. I began this when I saw "Eccentricities of a Nightingale" many years ago and I still think she's absolutely WONDERFUL.)

[JBSinger]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 8:45am

Saw it. First let me say the acting was spot on. But - and a BIG but - Follies is a show that needs to be well sung, with lavish sets and a big orchestra. The four leads just couldn't handle the music. The supporting players all had stronger voices and put their numbers across with zest. It's one of the reasons that Polly Bergen really stood out. I found it funny that the guys (who had MT experience) were really lacking in their vocal chops. Blythe Danner was having vocal trouble the night I went, but I doubt her singing was much more than what I heard - she was a perfect Phyllis - just couldn't sing it.

Follies has been built into a legend that will be nearly impossible to overcome. Costs being what they are, in order to do Follies in NYC well - it would be too prohibitive.

Posted: 10/11/05 at 9:50am

There is a production of Follies coming up in NYC. Does anyone know when it begins?

edit: never mind kids, found it. Here it is for those who are interested...

Performances are October 28, 29, November 2-5, at 8 PM, with a 3 PM matinee on October 30 and a 2 PM matinee on November 5. For tickets, you can go to www.bht.org or call 212 988-2012.
Updated On: 10/11/05 at 09:50 AM

[lildogs]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 9:56am

I was less than thrilled with the revival too, but just being able to har that score was worth the ticket price. I thought Blythe was fine as Phyllis and she acted the hell out of Could I Leave You? but didn't have a particularly strong voice. All I remember of Ivey's performance was the way she flounced her skirt on the Beautiful Girls entrance. Harrison was forgettable and Williams was just plain awful. I thought Polly was a tad overrated but very good; Betty Garrett was very cute, and the dancing couple (the name escapes me right now) were surprisingly agile. My favorite was Jane White as Solange--I felt she made the most of what she had...It looked like it had been produced on the cheap and the choreo left much to be desired especially after reading so much about Bennett's original staging. Ah well....

It's just such a hard show to do right...I really wish I could have seen Papermill's!

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 10:57am

polly bergen, what a great talent and so underused. i still can't believe she did that dancing lesson thing with mark hamill. so bad i blocked it out. i saw her do I'M STILL HERE at a show in the kaplan penthouse at lincoln center and there was not a dry eye, or dry seat in the place.
her health has been precarious in the last few years.

[lildogs]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:01am

Oy, I saw Six Dance Lessons too! Mark Hamill, please just stick to your voice-over and Christian stuff...That show was like an episode of The Golden Girls brought to by the writers of America's Funniest Home Videos...all it missed were the wacky sound effects...Boing!

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:02am

The recent Roundabout revival was my first exposure to Follies. Given the the unfeasibility of a profitable run, perhaps the only time I'll get to see Follies on Broadway. Wish I could have caught Papermill's, but I was younger then, and didn't know any better....

[Glebb]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:20am

Did Dorothy Collins and Alexis Smith have great voices?
I really don't know. I used to just stare at my mothers record cover of FOLLIES and never listened to it.
My introduction to FOLLIES was the concert version.
Cook had a great voice but Remick's (I love her never the less) was not that great.

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:24am

dorothy collins had a fabulous, smooth mix. she was a band singer from the "your hit parade" show in the 50's. not the actress that alexis was, but a wonderful voice and presence.

[Glebb]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:28am

Thanks GG.
I saw a clip of The David Frost Show and De Carlo did "I'm Still Here."

[Smaxie]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:33am

The drama surrounding the Paper Mill Follies was the following: first class rights for Follies are controlled by Bobby Goldman, the wife (now widow) of author James Goldman. For whatever reason, Sondheim has very little say or control over the first class rights for Follies. She could not let the Paper Mill production come to Broadway because she had already given the rights to Roundabout to produce a revival.

There was a rumor that Sondheim didn't like the Paper Mill production and allowed Bobby Goldman to be the heavy in preventing it from coming to New York. However, he saw the Paper Mill production repeatedly, came to the closing party, and served as executive producer of the Paper Mill recording, so I've always found it doubtful that he didn't enjoy it.

Updated On: 10/11/05 at 11:33 AM

[lildogs]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 11:38am

I agree that Dorothy Collins had a great voice and Alexis is a great actress--you should easily find her singing Could I Leave You? on video...

I think traditionally that Sally is cast with a stronger singer, Phyllis a stronger actress...

One quick thing: on the Rigg/MacKenzie recording, One More Kiss is peerless!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 5:14pm

Mamie - Both Williams and Harrison have experience in Broadway musicals (as well as regionally), so I'm not sure if they qualify as "stunt casting".

[Jayar]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 5:52pm

I just happened to be thinking about the London Follies a couple of days ago as I went to see "High Society" at the Shaftsbury Theatre where the London production was staged.

I loved the London Follies and always got a huge thrill when the party set transformed into the Loveland set. What I wouldn't give to see that again. I thought the original London cast was just perfect though I preferred Eartha later in the run as Carlotta. Diana Rigg was fantastic, though I don't think this comes across so well in the recording as she was probably the weakest singer in the cast. But to see her perform "Ah but Underneath" was something else.

I must admit I was wondering to myself if it was about time London had a fully staged West End production. It would be a great one for the National Theatre.

[Mamie]

Posted: 10/11/05 at 6:19pm

Thanks MisterMatt. Maybe they were a lot better in the other things they appeared in. I thought they were just awful in this and that was the only excuse I could come up with for casting them.

[Theatrical Landladies]

Posted: 10/12/05 at 5:35pm

JAYAR.... I am in total agreement that LONDON deserves another FULL SCALE Follies! You're right that the transformation into LOVELAND was simply incredible and I loved the way the LOVE WILL SEE US THROUGH and YOU'RE GONNA LOVE TOMORROW were split by LOSING MY MIND and AH BUT UNDERNEATH and do you remember the lift going up with the your PHYLIS/BEN nd coming down with the older couple (just before A B U)? BRILLIANT! Diana Rigg was to die for though the recording doesn't do her performance justice!

In contrast the 2001 production was just dull!

[wickedfan]

Posted: 10/12/05 at 6:31pm

Singing wise- You need a vocally strong Ben and Sally (If you have "eh" singers doing "Too Many Mornings" then, well, it would kill it) Buddy doesn't have to be the best singer, neither does Phyllis. Heck, "Lucy and Jessie" consists of like, three notes. BUT they must all be good actors as well. Because if they can't act then watching the show would be just plain boring. It's two and a half hours of bickering. If the actors aren't good while doing it, then what's the point?

The same could be said with the score. Yes, you have to act the songs, but certain songs call for strong, or somewhat strong, singers. "I'm Still Here", "Losing My Mind","Too Many Mornings" etc.

[Jayar]

Posted: 10/12/05 at 7:00pm

Theatrical Landladies -Glad you agree, I can't remember the bit with the lift, see this is why I'd love to see that production again, I hate to think what else I might have forgotten. I do remember how wonderful "Mirror, Mirror" was, that was always one of the highlights for me. Can you imagine what it would cost to stage that production now!!

[WriteInNYC]

Posted: 10/12/05 at 7:28pm

I saw it and enjoyed many of the performances, but there was just something missing. I wouldn't say it was a bad revival, but a very paint-by-the-numbers version of an otherwise groundbreaking piece. I saw it with a friend who didn't know the show and he enjoyed it but had the same opinion, "Good, not great." I do remember liking the way they used the principal quartet and their younger selves in various scenes and songs, but that was as imaginative as it got. Read Ted Chapin's book, "Everything Was Possible," which chronicles the original Broadway production from first rehearsal through closing night, it's fascinating. Chapin's book outlines Hal Prince and Michael Bennett's original concepts, all of which sound so much more exciting than the 2001 revival.