Why didn't the 2001 FOLLIES get recorded?

The Roundabout production just wasn't all that good, particularly with the Paper Mill having been done recently and being fresh in people's minds. Mind you, I'm not saying the Paper Mill was perfect (it wasn't), but it was light years ahead of the Roundabout production. I truly believe that Follies cries out for a lavish production and Roundabout's version was anything but lavish. And there's just too many Follies out there (OBR, London, Paper Mill, '85 concert) that are better performed. IMO.

---

It was said at the time that Sondheim had signed an agreement with the company that recorded the Paper Mill production stipulating that there wouldn't be another recording of the score for a certain number of years. I have no idea if that's true.

Had the Roundabout production been a success, it might have caused a problem.

Ditto to what nobodyhome said. Plus (rumor says) that Paper Mill production was intended to move on to Broadway, which would have made that Paper Mill recording the de facto OBC. So perhaps the contract forbade any other Broadway cast album of Follies for a period of time.

Updated On: 11/15/08 at 11:15 PM

BrodyFosse123, I don't understand your post.

You say "IT SUCKED!" and you proceed to post a bunch of photos? Huh?

It seems like posting photos is all you're capable of doing on this board.

Do you have an opinion on the production? Did you see it?

---

I always like to post photos simply to enhance the topic being discussed. I feel that by doing this it helps give some visual scope of what is being discussed, especially to those reading the comments who are unfamiliar with the show or who have never seen anything regarding the discussed show, etc.

I didn't like the 2001 revival of many reasons, the large one being the production itself. It looked and felt 'empty'. The minimalistic approach to the revival just didn't cut it -- you wanted more. Even the musical numbers just laid there. No magic whatsoever.

Walking into the banged-up interior of the Belasco gave you some false hope. You assumed if they carried the tone of the musical's essence out into the house this was going to be one big whopper of a show. Then the musical starts and its a dark stage literally the entire show. Aside from seeing Betty Garrett, Polly Bergen and a few others... you just lost any interest in what was going on. Gregory Harrison and Treat Williams looked like Blythe Danner and Judith Ivey's older sons, which didn't help at all... and that Weisman staircase. Did they expect us to be wowed by that?

It was simply a revival that never should have happened. If you're going to do FOLLIES, do it right. Paper Mill Playhouse did and the fact that people are still talking about it speaks for itself.

I am a huge fan of Follies, and I dragged my wife to this revival. She hasn't forgiven me yet.

---

Alright Pal Joey. Onto a happy topic-
How fabulous was Alexis back in 1971?

THIS good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TxLGIdv85I

(Thank you, jv.)

---

Hearn and Patinkin were very badly miscast. Cook and Remick? Absolutely not. Had Follies run longer in its original run, Lee could have replaced Alexis Smith when she went off to LA. She was perfect for Phyllis.

Oh, that's true. She would have been too young. I don't think Comden and Green were miscast though. Stritch, though I love her to bits, really took all the joy out of "Broadway Baby." Did she really have to take the tempo that slowly?

The ending is Herb Ross' fault. He thought the original ending was "too downbeat." DUH! What did you expect to happen after a two hour long musical comedy nervous breakdown? A happy ending? Sondheim and Goldman could have easily nixed him on that, but Goldman was starting to second guess his brilliant original book and Sondheim probably didn't want any arguments.

I saw the original & Mrs R did not

This was her introduction to the show. It was better than nothing.

---