Wouldn't Sutton Foster make a great Mabel in MACK AND MABEL...
#2
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:00pm
Absolutely.
#3
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:02pm
she would make a WONDERFUL mable. i love that musical, and i love sutton. hope that happens.
"Gimme Gimme That Thing Called Love"
#4
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:15pm
I love Sutton Foster
CAGES OR WINGS? WHICH DO YOU PREFER? ASK THE BIRDS. FEAR OR LOVE, BABY? DON'T SAY THE ANSWER, ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS.
#5
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:23pm
That would be great. Sutton Foster is amazing.
#6
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:27pm
Being a fan of M & M, I welcome any idea which would result in its revival
Poster Emeritus
#7
Not in the least. Mabel Normand, as portrayed in the musical, projects qualities such as vulnerability, pathos and, ultimately, abject dependency. There is nothing remotely fragile about the coltish Ms. Foster in temperament or type.
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:40pm
Not in the least. Mabel Normand, as portrayed in the musical, projects qualities such as vulnerability, pathos and, ultimately, abject dependency. There is nothing remotely fragile about the coltish Ms. Foster in temperament or type.
#8
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:43pm
It's called acting...
#9
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:46pm
Then Harvey Fierstein can play Billy Bigelow, right?
Type and persona matter.
Type and persona matter.
Updated On: 1/25/05 at 09:46 PM
#10
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:49pm
Agreed, but I don't think that we should let type casting rule. I don't think it would be too much of a stretch for Sutton to play Mabel.
#11
Posted: 1/25/05 at 9:57pm
I'm sure she'd be great, but I'd much rather see her as the title role in Peter Pan. She has the perfect voice, movements, freshness, tomboyishness, presence and youth for the role.
Rosencrantz: "Be happy - if you're not even HAPPY what's so good about surviving? We'll be all right. I suppose we just go on."
- from Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
#12
Posted: 1/25/05 at 11:32pm
I honestly believe that Sutton Foster could play nearly any role.
ESPECIALLY Mabel.
They really do need to revive Mack and Mabel.
I don't even think they need to update the script that much. I doubt the old one would flop with audiences today.
That said, who is still in awe of the wonderful- ness of Bernadette and ROBERT PRESTON on the OBC? sigh....
ESPECIALLY Mabel.
They really do need to revive Mack and Mabel.
I don't even think they need to update the script that much. I doubt the old one would flop with audiences today.
That said, who is still in awe of the wonderful- ness of Bernadette and ROBERT PRESTON on the OBC? sigh....
[title of show] on Broadway. it's time. believe.
#13
Posted: 1/25/05 at 11:52pm
The OBC is fantastic. My favorite Jerry Herman score.
#14
Posted: 1/26/05 at 12:05am
Mine too!
"Look what happened to Mabel!!!"
"Look what happened to Mabel!!!"
[title of show] on Broadway. it's time. believe.
#15
Posted: 1/26/05 at 12:07am
Jerry's favorite too.
#16
Posted: 1/26/05 at 1:11am
"I doubt the old one would flop...today..." For heaven's sake, if its old-fashioned script couldn't find an audience with the likes of Preston and Peters thirty years ago, what makes you think it would fly today?? They just did the revised script at Goodspeed, and, great score nothwithstanding, the show, like several other constantly revised properties such as THE BAKER'S WIFE and MERRILY WE ROLL ALONG, simply doesn't work. Period. It would take star-wattage of an incandescent sort to get this show back into NYC. And as hard-working as she may be, Foster is not a star (she was shown off to as good advantage in TMM as she ever will be). However, she is certainly more appropriate type-wise for Peter Pan than Mabel Normand.
Updated On: 1/26/05 at 01:11 AM
#17
Posted: 1/26/05 at 1:59am
Musicals with darker endings have succeeded in New York and elsewhere more and more often since '74, have they not? Audiences are more open to accept unconventional endings, especially in smaller, more intimate venues. Floyd Collins, anyone?
I'm sure that with the right direction, the right venue, the right cast, and the right producers, the original script could find an appreciative audience.
And by the way, I do not mean a COMPLETELY un- revised script. I only mean one that preserves the original ending in its entirety.
I'm sure that with the right direction, the right venue, the right cast, and the right producers, the original script could find an appreciative audience.
And by the way, I do not mean a COMPLETELY un- revised script. I only mean one that preserves the original ending in its entirety.
[title of show] on Broadway. it's time. believe.
#18
Since FLOYD COLLINS has failed to find an audience in any venue, intimate or large, it's hardly an example of a crowd-pleasing "dark" show. Better to look to SHOWBOAT or CABARET or EVITA or WEST SIDE STORY for shows with unconventional endings that work.
But the downbeat ending of MACK AND MABEL is the least of its problems. For a show dealing with slapstick and comedy, there are mighty few yocks in the script; the romance is paper-thin and barely delineated; situations like Mabel disrupting the film shoot are contrived and cliched; and by the time she succumbs to her addictions, there is nothing left for the character to do (and the actress to play) but look sad.
You'd need to throw the whole thing out and start from scratch and that seems unlikely at this point.
Posted: 1/26/05 at 9:16am
Since FLOYD COLLINS has failed to find an audience in any venue, intimate or large, it's hardly an example of a crowd-pleasing "dark" show. Better to look to SHOWBOAT or CABARET or EVITA or WEST SIDE STORY for shows with unconventional endings that work.
But the downbeat ending of MACK AND MABEL is the least of its problems. For a show dealing with slapstick and comedy, there are mighty few yocks in the script; the romance is paper-thin and barely delineated; situations like Mabel disrupting the film shoot are contrived and cliched; and by the time she succumbs to her addictions, there is nothing left for the character to do (and the actress to play) but look sad.
You'd need to throw the whole thing out and start from scratch and that seems unlikely at this point.
#19
Posted: 1/26/05 at 9:24am
CurtainUp...Sutton as Peter Pan?! She's huge!
#20
Posted: 1/26/05 at 1:02pm
She's tall enough to be your mother... Goliath!
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $72
Tickets From $65