Wow - Encores is doing FOLLIES- Page 4

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 7/2/06 at 3:01am

With all respect, it is especially in a concert version that Gleason doesn't seem to me to make much sense as Sally.

Sally has a good deal of difficult music to sing, with a range of two full octaves, from G to G. And not only is the music rangy, it requires a good deal of dramatic punch, a powerful sound.

Gleason is a passable singer with an extremely light voice of some flexibility. She is able to put over songs that are suitable to her personal qualities as an actress as long as they aren't too technically demanding or rangy and they don't require much in the way of vocal power. She can put over charm songs, not great musical-dramatic monologues. ("Moments in the Woods," written very specifically for her, is a great musical-dramatic monologue, but one tailored to her specific strengths and weaknesses.)

I rather suspect that she wouldn't even want to sing music as difficult and rangy as Sally's in a high-profile concert. And before attempting something so difficult (and unlike anything she's done before) I think that she would want more than a week and a half of rehearsal. Updated On: 7/2/06 at 03:01 AM

[cliffarico]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 11:28am

I read that the actors do not get paid for their performances for the Encore shows, is that true?

Posted: 7/4/06 at 1:31pm

What is it they say "The lights are on but nobody's home"

I saw the original Follies, the 1985 concert and the Paper Mill Playhouse production and loved them. The 2001 Roundabout revival was definitely underwhelming.

I'm upset with the 2007 Encores! season. They're celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Ziegfeld Follies with 2 book shows and a concert. Both Follies and the concert do not fit in at all with the stated mission of the Encores! series. Paul Gemignani is continuing his ruination of the series. He began last year by cutting significant portions of the Kismet score because he didn't like them. Next year he's putting his buddy Stephen Sondheim's show into a series which is supposed to be about musicals with good scores that are unlikely to be produced and he's putting together a concert for the 3rd show which, in the mind of the powers-that-be at the City Center, replaces their November BASH concerts. And, on top of that, Gemignani is conducting the 2nd show in next year's series. If he's too busy for the job, I say bring back Rob Fisher .

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 1:48pm

I must be forgetting; what signficant parts of the Kismet score were cut? I know that score well and I don't remember major cuts.

From the very beginning (or at least near the beginning) Encores hasn't always done compete versions of the scores. One Touch of Venus cut most of Weill's ballet music, cuts that were far more significant and objectionable than any cuts in Kismet. (That's not to defend the presentation of Kismet, which wasn't very good.) If you want to complain about Encores making cuts to the scores, that's fine and I'll complain with you, but Gemignani can't be blamed for instituting it as a new practice there.

As for Fisher conducting a show, wasn't it announced from the beginning that Fisher would be coming back from time to time? Gemignani conducted Do Re Mi. and nobody called for Fisher's resignation. Guest conductors are common with all orchestras and the return of Fisher to Encores is inevitable and even good.

I don't love Gemignani myself, but he has been doing some good things, like trying to come up with a better setup for the orchestra and less amplification.

None of this is to defend the choice of Follies when so many worthy shows are still waiting to be done. But it's the revue that seems far more questionable.

But I also question whether doing Follies was even his idea. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was Viertel's idea.


Updated On: 7/4/06 at 01:48 PM

[OtherDaryl]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 2:28pm

I can't resist -

The Gals:

Phyllis - Ms. Streep, hands down first choice, especially after her singing in Prairie Home Companion. Ms. Close or Ms. LuPone would suffice.
Sally - 10 years ago, I would have said Midler with Blossom as young Sally, but not anymore. Donna Murphy would be a lovely counter to Streep and the songs would soar. Marin Mazzie (sp?) might be very nice. Oh, wait, it's coming - Dame Christina Ebersole! - If she's not too tired out.
Hattie - Liza or Shirley, for sure! Has to be old school.
Carlotta - Eartha was amazing in London - who hasn't done her take on this already?
French lady - Catherine Deneuve?
Opera ladies - Leontyne Price/Audra MacDonald (I know it's never gonna happen)
Who's That Girl lady - Priscilla Lopez

The Rain on the Roof duo - Dick Van Dyke and Mary Tyler Moore

The guys (mix and match - does it really matter?):

Kevin Kline (especially with Streep or Close), Stokes-Mitchell, Cerveris, Walken, Naughton

[lildogs]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 2:48pm

There's no amount of money I wouldn't pay to see Walken do Buddy's Blues--since he really can dance!

Donna would make an excellent Sally as well...

I like Dick and Mary doing Rain on the Roof as well--too bad we couldn't have Debbie Reynolds and Donald O'Connor--how about Debbie and Tommy Rall?

EDIT: Two other possibilities: Rita and George Chakiris or Jane Powell and Russ Tamblyn?
Updated On: 7/4/06 at 02:48 PM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 2:54pm

Smaxie: That John Simon quote is directly from a book I have with a collection of his reviews. It is under the original broadway production from the 1970's chapter. I'm positive.

[Smaxie]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 3:05pm

Munk, I've linked his review of the 1998 Paper Mill production. Here are the first and last paragraphs. In the first, he admits to not appreciating the 1971 original production, and in the last, you'll find the quote you cited:

"I shamefacedly admit that, like some colleagues, I did not in 1971 recognize the greatness of Follies. I now see that Follies is the kind of show irresistible to anyone who has lived long enough to fathom the meaning of aging, lost youth, mortality, and the magnificent though Pyrrhic victory of not going gentle into that good night. The show potently accumulates meaning from all our losses, from all our gallant last-ditch stands. Never mind Flo Ziegfeld, and mourn for two incomparable stars whose luster the show now subsumes: Alexis Smith and Lee Remick. Were there ever two more maturely beautiful women on our stages, more ladylike and sexy, more aglitter yet accessible, more totally theatrical and not the least bit stagy? Where are you now, Alexis and Lee, you two marvelous Phyllises of the 1971 premiere and the 1985 concert revival? You are built into the accruing glory that is Follies, as surely as Daphne lives in the olive tree, as Andromeda lights up the sky."

...

"Which brings us back to Sondheim, whose supreme masterpiece this is -- a kind of King Lear of musical comedy. In a just and wiser world, it is not Les Miz, Phantom, and Cats that would be forever; instead, there would be one sold-out theater playing Follies always. Always."
New York Magazine - John Simon

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 3:08pm

Not to mention that in 1971, he would not have been comparing Follies to those other shows.

[Smaxie]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 3:10pm

Yes, that too. Cats, Phantom and Les Miz didn't exist yet.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 3:17pm

How true, I didn't even think of that.

I have to go home now and look at my book...I was sure that it wasn't the revival.

Damnit.

Whatever, it's a good quote.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 3:31pm

Victoria Clark as Sally

Dick Van Dyke as Weiseman

Love Debbie and Donald doing RAIN ON THE ROOF.

The actors do get paid for rehearsals and performances but not a whole lot.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 3:47pm

FOLLIES is the only major Sondheim musical that has not received a full television broadcast (the last concert version was shown as a documentary with only selected onstage clips) I wonder if there is any chance this will be broadcast. Surely that decision will be dictated by the kind of cast they are able to assemble.

[sondheimboy2]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 4:00pm

Isn't Donald O'Connor dead? How about Debbie Reynolds and Carleton Carpenter?

How about Carol Channing as Hattie? Can you imagine her singing "Broadway Baby"!

[sondheimboy2]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 4:21pm

And John McMartin (the original Ben) as Dmitri Weissmann

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 5:24pm

Honestly, Donald O'Connor,even dead, is a less crazy idea than some of the casting suggestions that have appeared on various theatre chat rooms and message groups.

[lildogs]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 7:37pm

That's why I suggested Tommy Rall instead of the late O'Connor--but that would have been absolutely unreal--the crowd would go crazy and the house would come down!

Can we get Paula Kelly in there somehow? Maybe "Who's That Woman?"

We are forgetting, though, Miss Angela Lansubury and what a great Carlotta she would be--I'd pay anything to see her live.

Ann Reinking as Hattie?

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 8:05pm

Sally: Meryl Streep
Phyllis: Sigourney Weaver
Ben: Kevin Kline
Buddy: Christopher Walken
Carlotta: Angela Lansbury (sentimental) or Sharon Stone (appropriate).
Hattie: Carol Channing
Solonge: Leslie Caron
Stella: Liza Minnelli
Heidi: Jane Powell
The Whtimans: Mitzi Gaynor and Russ Tamblyn

or, more realistically:

Sally: Christine Ebersole
Phyllis: Donna Murphy
Ben: James Naughton
Buddy: Harry Groener
Carlotta: Diahann Carroll
Hattie: Jane Connell
Stella: Judy Kaye
Heidi: Rita Gardner
Solonge: Ann Reinking
The Whitmans: Lee Roy Reems and Bonnie Franklin







Updated On: 7/4/06 at 08:05 PM

[sondheimboy2]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 9:51pm

I love your casting Michael Bennett, but you're casting some parts a bit too young. Ann Reinking and Judy Kaye are roughly the same age as your leads. They should be at least ten years older.

I could see Sharon Stone being a good Phyllis. Can she sing?

[lildogs]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 9:53pm

MB, you REALLY think Sharon Stone is more appropriate for "I'm Still Here"? SHE would certainly think she's nowhere near old enough to be in this show--and she isn't--and she has hardly been through anything--a couple of so-so movies and no stage experience at all?

Would sell tix in a Melanie Griffith-train wreck kinda way, but no real theatre person would want to see Sharon Stone do anything, much less sing Sondheim.

I do like Lee Roy Reams and Bonnie btw...good call...and Mitzi and Russ--I just love him--had a huge crush on him all through my formative years--such a cutie!

How about Twiggy and Tommy as the Whitmans?

[lildogs]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 9:54pm

Sorry, DP Updated On: 7/4/06 at 09:54 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/4/06 at 10:03pm

Lil dogs - You should compare Stone's career to Yvonne DeCarlo who the song was written for and largely about. People mistakenly think that Carlotta is an old grande dame, who is reflecting on her life. That isn't true. She is a contemporary of Phyllis and Sally who is enduring the day to day glorious and absurdities of being a rather B list celebrity. It's not a song of reflection but of survival.

I can think of no other Hollywood actress who fits that kind of description. Stone has gone from being the "it" girl to "washed up" to "camp icon" in the course of her career.

I can't resist the delight in what Lansbury would do with "I'm Still Here," but if you go by the actual script: absolutely, I think Stone is more right for the role, and at 49 years old, she's actually the exact age given for the character in the description.

And yes, Stone does sing. She's been working on an album of original songs.

POSTCRIPT: Yes, some of those choices are a "little" young; though I think they are the same "relative" ages of the leads in the Philharmonic production. I actually think if Patti LuPone wants to be in this - Stella is her role. She's really not a Carlotta, Phyllis or Sally.

French actress, Zizi Jeanmaire was talked about for the Roundabout production - she'd make a fine Salonge. I'd also love to see Elizabeth Seal. Or if they want real authenticity: French musical comedy queen, Annie Cordy.




Updated On: 7/4/06 at 10:03 PM

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 7/5/06 at 1:31am

The script describes Carlotta as 50. Yvonne De Carlo was 48 when the original production opened. The script describes Stella as being in her middle fifties. Mary Mc Carty was 47.

Phyllis and Sally are both supposed to be 49. Collins was only 44 when the original production opened. Smith was 49,

For some reason some recent productions have cast Carlotta much older, but it makes no sense. She danced in the chorus line with Sally and Phyllis. She wouldn't have been 30 (or older) when they were 19.

Of course, some recent productions have done a lot of things that made no sense.

Truth is that Carlotta probably should be a little older than Sally and Phyllis for "I'm Still Here" to make sense. If the show is set in 1971 and Carlotta is only 50, she really couldn't have done some of the things discussed in the song.

If she's just three years older, it does start to be plausible.

Other reasons why shouldn't be much older: Her continuing sexual attractiveness to Ben becomes less plausible. And it's one thing for a woman of 50 or 55 to tell us that she lives with a 26-year-old (at least if an understanding or appreciative laugh is the hoped-for response). If she's in her seventies (as with Polly Bergen and Ann Miller), it's a little different. And her little monologue to the audience early in the show makes increasingly less sense the older she gets.

Updated On: 7/5/06 at 01:31 AM

[lildogs]

Posted: 7/5/06 at 7:57am

I get what you're saying, MB, but Lansbury was actually alive to remember Brenda Frazier. And I agree, Stone is an old-school movie star, best remembered for flashing her goodies in 1992. That was only 14 years ago--hardly a lifetime of ups and downs....yes, Sharon has done alot of good works in her life and should be lauded for it, and yes, I know she had a cameo in Stardust Memories, but she hasn't careered from career to career. You gotta make it through more than one decade to win me over. And Sharon still wants to play the sexpot, as the BI sequel proves--more like Joan Crawford than Yvonne DeCarlo.

To me, Follies is a musical about the form itself and it's misleading promises--a nightmare in which we see ourselves age and weaken, even the most beautiful and agile falter and fall. There is no such thing as happily ever after (a recurring Sondheim theme) and as such, using true Broadway or film legends who have both blossomed and aged in the public eye has a poignancy (is that a word like striven?) that can't be matched. Like casting Betty Garrett in the revival--sure, there were/are better actresses for the role, but Betty brings an authenticity to a role like Hattie that can't be matched--it's that special little something that can't be replicated by even the most peerless of performers.

And though Sharon is 48, she certainly doesn't look it, doesn't present herself like it, and probably doesn't want people to think of her when they think of, shall we say "mature" actresses.

That being said, she'd probably be just fine--but no way would I prefer her to Angela, or any other of the suggestions that have been posted on the board. It's not that it's a bad idea, it just seems to go against what the show (not the character) is about. And I always thought that Phyllis should be the one who most closely resembles her young self, which is why Lucy and Jesse or Ah! But Underneath works...she isn't the glamour gal she pretends and appears to be.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/5/06 at 8:49am

We can't forget though, that FOLLIES now is a period piece. It's impossible to cast genuinely "authentic" people in the roles today, because the show was current in 1971...

If you were to cast actors who lived through "Abbie's Irish Rose" or could actually have been "Weisman Girls" in the 1920s and 30s, you would have to cast actors the age Dorothy Collins, Alexis Smith and Ethel Shutta would be TODAY which means a cast of actors ranging from 85 to 110. Have fun directing that one!

Basically what I'm saying is that you need to cast the role based on the character, not on whether the actor has actually "lived it," because that is virtually impossible now.

And, I don't for a second believe that Carlotta believes she is "old" - she has a 26 year old boyfriend! You need to go back and read the script; if anything she thinks she is still a sexpot. I agree Lansbury would be wonderful on the song, but she would be absolutely absurd in Carlotta's dialogue.

Carlotta is a 50ish, former sexpot who has descended into self parody...

By the script, Believe it or not:

Susan Lucci
Sharon Stone
Farrah Fawcett
Adrienne Barbeau
Kim Cattrall
Suzanne Sommers
Ann Margret

all make more sense for the role than Lansbury.





Updated On: 7/5/06 at 08:49 AM