Posted: 9/23/15 at 12:15pm
I wasn't aware of this board when Promises, Promises had its 2010 revival. I'm wondering what thoughts are about this musical's revival. I recall watching The Tony Awards choreography segment from Promises, Promises repeatedly after its June 2010 broadcast. Eventually, I finally got to see the revival in San Francisco last year. Thoughts? Feedback? Input?
Updated On: 9/23/15 at 12:15 PM
Posted: 9/23/15 at 12:22pm
I saw it. It was dated, but I enjoyed the evening. Loved the Turkey Lurkey dance number. Sean Hayes was out and I saw his understudy. I later saw How to Succeed, the similarities in dance numbers, sets, costumes, was very evident. The same creative team was involved in both.
Posted: 9/23/15 at 12:22pm
I saw it in NYC, front row, center seats. All the magic I expected was missing. It was a dull show.
My brother and sister-in-law loved it. My daughter and brother agreed with me.
"Turkey Lurkey Time" from the movie "Camp" far outshined what we saw on that stage. Even the old video clip from the Tonys was more inspired.
Posted: 9/23/15 at 6:38pm
It was okay. Katie Finneran was the standout. Sean Hayes was very good and Cheno did her best even though she was clearly miscast.
Posted: 9/23/15 at 6:45pm
I loved it; I think I ended up seeing it 3 times. Katie Finneran was the best part of the show
Posted: 9/23/15 at 6:49pm
Posted: 9/23/15 at 6:55pm
I enjoyed it for what it was. Hayes gave 100 percent. Chenoweth struggled in a role that was all wrong for her. Finneran was fun but I thought it was an overrated performance. I felt Angela Lansbury gave the best featured performance that year. The critics slammed the production, and it wasn't nominated for Best Revival.
Posted: 9/23/15 at 7:27pm
Ugh. Don't get me started. It was woefully miscast. The choreography was a huge let down. The interpolation of two additional Bacharach/David songs that were not written for the show added nothing - - - and they changed the time period of the show from the late '60s to the early '60s.
Posted: 9/23/15 at 7:55pm
It wasn't well directed or choreographed. Rather, it was over-choreographed, so when the actual dance moments like the should-have-been-wonderful "Turkey Lurkey Time" happened they just seemed like extensions of what was going on throughout and they failed to pop. Neither Sean Hayes nor Kristen Chenoweth were ideally cast, but both gave good performances. Chenoweth sounded beautiful. Goldwyn was quite good as Sheldrake and Katie Finneran was a ton of fun. The added songs were completely unnecessary and did not fit in.
It was enjoyable, but it could and should have been better.
Updated On: 9/24/15 at 07:55 PM
Posted: 9/23/15 at 9:42pm
Hayes did his best, but it was a poorly directed production. Chenoweth was woefully miscast, but I thought she was fine and didn't hate her nearly as much as some other people did. A pre-Scandal Tony Goldwyn was quite good.
I remember hating the choreography and couldn't understand why everyone always talked about Turkey Lurkey Time until I went home and watched the Donna McKechnie original on YouTube.
I also didn't get all the hoopla over Katie Finneran that year. I mean she was funny, but it wasn't the comedic milestone performance some made it out to be.
Posted: 9/23/15 at 11:13pm
It was awful!!!!!!
Posted: 9/23/15 at 11:24pm
Posted: 9/24/15 at 1:52pm
I dunno why they don't just always use the Bennett choreography for Turkey Lurkey. Thanks to youtube it's become pretty much iconic to ANY fan of this musical. I feel sorry for anyone trying to do a new version. I felt the same way about Rich Man's Frug in the last Sweet Charity and Bennett's Who's that Woman in Follies (which some productions, like London and Papermill have gone back to the original.) They do it with other shows (keeping the original Hot Honey Rag by Fosse in Chicago, the Manson Trio in Pippin,) so...
Posted: 9/24/15 at 2:19pm
As I remember it, Rob Ashford was okay with using the original Turkey Lurkey choreography but the producers couldn't make a a deal with the Michael Bennett estate.
Posted: 9/24/15 at 4:36pm
For all its misfires, it tweaked/"fixed" an interesting issue with the original show. Neil Simon, the librettist, is not a big fan of traditional musical structure, and prefers to write a straight play with songs that comment, rather than a fully integrated musical. This is almost always changed in revivals and adaptations: "Promises, Promises," "Little Me" and "Sweet Charity" all added reprises and finales in the revival, where they original had only non-recurring numbers and dialogue finales.
Posted: 9/24/15 at 4:55pm
I was very concerned for Dick Latessa.
Posted: 9/24/15 at 4:59pm
Wanted to see it but couldn't. I do love the cast recording.
Posted: 9/24/15 at 5:13pm
For the most part, I loved the revival and I did see the original.
I had a few mild reservations but I still enjoyed the production. My biggest problem was that they reset it in 1962 instead of 1968 and the drug references did not make sense for 1962. I missed the go- go boots of 1968 where it should have been set. Mad Men was hot that year so they reset it in 1962,
The cast was first rate but as it has been said, it did not need the additional Bacharach songs to beef up Kristen Chenowith's part. I don't think that ruined it though.
I thought the "Where Can you take a girl" office workers were cast way to young. I remember when those old farts sang it in the original it was a hoot. This song kind of laid there flat cause the office workers were too young.
While Turkey Lurkey Time was not as good as the original, it was not as horrific as everyone is making it out to be.
Katie Finneran was indeed a revelation as Margie MacDougal in the role especially having seen her replacement Molly Shannon who was no where near as good, believable or funny.
In spite of my mild reservations, I loved the show.
Posted: 9/24/15 at 5:21pm
Ashford's direction and cheography were awful. I know the piece well and have seen many productions. His choices were all wrong. Enough said and a real shame.
Posted: 9/25/15 at 2:15pm
I loved it! I thought it was very cute and darling.
Posted: 9/25/15 at 2:41pm
I actually enjoyed it. The whole thing is on youtube. That's how I saw it.
Posted: 9/25/15 at 4:43pm
Was it great? No.
But I had been listening to the soundtrack since I was a kid and I was glad they put it on.
Posted: 9/26/15 at 6:32pm
Well, my friends and I loved it, although we did think Kristen Chenoweth just was not right for the role.
Posted: 9/26/15 at 6:36pm
I'm always surprised hearing this because I'm obsessed with the cast recording.
Why wasn't Chenoweth right for the role? I've seen her in serious roles on film and thought she was incredible and I actually wish she did a bit more of them.
Posted: 9/26/15 at 6:43pm
I believe that it wasn't a question of whether Kristin Chenoweth could handle a serious role and more that she was a tad too mature for it.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
