Australia? Considering that this will (I assume) recreate the stunning original production I hope that this is preserved on video and released commercially. That is probably the only way I will get to see it.
There do tend to be differences between acting editions of scripts and the copies you buy in a bookstore. I was once directing OUR TOWN and read the manuscript, which I bought in a bookstore, many times prior to auditions. When we got the acting editions of the script from the licensing company I noticed that there were some differences, particularly in the stage directions.
Referring to the non-acting version did help immensely at one point when I was at the end of t
That is the claim made in this Variety article. "The new Spielberg film is a direct adaptation of the original Broadway musical of the same name, not a remake of the Robert Wise-directed 1961 film." Sorry but that makes no sense!Â
I saw it last year on Broadway and I did not like it at all. I appreciated the talented cast and the terrific staging, but could not follow the story at all. Much of the lyrics seem to be exposition, telling us what this person or that person did. Exposition does not make good drama. What makes it worse is that much of the exposition is done with rap, which does not fall easily on the ears or the brain. There needs to be time for the ear to hear a lyric and the b
If I remember correctly (and I think I do) Mackintosh's Broadway revival of OLIVER!, based on his London version directed by Sam Mendes, was killed by Equity's insistence that all the little kids in the opening number, about 40 I believe, should get Equity Broadway contracts, despite the fact the after the first two numbers, they are never on stage again.
Mackintosh threatened to not bring the show to Broadway if Equity didn't budge. Equity didn't
I am going to add "Just Like That" from "A Christmas Story". I love how it starts off as the mother trying to get Ralphie to stop crying by reminding him that these bad times are over "Just Like That", but the song's meaning changes into the mother's lament that her children are growing up so quickly and she wishes they could stay just the way they are; that their childhood will be over "Just Like That". A sentiment most parents
Unfortunately, I will not be seeing this year's tour as it is not in my part of the country. But I have seen it every year for the past 4 years and it is terrific every time. Looks like some of the same actors from last year's tour -the Old Man, Jean Shepherd-- but the kids are usually different each year for obvious reasons. Still, I have always enjoyed this tour. If it is in your area, I highly recommend it.
Boston has it own version of TKTS called Bostix. It's a small booth right in front of Faneuil Hall that has been there for as long as I can remember. And I don't ever remember there being TKTS lines. I would usually just walk up or maybe have two or three people in front of me. Of course, now they have an online presence which offers discounted seats for purchase, though certainly not at a fifty percent off rate. If only it were easier to drive in Boston
Parade3: I am wondering what you thought of the previous stage adaptation of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD by Christopher Sergel. That one has been around for decades and has been produced frequently in regional production, but never on Broadway.
I've only seen it once but remember thinking it was "Masterpiece Theater meets Rodgers and Hammerstein". I recall it being a somewhat "dry" presentation.
The number of accusation is irrelevant when all the accusations are close to 4 decades old and have no supporting evidence or corroborating witnesses (including those named by the accusers, some of whom are close friends of the accusers).
The fourth and final of Dr. Ford's "Party Goers" has been identified and contacted.
"CNN has learned that the committee has reached out to a longtime friend of Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser.
"I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article," a committee staffer wrote Keyser earlier this week.
henrikegerman said: "How can anyone say at this point, before even hearing her testimony, that Ford is not credible? "
Conversely, how can anyone concluded that Judge Kavanaugh is not credible? How can anyone conclude that Judge Kavanaugh is guilty when no one has heard the specifics of his accuser's claim, nor of Kavanaugh's denials? Yet TONS of Democrats in the House and Senate have already said they believe Dr. Ford's claim and that Ju
Back Row said: "mikey2573 said: "Back Row said: "I think Dr. Ford is infinitely more credible than the guy who swears that he did not even attend a party that has not even been specified by date and time."
Isn't that because Dr. Ford cannot specify a date and time? Nor does she know where the party was, who was there (other than oneother person), or how she got home. In fact, when she disclosed the incident to her therapist and h
ErikJ972 said: "mikey2573 said: "KFC1991 said: "John Adams,one of the things in Ford's favor is that she has asked for an FBI investigation. It doesn't seem like a liar would call for that. But the GOP says no to the FBI investigation. Kavanaugh's defenders seem to think an investigation would hurt their guy. "
The FBI investigates FEDERAL crimes. What Kavanaugh is alleged to have done is not a federal crime and therefore would
KFC1991 said: "John Adams,one of the things in Ford's favor is that she has asked for an FBI investigation. It doesn't seem like a liar would call for that. But the GOP says no to the FBI investigation. Kavanaugh's defenders seem to think an investigation would hurt their guy. "
The FBI investigates FEDERAL crimes. What Kavanaugh is alleged to have done is not a federal crime and therefore would not fall under the FBI's jurisdiction.
"And yeah, I guess it does lack credibility. That must be why dozens of classmates have come forward to say they knew of the assault occurring at the time when it actually happened,"
I think you are mistaken. There is only one other witness and he has stated that the incident alleged did not happen. Also, Dr. Ford has admitted she told no one else at the time, not even her closest friends. In none of the accounts I have heard have I read of
Back Row said: " I think Dr. Ford is infinitely more credible than the guy who swears that he did not even attend a party that has not even been specified by date and time."
Isn't that because Dr. Ford cannot specify a date and time? Nor does she know where the party was, who was there (other than one other person), or how she got home. In fact, when she disclosed the incident to her therapist and husband some thirty years late
