I'd say that the comments about Dixon stealing the show are more in reference to the fact that he was just blatantly obviously the best thing about the entire enterprise, not so much about name-recognition. Legend was painfully, amateurishly bad, grammar-school level bad.
Not for the first time in depictions of this story did I sit there wondering why anybody would go to the trouble of arresting, prosecuting, putting on trial and eventually crucifying this little Jesu
JCS is one of my favorite musicals. Overall I loved this production, but I did think that John Legend was the weak link in the cast. He's a good singer but IMO vocally not a good match for Jesus. I would have preferred someone with more the sound of the guy who played Simon Zealotes. Good acting could have made up for it, but he fell flat there too IMO.
Brandon Victor Dixon was probably the best Judas I've seen since Carl Anderson. The rest of the cast was good. I really loved
I blame Jamie. In fact, I'm convinced that one of the reasons Cathy was so "resentful" of his success is because she didn't want to tag along at parties where he seemed to always be ignoring her and/or flirting with other women.
She even basically tells him as much and his response is "UGH don't be so jealous of my success."
I absolutely love In the Heights and was lucky enough to see it on Broadway. I was really excited when it won Best Musical. However, there are a ton of plot holes. You can't think about the storyline that closely or it all falls apart.
Regardless, though, I honestly connect it to more emotionally than I do to Hamilton.
I have kind of two minds about the ending. First, there's the rational, feminist side of me that is completely thinking, yes, Shaw has some great points. Eliza should be with someone who treats her like an equal. But then there's the romantic side of me that just loves seeing Henry soften up over time and is always up for "love/hate" romances. That side of me is sad that the revival doesn't include that ending. And, honestly, that's probably the side that&#
Where did that vibrato come from? Was it learned? Had Ben used the sweeter voice and falsetto as in DEH it might have really been beautiful.
I started to notice his vibrato starting to sound, in my opinion, more out-of-control when he performed DEH on a talk show--I think maybe Stephen Colbert? I'm not sure if it's a breathing control issue or if it's an intentional choice. I do know that for more classical-sounding scores like WSS, you're supposed to just
Just looked up a video of Ansel Elgort singing and, yup, I would be more than fine with that casting. I'll worry more about Maria, given Hollywood's difficult history of casting good classical sopranos.
I haven't seen the production, just listened to the new songs, but does anyone else feel like they don't fit the rest of the score that well? Then again, thinking about the movie, I'm not sure that the score felt super cohesive there. Maybe that's the issue? I dunno.
Also, for those who have seen the show, does Kristoff get a song before he goes back for Anna after "delivering" her to Hans? Because I've always thought that moment really needed that.<
What about Taron Egerton? Judging from his performance in Sing!, he could probably do the role justice vocally, he's young, and he's something of a name. Sure, he'd have to fake an American accent, but that seems like a minor thing when you consider movie musical casting.
Also, Platt could probably benefit from working on his vibrato, IMO.
I work with sexual assault survivors and just want to say that Rapp's version of events meets criteria for a traumatic event as we would define it when diagnosing PTSD. It doesn't matter if he got away--the threat was there. I've worked with people who have similar stories where they got away, and often the horror comes from 1. the fact that someone would try to do that in the first place and 2. the "what ifs" that you play over and over again in your mind. And then ther
Does Kristoff get any solo songs in the show? I've always thought that the scene where he leaves Anna behind with Hans would be the perfect time for one.
I'm not being inconsistent. I want a young Natasha and a young Pierre. I don't like casting older actors in either role (as I said before about Pierre).
I don't think it's ageism so much as a reaction to the inherent sexism that is often behind casting a young actress and an older male actor to play her love interest.
Edit: I want to clarify that I don't find this particular casting decision sexist, but I think it's hard to view it without that framework given how prevalent it is.
I don't think an older Natasha would work because her actions in Great Comet are pretty immature. I've already seen people talking about how she comes across as really stupid and that they don't understand why she makes the choices that she does. I think that'd be even worse if she were played by an older actress.
Well, in the novel they get married in 1813, so it's not exactly years later. I don't think he's pining for her but I definitely think he has feelings for her.
Like I said, I'm kind of the wrong person to argue with because I don't like casting Pierre as someone older in general, and not just because of the Natasha thing.
