BrodyFosse123 said: "She’s a producer of THE CHER SHOW so after her infamous critique of the Chicago incarnation of the show, she most definitely will be heavily involved with the Broadway version of the show. She also saw the same flaws audiences pointed out and immediately took action and changes started within 24 hours of her taking the reign on the show. The work is going to be heavy."
I think this is correct. Now, whether it will turn it into a great show
Easy. Because we've all seen productions that went on and on, aimlessly, without a sense of progression towards an inevitable and surprising end.
There's a book, certainly a structure, but it takes good direction to give it tension. Simply put, it doesn't have a strong book, that is one you can trust to do much heavy lifting.
SomethingPeculiar said: "Or they could be going the Les Mis route: filmed stage version now (in Les Mis’s case, the 10th anniversary concert) and a feature film ~15 years later."
Bet you that's the plan.
And I think it could be great and innovative. I think it's likely it would be a hit.
Her revival was immediate, fresh and political. I recall seeing so many productions before hers that always felt like 1960s, The Boardgame. And hers found the vital spark in the current generation of youth (then Millennials, though now would be Gen Z) and connected their wakening political energy to the spirit of the show. Not to mention, it's true, she managed to make it feel like it had a book.
Critics have judged actors by their appearance since forever and it has always been wrong. Even positive comments. If you've worked on a show and had it happen, it's always glaringly obvious how inappropriate it is - in fact, sometimes it's even more obvious when it is positive.
As for the argument it was actually a criticism of the design, that goes out the window when the critic proffers a better costume as being the one worn by a thinner cast member.
And let
STRAIGHT WHITE MEN Previews Jul 23
2018, 06:28:28 PM
Folks talking about the “self proclaimed” cool crowd, no crowd has proclaimed themselves cool.
There are just people who like Lee’s work and see what she’s doing, some who do and don’t think it work, and some who don’t on both. Deciding which of these groups is “cool” says more about you then others or the play.
Kad said: "The fact that this play is raising so many hackles on here is wild."
EXACTLY what I thought scrolling this page. Basically a chorus of "How DARE they present this! I'm taking my toys and going home!"
I still think it's incredible and wonderful Second Stage is using their new Broadway space to present a Lee play - challenging but deserving of the exposure - as opposed to simply presently more traditionally commercial fare as a cash
Huh, savvy publicity tactic and a bit witty, as well. But bye.
Whenever anyone who isn't trans-identified brings up trans people and their movement for criticism, it looks so obvious so me as just another iteration of what society did to gay people for decades. You could swap out trans for gay and the tenor of the debate is identical, from the far right inventing scenarios for children needing protection or self proclaimed liberals hemming and hawing if they're doing it right o
Easy. The same reason straight white men are likely to bristle when you call them those three words. Straight white men essentially named every other minority group and while doing so, were viewed as neutral. No more. And by focusing a play on them, it views them with the same conscious gaze they've put other groups in for decades. That is indeed subversive.
WhizzerMarvin said: "Why isn’t Pretty Woman having a second try-out in Boston after swapping out a leading man and several songs. It sounds like the book and score needed some serious work after Chicago, which is fine. Take the time to fix it, have a second try-out and then bring it in.
In the Golden Age, I would say it was the norm to have a multiple city try-out period. I know it’s more expensive to do that now, but get it right on the road before coming to N
I agree. I recall it being a lose-lose for ROCKY. Had they not included it, folks would've been mad; but once they did, they guaranteed no one would remember the F&A score.
Completely separate from this thread (I haven't seen it yet), we should stop referencing standing ovations at Bway shows. Folks want to justify their big ticket purchase and stand nearly every time.
On Bway, it's probably more telling on the shows where they don't stand.
The production is incredible, as well as incredibly intense and incredibly bleak.
Based on the Visconti film about a wealthy industrial family at the rise of the Nazi party, it focuses on the evil in nearly every character. Therefore, it makes for a intense and bleak evening. That may also be why it didn't happen to be my favorite Ivo show. But the performances are stellar and the production full of shocking memorable images, like you'd expect from Ivo.
reginula said: "Is this where we come to pray for a Broadway transfer?"
YES.
And I also recall more than one party saying the gay version directed by John Tiffany in a reading didn't work. I could be making this up, but something about the tone of the piece, the humor felt wrong with gay men - makes sense to me.
If you're going to "reinvent" it, why stop with the choreography? Why stop with the "production"?
Why not re-do the book, the lyrics and the music while you're at it?
Why only change the choreography and staging?"
To be fair, while there are some shows where the choreography is contractually attached to the property, most shows aren't, as you know. All licensed shows, thoug
