I'm not a young person, but one of the advantages of that is that I am about the only person I know who saw the production of ARTURO UI that Christopher Plummer did in the '60s with a score of live incidental music by...Jule Styne. Tony Richardson directed, David Merrick produced, the cast was stuffed with great vaudevillians, some of whom had been in the original GUYS AND DOLLS, and it was simply spectacular in every way. It got bad reviews and ran a week. What I'd give to see th
In the case of "Senator Joe" it was the only show in my memory to have its plastics up on two marquees at once -- right across the street from each other -- the Virginia (now the Wilson) and the Simon. The producer, Adela Holzer, couldn't post a bond to Jujamcyn, which owned the Wilson, and so made a deal for the Simon with the Nederlanders and moved across the street. By April of the following year she was incarcerated at the Bedford Hills Correctional Facility for
I agree with everything you're saying. I think it's bold and throws down some big and really interesting questions in a very theatrical gesture. I just think the play that emerges is pretty bad and undisciplined. Doesn't mean he won't write better ones.
I wonder if there are folks who have seen it and disliked it as much as I did who just don't want to say so. I found it almost intolerably dull, confused and self-indulgent. A very young writer's attempt to do something big and scary but with very little to really offer that's genuinely insightful and a great deal of patience for saying variations on the same thing over and over again. I realize it's virtual heresy to say so, but this isn't a good play -- and is
It al depends on you setting a time frame for your question. In 1927-28, the year SHOW BOAT opened, there were over 200 Broadway openings and I assume many more shows were running simultaneously than we have now. But for the last 5 years, you might be right.
Some interesting posts on the TB board from folks who loved it at NYTW and hated it at the National. I saw it in London last week -- my first-ever encounter with it -- and was mystified by all the enthusiasm on this board. What I saw was interminable, ugly, obvious, miscast and unbelievably pretentious. If this is what's coming, I'd temper my enthusiasm at least until you get a look at it. And while I don't like to predict awards, it's hard for me to picture Brooks Ashman
Just_John said: "I saw it this afternoon and I loved it. I had seen the broadway revival over ten times and don’t think it was as strong as that, but with more rehearsal it could have been. It ran two hours and twenty minutes. It’s suppsoed to be one hour and 40 minutes."
I've seen a lot of productions, including the original, the revival, and his one, and a few around the country. None of them was an hour and 40 minutes. The show has, in my expe
wonkit said: "I am reading the play before seeing it. Is it as clunky in performance as on the page? There are a lot of "clever" paraphrases of Shakespeare, for example, but that could either work or fail miserably. Is there music? It seems like a speakeasy atmosphere and the text does suggest there may be background tunes. I guess I am trying to imagine how the production gets the audience involved, and whether any of the humor is being conveyed."
what’s the “godspell” inspired number? i’m genuinely curious.
Part of the plot revolves around the "Broadway Stars" hitching a ride to Indiana on a bus with the cast of a non-Equity tour of Godspell, which results in...well, you can imagine. One thing no one seems to mention in these posts is that the show's score contains quite a number of pastiche numbers in tribute to
Bwayfan292 said: "The show may not be “flop material” but it’snot selling well, so it could most definitely be a flop."
This feels like a non-sequitur to me. The show is not selling because, frankly, until it gets in front of an audience, it has nothing to sell -- no stars, no famous (Sondheim/Lloyd Webber) collaborators, no spectacular spectacle (King Kong) no famous title or beloved piece of underlying material (Pretty Woman) -- th
Rags for sure, and, if you're into older shows, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, which sounds gorgeous on CD and is a show that just doesn't work in any way. And I would go out on a limb and say Sweet Charity -- another show that never quite works in the theater for me, but has a terrific score.