I saw Spider-Man 1.0 and it was indeed bananas. There are some quite lengthy threads on here from that time, including one documenting the night that Chris Tierney fell off a raised platform and down into the stage and was seriously injured (and miraculously returned to the show once he recovered).
Some of you have never heard of intentional musical motifs and themes and it really shows!
But seriously, there's a stark difference between the repetition of musical and lyrical phrases in Into the Woods (all intentional and done with the intent of furthering story and/or character) and ALW's inability to write more than 3-5 songs per show. You can dislike Sondheim, but dismissing his work as boring or painting him as not having any skill as a writer is absurd.
Was this really necessary? Someone asked where seat locations had been from people who'd won and a few of us responded to the question. It's your business if you don't like the show, but I don't understand why people seem to be getting off on its commercial failure/closing.
Signature also lost power about 2 hours after Times Square did. We had a 9 pm NYMF curtain that did go up, but we lost power about 20-30 minutes into the performance and then cancelled it.
Amar Ramasar is indeed half Puerto Rican, but he was appallingly bad in Carousel and is also <<edited by BWW staff>>. If it's true that he's been cast, I'll be disappointed but not surprised.
If you're interested in teaching, why not get a degree in music education or vocal pedagogy instead of performance? Westminster Choir College in New Jersey has an excellent reputation for both, and they also offer performance degrees.
OffOnBwayHi said: "lol I really think The Shed will never be your thing until you open up to what the programming is. Unlike other institutions, the artists are truly dictating the work, not the audience$. And that’s HUGE and unheard of.
i agree and think they are going to need a major hit sometime down the line to really become a respected institution and sustain, but it looks as if they are gonna do it on their own terms.
GeorgeandDot said: "I think straight people can play gay roles if they approach it with nuance and humanity. I thought that Timothee Chalamet and Cate Blanchett both played gay roles gorgeously with a ton of depth and nuance. However, straight actors can easily fall into the trap of playing stereotypes without humanity and nuance. They go for the camp, but none of the humanity. However, when gay actors play roles like that, it comes across as human and a form of self-expression. An e
Lin did something similar when someone was filming during the Broadway run of In the Heights: "Get off at 181st and take the escalator/You better put that away, I'm gonna take it later."
I saw the show very early in previews and I know it went through vast changes, which indicates to me that they should have done an out of town tryout before the Broadway run. The main thing that sticks out as a problem to me a number of years on is the direction; it felt overwrought and was attempting to make a large-scale spectacle of a story that should have been small and focused on the relationships among the characters. The book definitely didn't help this as it wasn't particular
Be More Chill was not a Signature production, it was commercial and they were renting the space from Signature. I don't know if Octet can be extended any further because all of the spaces at Signature are being rented for the summer, so something else will be going in there.
There's been a best revival of a musical category with only two nominees before, most recently in 2011 (I think) with How to Succeed and Anything Goes. It also happened in 1995 with both the best musical (Sunset Boulevard and Smokey Joe's Cafe) and best revival of a musical (Show Boat and How to Succeed with Matthew Broderick) categories.
Have you considered that the purpose of this play is not to instruct anyone about race or racism? Black writers (or queer writers, or indigenous writers, or Latinx writers, or women, etc. etc.) are not honor-bound to write plays that educate people who aren't part of that marginalized group or groups. We don't need to make everything palatable to everyone. If it isn't your thing, that's fine; it doesn't make the work meaningless.
Broadway_Boy, if you go to a Suzan-Lori Parks play looking for realism, you are really barking up the wrong tree. That isn't what she traffics in as a writer, and the point of this play isn't to offer up a plausible scenario. It's deliberately just a few steps off from reality, but close enough to cause discomfort and introspection.
Anyway, I was at the invited dress for this and happened to think it was brilliant. I think there's some slightly extraneous material
I feel like the approach to some of these recent revivals of older musicals with problematic material has been really off base. I don't know that it "fixes" anything to make minor tweaks and changes to try and fool the audience and conceal the misogyny (or whatever it is) that's inherent in the material. It really doesn't help that nearly every major musical revival is directed by men (and often the same three or four men). I think there's much more to be learned fro
I also saw it and loved it, it's a beautiful production. The supertitles are quite easy to read, though I'm sure it helps that I'm very familiar with the show.
Memphis really benefited from being one of only two original musical scores that season (the other being The Addams Family, which is also a bad show), and being the only traditional book musical nominated for a lot of the major awards. I saw everything that season other than Million Dollar Quartet, and American Idiot and Fela were both distinctly better and more interesting than Memphis, which is lazy, mediocre, white savior garbage.
