SomethingPeculiar said: "There's no chance in heck that Olivo or Tveit is getting replaced after that love-letter from Ben Brantley."
I'm not being snarky about this. I'm honestly curious. Does the enthusiastic blessing of The New York Times lead theater critic matter that much? I guess it used to, and perhaps the decline in the number of critics might makes the Times more important. But the musical is based on a known quantity, albeit one
bear88 said: "Jeff Whitty, who wrote the original Head Over Heels before parting ways with the production under murky circumstances, is decidedly unhappy with Sara Holdren's rave reviewof the show in Vulture for what he says are "ugly sneers" in her portrayal of his hypothetical pitch (clearly written as a joke), an allegedly inaccurate characterization of the original show's lackof iambic pentameter (Whitty says his opening night script of the sho
Moulin Rouge at Emerson Colonial Theatre Reviews Aug 5
2018, 02:42:05 PM
Brantley loved everything about it, including aspects of the show that have been criticized here - Olivo and the "perfectly cast" Tveit, the added songs and other changes. His only problem, a minor one, was that Act 2 is too long.
So I looked it up. Karen Olivo is 41, will turn 42 in a few days. Katrina Lenk is 43. Aaron Tveit is 34.
Kidman and McGregor are four years apart. I always thought his character was supposed to be younger, less experienced. He certainly looked younger.
I haven't seen the show in Boston, but I doubt there would be gripes if people thought Christian and Satine had chemistry on stage. Olivo isn't that much older, and she certainly doesn't look old.
I have never seen the show before, so I won't have a reference point. The only San Francisco Playhouse show I have seen was La Cage Aux Folles, which I thought was nicely staged. If the performances are good, that's more important to me - unless I'm one of those people who doesn't like the musical.
WhizzerMarvin said: "I went back to Head Over Heels tonight to see what (if anything) was changed during previews and if my opinions might have differed on a second viewing. As is usually the case these days, the show was essentially note for note and word for word the same as when previews began, although the pace had greatly picked up and the timing was snappier.
The audience was not large tonight and I could feel them wanting to like the show, but everytime a gust of en
Head Over Heels is inherently a tough sell. The Go-Go's had a short run as a band, with a few hits along with Belinda Carlisle's solo hits, but they're not a big name group with lots of familiar songs - outside of a relatively narrow age range. The quirky plot and faux-Elizabethan language wasn't going to help attract those very people. I had to talk my wife into attending the show in its San Francisco tryout (she's
Jeff Whitty, who wrote the original Head Over Heels before parting ways with the production under murky circumstances, is decidedly unhappy with Sara Holdren's rave review of the show in Vulture for what he says are "ugly sneers" in her portrayal of his hypothetical pitch (clearly written as a joke), an allegedly inaccurate characterization of the original show's lack of iambic pentameter (Whitty says his opening night script of the
UncleCharlie said: "Still not clear why the producers believed VERYlukewarm reviews from it's big Bay Area tryout meant "Get this to Broadway as soon as possible"."
The producers already had a Broadway opening before the show started at the Curran in San Francisco in March. There wasn't ever going to be time to fix much, much less do the sort of revamp some have suggested. I remember the tone of Head Over Heels thread in San
ScottyDoesn'tKnow2 said: "I rewrote my response. I realized that Brantley was trying to say Durand was purposely playing his character as incompetent. I thought he literally was saying Durand was charming or something positive but incompetent in his performance since the rest of the review seemed take on that sort of weird tone."
It's easy to understand the confusion, given Brantley's surprising criticism of the cast, with one exception. I had to go back
BroadwayConcierge said: "Mostly surprised by how much Brantley hated the cast members themselves, aside from Rachel York. I thought the cast was fabulous altogether."
That's what jumped out at me. It's not a show for everyone, and plenty of people have slammed it here, both at the San Francisco preview and on Broadway. But the cast? The show I saw twice had several individual standouts (including York) and a strong cast overall. The cast, including the ensemb
I never saw Cats, so I have no positive or negative attachment to it, but I find the continued use of the show as a punchline to be a turn-off. The first show I ever saw in New York was the original Six Degrees of Separation, which employed it as a running joke, but that was a long time ago when Cats was an unavoidable sensation for theatergoers. I just find it unbearably lazy and pandering when the reference pops up in new works, especially when it&#
HogansHero said: "The news of the moment is that Head over Heels is getting a solid headstart in the competition for most clueless producing of the new season, and OOTI is basically in the same rut it was in before the Tonys, just ona slightly different plane: it is a chronic under-performer for its position."
I saw Head Over Heels during its out-of-town tryout, and I enjoyed it despite flaws I hoped would be addressed. But it seems like the s
broadwaysfguy said: "This is kind of a sleeper musical, that didn't get almost any attention or interest from the board or even local board contributors that see most of the out of town tryouts in the sf bay area, so its probably gonna have to generate more buzz and enthusiasm to get to broadway."
I didn't see the show myself, but I wouldn't read too much into the reaction, or lack thereof. I don't know what attendance was like, but the musical just n
Broadway Grosses: Week Ending 7/1/18 Jul 2
2018, 04:47:34 PM
I know it's just the first week of previews, but the Head Over Heels numbers look pretty awful, especially since it was filling all the seats early in the week. I thought the numbers would be better than that.
This isn't a show likely to get glowing reviews, although it might get some good word of mouth as a fun show.
It sounds like it has similar strengths and weaknesses as the incarnation I saw at the Berkeley Rep, although I read that Des McAnuff said it had been extensively revamped. Marks' review gives it more credit for telling the band members' stories, albeit in by-the-numbers fashion. But the real reason to see this show is the ones Marks cites: Sergio Trujillo's fantastic choreography and some of the musical performances. Because I enjoyed that so much, and my wife and daugh
The San Jose Stage Company's performance of Hedwig and the Angry Inch was a lot of fun Saturday night. Keith Pinto does a very good job as Hedwig. I enjoyed his improvisations, which kept the show fresh, and appreciated his intensity. It's a hell of a role. Ashley Garlick was in excellent voice as Yitzhak. The intimacy of the venue (there were about 100 people there in a small theater) worked well. NYfanfromCA, I know you're seeing it cold, but t
