EDWIN DROOD Highlights Video- Page 2

[Bialyhoos22]

Posted: 11/12/12 at 10:15pm

AAO26 -- no one is complaining or bemoaning that we have a glorious revival of this remarkable show. But it must be said that the role of the Chairman is as inseparable to George Rose as Max Bialystock is to Zero Mostel. And it was Rupert Holmes that made this exact comparison. The role of the Chairman was in a major way shaped by Rose's persona and adlibs during the initial staged readings done in February and May of 1985.

As such, there are certain tent poles to the role that actors need to be at least aware of to be truly successful in the part. Norton has done more than an admirable job filling these large shoes, but could stand to have A LOT more Victorian Music Hall in his performance. There was something very authentic about Rose in the part (who would be 93 next year) -- he was a 'barker' in the role (just as the real Chairmen of 1890s were known to be) Whipping the audience into shape, teasing them, scorning them, rousing them up. That particular aspect is missing here.

I think it's perfectly valid to compare and contrast this production, as many of these roles played to the strengths and idiosyncrasies of the original performers. ie. George Rose WAS William Cartwright, Betty Buckley WAS Miss Alice Nutting. Their performances shaped the characters, plot and music Rupert wrote. Therefore it only makes sense to include them in the discussion of any subsequent production.

Updated On: 11/12/12 at 10:15 PM

[Miranda3]

Posted: 11/12/12 at 10:29pm

Viva (or vivo) Bialy!

Updated On: 11/12/12 at 10:29 PM

[AAO26]

Posted: 11/12/12 at 10:43pm

Miranda3,

I'm enjoying this very much:

https://www.broadwayworld.com/videoplay.php?colid=425188

And saw the original also.

Quite refreshing I must say. Like a much needed coat of paint...

[Miranda3]

Posted: 11/12/12 at 11:01pm

Or, alternatively, less is more.

But I really don't want to argue whether the current production is worthy or not. I think it is.

Can't we just differ on whether the original or the current is better? On purely subjective grounds? I might argue one way, you the other, but we don't have to dismiss one to prefer the other.

Updated On: 11/12/12 at 11:01 PM

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 11/13/12 at 8:12am

They all aound amazing and it looks wonderful! I can't wait to see this in December

[AAO26]

Posted: 11/13/12 at 11:05pm

Cleo who also had the advantage of being British and thus naturally conversant with a Cockney accent.

But these drawbacks evaporate shortly after Ms. Rivera sweeps onstage, trailing a welcome air of effortless glamour as the senior diva of the troupe. Bathing in the audience’s rapturous reception, she’s both in character and merrily out of it, and our affection for Ms. Rivera only increases the pleasure we take in the musical’s multiple layers: we can cheer her shamelessly without feeling like vulgarians.

[AAO26]

Posted: 11/13/12 at 11:08pm

And as opium-wielding Princess Puffer, Chita Rivera lends her legendary presence and wit, making for a surprising Cockney matron and pulling it off with sass and class.

[chewy5000]

Posted: 11/15/12 at 6:38am