Question about '02 revival of OKLAHOMA!

[zamedy]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 10:21am

I recently came across a clip featuring the latest revival cast on Letterman. The title song is so infectious, and is now playing over and over in my head. The Tony performance from that year was also great - great set, great choreography. So my question is.. why did it have such a short run? From my little research, it closed in less than a year? I'm just really surprised that with all the hype and name recognition with tourists, it went dark in about 11 months... especially considering the original ran for what, 2,200 performances? Was it just bad directing? Marketing? Have audiences just grown tired of the ground-breaking, classic musicals of yester-year because they figure they've seen it done (badly) a million times in high schools?

BTW.. from the short clips I have seen, I love Andrea Martin as Aunt Eller. I was never a big Oklahoma fan... but how can you not love and appreciate the music. It still holds up all these years later.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woXKaFsHhO8&feature=related



Updated On: 1/5/11 at 10:21 AM

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 10:42am

It was a terribly droll production.

[MissAnneThrop]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 11:06am

i remember the nap i took.

[Hanna from Hamburg]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 11:36am

I saw the revival and I think there were several things that were problematic:

1. It was in The Gershwin. MANY shows have not been able to be financially successful in that venue.
2. I felt that it MIGHT have been more successful with a Director / Choreographer versus a Director AND a Choreographer. I kind of felt like there was a struggle in the vision of the piece, like the dance numbers had one feel and the scenes changed to a different one, so the work didn't feel cohesive.
3. I LOVED the concept of Laurie doing the dream ballet, but I felt like Josefina Gabrielle wasn't strong enough in either singing OR ballet to warrant the decision for this production. She was okay in singing and okay in ballet and if she would have been a KNOCKOUT in one or the other, I would have been sold more. Also, I didn't buy that she was a YOUNG Laurie.

Just my thoughts.

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 12:02pm

The production (especially the set) was swallowed up by the huge Gershwin stage. It would have been much better in a smaller theater on a smaller stage.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 12:57pm

Basically what Hanna said.

I think the major factor that killed it was that it was playing in the Gershwin which is huge.

Classic musicals really need a skilled director and the right venue. George C. Wolfe's "On the Town" also played the Gershwin and I remember that being terribly dull.

[iamchanging9]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 1:05pm

I wholeheartedly loved this production.

[jonartdesigns]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 1:22pm

The show had its high points (Shuler Hensley) and its low points (Aunt Eller's forced perspective house being rotated to straight on), but in the end, as others have said it is a LONG show that was swallowed by a massive theater

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 1:27pm

As someone else said, the Gershwin is huge. It is hard for any show to sell out or do well. I watched the production on DVD and while it was enjoyable and had some clever staging (I loved how big they made the stage and the forced perspective used to capture the vastness of Oklahoma), the show was just just boring and dull.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 1:54pm

I really like the DVD of the National production, though I'm not fond of the changes in orchestrations and arrangements. I think the only way the show could have possibly made money at the Gershwin was if Jackman had reprised his performance of Curly. Otherwise, the show would have been better served in Lincoln Center as the stage is quite similar to that of the National.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 2:21pm

I loved the production and saw it around 4th of July with a terribly enthusiastic audience.

To be honest, OKLAHOMA! is a show I have always enjoyed on film, stage or video.

Had a few quibbles with some of the staging - some of "cute" steps in "The Farmer and the Cowman" had more to do with Stroman milking the number than with character.

The ballet tended to plod -it comes at tehe end of an already long Act One (and there is really no other place for the intermission.)

I didn't see the necessity of moving to the train station (for "Kanasa City") and then back to the farm. Seemed like they were just trying to copy the movie, but really that entire first scene can be played effectively on one set. (The miniature train running across the apron of the stage as part of the transition was fun.)

Patrick Wilson was a fine Curly and Andrea Martin was younger more vibrant Aunt Eller (If she is Laury's Aunt would it not make sense that she wopuld be a contemporary of Laury's parents instead of a great-grandmother type?) Justin Bohon really dazzled with his dancing in Kansas City.

I liked some of the bits of Riggs Play (or Hammerstein's original script) that were restored helping flesh out teh characters a bit more - even though is was hardly more than a few lines here and there.

The revival opened to mostly favourable reviews (I gave it 4 stars out of 5 but The NY Times was especially negative) and did good busines through the summer tourist season and then tapered off taking a big dive in Jan 2003. The show is done so often that is is no longer a must-see on Broadway. The 1969 Lincon Center summer revival, the 1979 Broadway revival and this 2002 revival all lost money. Perhaps if this innovative Washington staging comes in it might break that trend.

[CandiceElyse]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 3:12pm

I saw the aforementioned Washington production and it was fantastic. I don't know if it would necessarily run for years, but it definitely deserves a shot. It was pretty minimalistic as far as the sets, but to me that just placed more emphasis on the characters. Nicholas Rodriguez and Eleasha Gamble were beyond fantastic. They were sweet and sassy with one another, which is what makes the Curly/Laurey relationship so wonderful. I would love for it to transfer to get the chance to see it again and so they get a cast recording because all of their voices were gorgeous!

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 9:53pm

The train station didn't bother me. It kept the plot moving instead of always being stuck on the farm
And I have to admit I LOVED the miniature train that went across the stage during the scene change.

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 1/5/11 at 10:39pm

Agree on the Arena Stage revival: Nicholas Rodriguez was an excellently sung and acted Curly and Eleasha Gamble was a fine Laurie (though I was disappointed she didn't sing the score as written for the reprise of PEOPLE WILL SAY WE'RE IN LOVE). I hope this version makes it to New York but it needs to be performed in the round. However, LOMBARDI's sticking around so I'm not sure what other venue would suit this version of OKLAHOMA! that Arena Stage housed. The Vivian Beaumont perhaps?

As for the 2002 revival, Shuler Hensley was the highlight. Josefina Gabrielle was indeed weak in both singing and dancing. And as handsome as Patrick Wilson is, he had pitch problems and was always singing a quarter tone under. That seems to be a consistent problem with his singing in the live performances I've seen him do.
Updated On: 1/6/11 at 10:39 PM

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 12:40am

I agree about Gabrielle's singing, but I thought her dancing (at least in the video) was fantastic.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 12:45am

Patrick Wilson drains the life out of everything he touches. If Hugh Jackman had opened it, it would still be running.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 1:59am

Are we all mad at Patrick Wilson for some reason? I didn't get the memo.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 7:22am

I thought the production was pretty dreadful, with most of the show's life and joy sucked out of it. Deadly slow pacing.

Other than Hensley and Martin, the casting was pretty weak. Patrick Wilson was no Hugh Jackman, and was as bland as ever. Josefina Gabrielle was neither a strong enough actress or dancer to warrant her being both the regular and dream Laurie. And worst of all, someone forgot to tell Jessica Boevers that her role was supposed to be funny. To this day, she remains the only Ado Annie I've seen who got almost no laughs. I've seen high schoolers play the role better than she.

[Hanna from Hamburg]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 8:27am

Completely forgot about Jessica playing Ado simply as a bimbo and (obviously) having NO CLUE who her character was. Josefina's dancing (IMHO) was MUCH stronger in the DVD than live onstage, but that could have had more to do with filming than anything else.

I didn't have a problem with Patrick and quite enjoyed seeing him onstage in chaps, but that's just me! I thought he had a wonderful charm and warmth.

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 2:00pm

The young lady who played Ado Annie in the Arena Stage revival was an actual high school student, and she was indeed better than the actress who played the same role in the 2002 revival.

[Kev]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 2:51pm

I've seen Jessica Boevers in a few projects and she has never impressed.

Speaking of the revival, did anyone catch it again with the replacements? (Buntrock, Bodnar, Foard, Duke etc?)

[Dollypop]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 8:46pm

I saw the production 5 times and really enjoyed it. My biggest problem was the gal Josefina, who played Laurie. Too old for the role and not a particularly good singer. The rest of the cast was excellent and Patrick Wilson has one of the best singing voices on Broadway.

As good as Wilson was, there was no chemistry between him and his Laurie.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 8:52pm

I've seen Patrick Wilson in enough things now to feel confident in my assessment that he never has chemistry with anyone. You obviously had a strong chemical response to him, DP, and that can make one forgiving. But seriously. The problem is him.

[Sylar2]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 11:35pm

World on the street is this show is coming back in 2012.....

[CandiceElyse]

Posted: 1/6/11 at 11:46pm

...the arena stage production or a brand new revival?