Just back from END OF THE RAINBOW- Page 2

[juggles]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 8:49am

Connecticut isn't all that far from Minnisota



Updated On: 3/21/12 at 08:49 AM

[Patash]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 9:21am

"While Bennett sings Garland stunningly well, her acting is a mannered, overblown mess - arms flailing, bouncing up and down onstage as if she were love child of Betty Hutton and Mick Jagger, crawling on the floor like a dog, screaming for pills and booze."

Wow. Sounds like she is perfection at being Judy! Not one of those overly romanticized versions. NOW I want to see it.

[smallworld]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 9:32am

I'm so glad to hear good things about Bennett. I got to see her in Minneapolis and I'm really hoping that the show will be running when I'm in NYC this summer - I wouldn't mind seeing it again. I really do hope she gains a Tony win, because her performance is absolutely stunning. I have never seen a performance quite like it - I felt like I was watching Judy Garland perform the entire time. It is a performance I will never forget.

[beagle]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 10:30am

I saw the show in London, and I think Tracie Bennett gave possibly the most extraordinary individual performance I've ever seen. The weird thing is that, while it's easy to watch clips and listen to Bennett's CD and know that she doesn't exactly look or sound like Garland, when it's live it's a very different thing. It's all about the energy and the spirit of the performance. Sure, my head told me she wasn't really Garland, but I didn't care. She made me believe she really was her, and that I was actually witnessing Garland in concert in the last months of her life. It was more of an evoking of Garland's spirit than an exact re-creation, and for me it really worked.

The play itself isn't perfect, but I enjoyed it for the atmosphere of the piece and for the performances--especially Bennett's. I hope it does well on Broadway.
Updated On: 3/20/12 at 10:30 AM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 11:19am

"Film and theatre are two totally different genres. Film is very still acting..i.e. facial whereas theatre is bigger as the audience at the back need to see facial expressions etc. as one doesn't have a camera up ones nose."

Yeah, PalJoey, geez. I can't believe you don't know that.

[juggles]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 11:34am

why do some posters lower themselves to sarcasm?

[Kristie-K2]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 1:03pm

As a fan of Judy Garland since I was 7 years old I have to decide if I want to fly in from Oregon by myself(I hate to fly) No Amtrak this time!!!

Is this show worth flying across the country? I do want to see Ricky Martin too.

I never focused on the madness that Judy went through. I just loved her talent

Even in the movie, I thought Judy Davis was okay, but I loved Tammy Blanchard...

I will wait for more reviews of the play...If I do go I will probably cry through the whole play... I am a big cry baby.

[juggles]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 1:25pm

Kristie.look up reviews on Google, search....end of the rainbow/minneapolis reviews. Or, end of the rainbow London reviews

or even...tracie bennett/reviews Updated On: 3/20/12 at 01:25 PM

[thetinymagic2]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 2:12pm

I think Traci played it all: sadness, sexiness, pathetic, drunk, high, sober, loving, hateful, spiteful, longing, hurt, happy,desperate. Just too bad there was no well writiten Mickey Deans. You really never knew what she saw in him, except a desperate clinging....(wasn't he a gay disco owner in America)?

Whether you end up loving it or hating it, it's a performance like you've never seen before. (and Michael Cumpsty is VERY good). I would not miss it. PLenty of discounts....

[PalJoey]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 3:10pm

I never focused on the madness that Judy went through. I just loved her talent

Kristie--I'll let you know after I see it next week, but from everything I've seen and heard about this play and her performance, it's not worth flying across the country for. I'm only traveling from across town but I think it might be too far me.

It seems to be nothing more than a tabloid-level horror show focusing exclusively on the madness, with an over-the-top scenery-chewing performance by an actress who has lucked into a poorly written vehicle in which she is able to garner standing ovations by presenting Garland as a self-destructive maniac.

Nothing anyone has said in its defense has made me think otherwise. But of course, I'll going with an ENTIRELY open mind...

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 3:17pm

Taking into account of course that Garland was a self-destructive maniac. A brilliant, loving, funny, sad maniac, but a self destructive maniac.

[Kristie-K2]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 3:37pm

Thanks Pal Joey, I will wait for your review...

I would love to see Ricky Martin and Shirley Knight too...

But it is going to take another big artist for me to get on that plane...

My boyfriend said he will give me some pills...I need to be knocked out....He He

[juggles]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 4:36pm

I first came out of this play so angry. So angry at MGM feeding a child with drugs that eventually ruined her life. I was angry at the five husbands/managers that exploited her and spent all her money until she was penniless. But I also came out loving Judy more but saddened by her early death, what a loss to the world.
She was the best voice in the 20th century and there will never be another like her. It is sad/funny everything.

[TulitaPepsi]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 5:24pm

A major problem with the show is that one never sees the charming Judy who beguiled people so much that they returned to work with her even after her problems drove them away. From the first scene she is manic and unbalanced and that stays that way varying degrees throughout the show.

Many people have remarked at Judy's ability to laugh at herself at even her lowest point. But as directed Bennett just mumbles.

Cumpsty is completely charmless character who mostly glowers at an ever-exasperated Deans (who is portrayed with surprising sympathy). The pianist represents Judy's gay fanbase, but we never know WHY Judy meant something for generations of gay men aside from "You saved my life".

There is a great play in Judy's TALK OF THE TOWN engagement. This isn't it.

[MusicalMo]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 6:25pm

"A major problem with the show is that one never sees the charming Judy who beguiled people so much that they returned to work with her even after her problems drove them away. From the first scene she is manic and unbalanced and that stays that way varying degrees throughout the show."

Tulita, I have to respectably disagree with this statement. There are several more quiet tender moments in the show that are not 'manic'. Those include the intimate moments between Anthony and Judy in Act 2 when he is helping her apply her make-up and later when he tries to convince her to come away with him and live quietly.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but 'charming' may mean one thing to you and one thing to another. When I got home from the show last night and I did some online research about Judy and About Mickey Deans. The way the last year of her life is described is pretty terrible, giving shoddy performances, being booed off stages, forgetting lines, just not her self anymore.

So, you may WISH that the play had covered more of her life than the last several months, in order to show different phases of her character. But you can't fault a play/author for choosing to focus on one series of events or time, or an actress for doing her job and accurately trying to portray Judy's emotional state and what was left of her singing voice at that late stage in her life.

Perhaps someone will do a Judy 'retrospective' one day for all the people who want to remember her as Dorothy or as she was in A Star Is Born, but this play isn't that and doesn't try to be.

Just keep that in mind.

[juggles]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 6:37pm

......................





Updated On: 3/25/12 at 06:37 PM

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 6:49pm

The US has thrown a few Tonys and Oscars at some Brit actors over the years, juggles, so I don't think your last post contributed much to the discussion.

And where are you getting a UK vs US thing? It sounds to me like some Americans have liked it so far and some not. I haven't seen a single poster say the problem with the show (if, indeed, they see a problem) is because the production and the star are British.

[TulitaPepsi]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 6:51pm

MusicalMo, there is no doubt Garland was a wreck the last year of her life - and Bennett actually sings better than Judy did for most of that time. Bennett isn't the problem - she has a remarkable instrument and in the hands of a more sensitive director and a better author, she might well create a great Garland (I'd love to hear a Bennett does Garland does Mama Rose) I do fault the author for focusing only on the relentlessly shrill tabloid-fodder Judy at the expense of creating a three-dimensional person. It's an easy way out to portray her - one might well leave the theater believing the author didn't even like Judy Garland.

I confess that I thought the scene with Anthony was bathetic.

Updated On: 3/20/12 at 06:51 PM

[Matt2]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 7:04pm

The more I hear about this show, the more I think of Pam Gems' "Piaf." Both shows bathe in the personal demons of the two women being portrayed. Both sound like they're not very well written (haven't read or seen "End of Rainbow" yet, so I'm going by word of mouth). The unfortunate writing and lack of development in any other characters leave the leading ladies to carry their respective shows-- with both receiving critical acclaim and awards/nominations.



Updated On: 3/22/12 at 07:04 PM

[juggles]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 7:54pm

..........
Updated On: 3/21/12 at 07:54 PM

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 8:06pm

This from the person who was chiding others for resorting to sarcasm.

[Matt2]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 8:09pm

"I give up, when your only claim to fame is Donald Duck, no wonder you can't understand serious stuff"

What?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 8:33pm

Zing! And Reg knocks Juggles's balls to the ground!

Anyhoo, doesn't this show kinda sound like something the odious Matthew Lombardo would cook up?

[goldenboy]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 11:13pm

I attended the second preview Tuesday 20 and I predict a divided camp on this one.


Perhaps I have seen too many good Judy Garland impersonators. Or perhaps I was just spoiled by the amazing Judy Davis/Tammy Blanchard movie---or perhaps my memory of Judy Garland is so special that it has trouble believing anything that isn't spot on ... but I did not for more than a few seconds ever believe it was Garland I was seeing on that stage.


I had a lot of problems suspending my disbelief with Tracie Bennett. First off Tracie Bennett in speaking voice sounded more like Katherine Hepburn than Judy Garland. This was quite disconcerting. In looks, she looked more like a young Mimi HInes complete with overbite in Funny Girl. Tracie Bennett comes closet to Garland during the songs but for me not close enough.

Tracie comes even closer capturing the drama of desperation of needing the pills and liquor and not getting over it. Does a nice job with a very manic "When you're smiling." But it was never quite Garland for me.

When I watched Judy Davis after a few minutes in Me and My Shadows, I believed I was watching Garland, Even Tommy Femia... when he sings live (do not judge by you tube) does capture something very close to Judy Garland when you see him in person. Christopher Peterson makes you think--Garland


Have I seen too much theatre? Have I seen to many Garland Impersonators? Is my love of the original overpowering my ability to buy into this?

To be fair the entire audience stood up for Tracie Bennett. I just didn't quite buy it. And I really wanted to believe in the Rainbow.




Updated On: 3/20/12 at 11:13 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 3/20/12 at 11:33pm

"First off Tracie Bennett in speaking voice sounded more like Katherine Hepburn than Judy Garland."

Maybe the odious Matthew Lombardo IS involved?