Ann Crumb in Aspects of Love

[Leadingplayer]

Posted: 12/14/12 at 9:41pm

How'd she get the lead? Why didn't they find a "name" to star? Did people turn it down?

[Justin D]

Posted: 12/14/12 at 9:55pm

I don't remember exact details but it had something to do with Equity and Sarah Brightman getting to do Phantom of Broadway, so it was like a tit for tat situation.

[bobs3]

Posted: 12/14/12 at 10:29pm

It was quite the scandal when Equity denied permission to Sarah Brightman to come with the show to Broadway -- it even made the front page of the New York Times. ALW was so incensed he threatened to cancel the Broadway production. Some sort of deal was eventually brokered where Sarah Brightman was allowed to do the show for six months in New York and ALW had to cast an American actress in the London premiere of his upcoming new musical ASPECTS OF LOVE.

[sbflyfan]

Posted: 12/14/12 at 11:49pm

Here's some interesting interview footage filmed at the opening night of "Aspects" in London.

Sarah talks briefly at 3:25 and is being very "polite"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRWuIOMvABk

P.S. Don't miss Michael Ball and his girlfriend (wife?) all over each other in every shot :-P

Updated On: 12/14/12 at 11:49 PM

[06s091]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 2:22pm

Many actresses were rumoured to play Rose including Sarah Brightman and Claire Moore but as others have said: ALW(or RUG) made a deal with American Equity to cast an American actress in the lead in the next London show in exchange for allowing Sarah to do Phantom on Broadway.

BTW: the woman in that video is Cathy McGowan who at the time was a tv presenter and interviewer. She was there to interview him but they did end up dating. They never married but they are still together.

[ajh]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 2:41pm

As I remember this was quite controversial at the time in London: as well as Brightman and Claire Moore, a number of West End leading ladies were touted for the role including Siobhan McCarthy (original Donna in Mamma Mia, original Mistress in Evita) and Rebecca Caine (original Cosette, Christine in Canadian Phantom) but in fact it had been promised to Susannah Fellows (Elaine Paige's Alternate in original Evita, later Alaura in London City Of Angels, Luisa in Donmar Nine, Mama Morton in Chicago), who had played it at ALW's Sydmonton Festival. Fellows was hastily replaced with Crumb when the Equity exchange for Brightman occured, but then took over when Crumb had her ghastly accident and returned to the States. Must say, I saw them both as Rose and they were both terrific, really couldn't pick a favorite.

[FritzW]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 6:29pm

Strange thing is that Susannah Fellows is an American (a native New Yorker), but a long time resident of the UK, since 1969. Here is her bio from the original Evita progamme:

SUSANNAH FELLOWS Susannah is a 'native New Yorker' and made her theatrical debut at the age of 15 with the Pittsburgh Light Opera Company. She has subsequently appeared in the US in The Gingerbread Lady; West Side Story; Enter Laughing; and Godspell. She first came to London in 1969 and made her English debut at the Cambridge Arts Theatre. She has since appeared on the stage in Oh Mr Porter at the Mermaid Theatre; and Cabaret at the Crucible Theatre Sheffield. She has also been seen on television, most recently as Rosamund deClifford in The Devils Crown.
Updated On: 12/15/12 at 06:29 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 6:54pm

It actually played out in several steps, which is why it was a little messy. Not nearly as messy as Sunset Blvd., but still messy. Par for the course with Mr. Lloyd Webber.

1) The deal was made to bring Phantom to America with Michael Crawford in the leading role.

2) Auditions were held for the Broadway company, and Patti Cohenour was ultimately told that she had the role of Christine. Yay, Patti!

3) Suddenly, (and before the American company had been announced) Andrew Lloyd Webber announced on his own that Sarah Brightman decided she wanted to play the part in America as well, and he really wanted her to play it, too.

4) American Equity said NO, for two reasons: One, there had already been Equity auditions for the role, and the part had been cast. Two, Sarah Brightman was not a big enough "name" to deem her "necessary" to the production (which was a usual bargaining ploy to allow certain actors to "cross the pond" in either direction to continue with a play or musical).

5) Webber was furious and insulted by that last part in particular and threatened in the media to cancel the American production entirely if they refused to let Sarah play the part.

6) Equity haggled with him, and it was decided that Sarah could recreate her role of Christine on Broadway, provided that Lloyd Webber cast an "unknown" American actress in a leading role in his next musical. (Not a name/star, in other words.)

7) Patti Cohenour was then told she could "stay on" as the alternate for Christine. Not a happy camper, and a crappy thing for them to do to her.

8 ) Ann Crumb created a leading role in the West End production of Aspects of Love and transferred with the production to Broadway.

Updated On: 12/15/12 at 06:54 PM

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 7:18pm

What a great clip!

Ann sounds so good in the CD, and Sarah sings a few songs from this show, they both must have been brilliant. I think Judy Kuhn would have been amazing as Rose Vibert too.

[jo]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 8:46pm

I saw Aspects of Love in London and on Broadway. Ann Crumb was just right for the part, including that undefinable Frenchwoman sultriness called for by the role of Rose Vibert. She also had great chemistry with Michael Ball and loved their scenes together especially in the first act, when Michael was the young not-yet-twenty lover to her worldly Rose, aspiring actress.

One of my favorites was SEEING IS BELIEVING -- sung so well and acted quite convincingly, even if the staging was very simple.

ASPECTS OF LOVE is my favorite LloydWebber musical score and the cast recording is superb!

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 9:00pm

"4) American Equity said NO, for two reasons: One, there had already been Equity auditions for the role, and the part had been cast. Two, Sarah Brightman was not a big enough "name" to deem her "necessary" to the production (which was a usual bargaining ploy to allow certain actors to "cross the pond" in either direction to continue with a play or musical)."

I will just say that from what I have heard British Equity is far less concerned with American actors "taking" jobs from UK citizens. The whole idea of a tit-for-tat exchange, as it were, seems to come primarily from AEA. So for instance Lloyd Webber encountered far less resistance from British Equity for casting Angela Christian and Jill Paice in The Woman in White, and may have even been planning ahead as a way to counter resistance to eventually bringing Maria Friedman over when the show was set to open here.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 10:19pm

I think she's perfection on the cast album. Actually, that's prob my fave ALW cast album--yes the story is silly (but hey, I love soap operas), and yes some of the lyrics--especiallyt he sung dialogue, is even more sillier, but it holds a special place in my heart.

When I was 11 I saw the regional premier at the Citadel in Edmonton in Robin Phillips' slihtly revised version (ALW was inthe audience) and as much as I adore Maria Bjornson's designs in the coffee table book, I can sorta see how some elt that production was almost too big (I guess they had to compete with expectations from Phantom). Phillips basic production, which like many of his shows used a lot of white, was perfect. I can't remember the cast (I think they were all Canadian) but I also found them ideal--I know this is the production that later toured N America with Sarah Brightman (a kind poster on here saw me complain that it didn't have a souvenir program, and mailed me one he got from the tour since he had an extra).

[Leadingplayer]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 10:25pm

I'm kind of surprised Cohenour accepted the alternate spot under those circumstances.

How was she in the role? Better than Brightman? Was there drama between the two of them a la Patti/Terri Klausner in Evita?

[KylePKJP]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 10:54pm

Re. Phantom: Rebecca Caine was originally offered the Christine alternate and eventual take-over on Broadway as Christine by Lloyd Webber himself. I'm not sure if this was before or after the Cohenour issue. Caine refused it, however, after having a negative experience with the London production when she assumed the Christine Alternate in '87 when Brightman left for a short period (this was well before the original London principals left for Broadway). Caine opened the Canadian production in September of 1989 with Colm Wilkinson and Byron Nease.

Part of Cohenour's compensation may have been that she opened the 1st Canadian National tour of Phantom in 1991, which eventualy became the Far East/International Tour.

Re. Crumb in Aspects of Love, I am thankful this compromise was forced on ALW because Crumb's voice is, for me, the most distinctive and ideally suited to the role she plays in the vast majority of ALW works.

Updated On: 12/16/12 at 10:54 PM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 11:35pm

And Caine, at least on CD, is the definitive Christine IMHO.

[KylePKJP]

Posted: 12/15/12 at 11:54pm

TO THIS DAY, if you are fortunate enough to hear her live as she does perform annually and even twice annually across Canada and the US, Rebecca Caine STILL nails Christine like none other I have heard.





Rebecca Caine Tour Dates Updated On: 12/15/12 at 11:54 PM

[bobs3]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 12:34am

I saw the original Broadway production and really liked the score but I thought the show was overproduced. I thought it would have worked better in a smaller theater and staged more like a chamber musical.

[KylePKJP]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 1:19am

I agree with the above. While I did not have the good fortune of seeing the show, I enjoyed the companion book written by Kurt Ganzel which beautifully shows Bjornson's amazing designs. However, they always struck me as much too large and expansive. The score strikes me as quite intimate and the sets, while marvelous, detract from the emotional impact of the show IMO.

[CHOOKA2]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 2:49am

I don't know who I saw in London in Aspects-remember Michael Ball--who wouldn't in those days.Whoever was the female lead--she was off doing a concert in Japan-I enquired at the box office when she would be back--and the very officious[?} queen in the box office said..'We are selling Aspects of Love-NOT Sarah Brightman or whoever'.I am glad I still bought a ticket because what I remember most--at the end,I was a blubbering mess-it had emotionally turned me inside out [a lot like Blood Brothers]- I think I was the last to leave the theatre.

[chrisampm2]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 5:15am

Bobs3, I feel the theater size of the original Broadway production struck just the right balance for a problematic piece. The Broadhurst is smaller than most theaters that house musicals - 1100 seats. In fact, it more often presents straight plays.

If the show were in a smaller theater I think the soap opera aspects and less than subtle book and lyrics would stick out even more. The Menier production, in its tiny theater, was greeted with bad reviews.

I do agree it would have benefited from a less grand stage design.

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 7:23am

I'm kind of surprised Cohenour accepted the alternate spot under those circumstances.

I'm sure there were many reasons. Even though it hadn't been announced, she had already been offered the role and contracts were involved, which means they had to pay her and negotiate a change. The word was out all over NY that she had the part. I heard it through a mutual friend after Patti's 3-hour audition with Webber. Patti had left The Mystery of Edwin Drood to do Phantom, and she would have been out of a job had she just bowed out gracefully.

This last part is the only speculation on my part: I think they offered her a lot of money to stay on as the alternate, and perhaps as others have said, they offered her tours as well.

I do know this (not speculation). She was not happy, and ultimately after having a perfectly wonderful experience in Big River, she followed it with back-to-back "unpleasant" experiences in Drood and Phantom. She then took time off (like many years) from NY after that. Some people said she quit the business because of these souring experiences, but Patti continued to work elsewhere, outside of the rat race in NY, ultimately coming back to Broadway a few times decades later.

I didn't see her in Phantom, but I saw her play Rosa Bud in Edwin Drood, and she was far and away the best Broadway soprano I heard during that era of the mid-to-late 1980s. Her range and power combined with her petite stature, "china doll" looks, and acting ability made her the top of her game. It was our loss that she took a break from the rest of her "ingenue years" in NY.

EDIT: She is set to star in ACT's production of "Grey Gardens" in Seattle in 2013.

Updated On: 12/16/12 at 07:23 AM

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 7:28am

Patti as Christine:

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 5:07pm

I saw Cohenhour in PHANTOM - the first summer of the run -- opposite Crawford and she was fine. Also loved her in DROOD, and had the unique of opportunity of seeing her go on for Victoria Clark the very first time, apparently with minimal or no rehearsal, in PIAZZA. She is always at the top of her game. Never saw the Brightman Christine (though I did see her in the original company of CATS in London.)

I saw Crumb in ASPECTS, and also Sarah Brightman as Rose in San Francisco. That odd tour used hanging sheets for a set, and really didn't make a more persuasive case for the show's story. Though it was overproduced, the original production was exquisite and at least looked very much like all of its European locales. The tour was on the cheap, and Brightman was a very chilly center for the evening. Interesting to read all of the Crumb appraisals now, because I don't recall anyone especially liking her in the part when it opened. Not that they were against her. She wasn't panned, but the part didn't make her a viable, in-demand musical leading lady for subsequent shows, alas. She has great pipes, and I still enjoy her on the album. The role of Rose is a tough one; who cares about this character?

Updated On: 12/16/12 at 05:07 PM

[Dubliner]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 5:21pm

I think its a cold, uninvolving show. Its very hard to feel any empathy for the plot and characters. The score is ravishing but seems to belong to another story.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 12/16/12 at 6:09pm

"If the show were in a smaller theater I think the soap opera aspects and less than subtle book and lyrics would stick out even more. The Menier production, in its tiny theater, was greeted with bad reviews. "

I'm very mixed on Robin Phillips as a director, though he did a lot for the Edmonton theatre scene (which in many ways is I think, oddly, one of the best in Canada, and not just because of their massive Fringe Fest), but I thought he struck the right balance with Aspects. Again, I was a young teen when I saw it, so my mileage now may vary, but I thought the intimacy added to it. Some of the sung dialogue was cut I remember, because even on the tape I had of the OLC some stuff was not in the stage show.

I have to disagree with Dubliner though. Yes, it is a trite love story in a way--but most love stories are (at least the ones in my life seem to be when I look back at them)--I find the characters really empathetic. (Maybe that's troubling, lol...)