I see nothing to like or admire in this. What am I missing? I find this pretty awful. The two voices do nothing for me. Nor do the vocal arrangements.
The orchestrations just seem to concentrate on a prominent instrument in the original orchestrations and bring it to the forefront in simplified form. What is so exciting about that?
I think it's intoxicating. It's truly gorgeous in the show. However, I think you have to be somewhat of a fan of the indie/folk sound to fully appreciate this rendition.
haven't seen the revival and have limited exposure to Oklahoma! in general but they both sound great to me- shes got that gritty voice and he has this twangy falsetto. i can see wishing two "classic sounding" actors were cast, but once you accept they are not going for that ole broadway sound- its fantastic.
FranklinDickson2018 said: "I see nothing to like or admire in this. What am I missing? I find this pretty awful. The two voices do nothing for me. Nor do the vocal arrangements.
The orchestrations just seem to concentrate on a prominent instrument in the original orchestrations and bring it to the forefront in simplified form.What is so exciting about that?
Im real sorry that anyone is forcing you to "like" this, that gun to your head must be scary. Dont give in.
If it doesnt appeal to you, it doesnt appeal to you, no harm done.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
Sorry to see the thread lapse into the usual nastiness, but it’s refreshing to hear a different take on a classic score that we’ve heard a hundred times performed with traditional orchestra.
Bluegrass is the perfect genre for the scene and setting, and almost everyone likes bluegrass. Even sworn enemies of country music.
When the OP STARTS in nastiness, hard to not answer in same.
I see nothing to like or admire in this. What am I missing? I find this pretty awful. The two voices do nothing for me. Nor do the vocal arrangements.
I'm not even sticking up for the show - I haven't seen it yet. I just hate when people bash things they haven't actually seen. (Or, as in this case, from one clip)
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
The orchestrations just seem to concentrate on a prominent instrument in the original orchestrations and bring it to the forefront in simplified form. What is so exciting about that?
Who described this arrangement of this song as "exciting"? It's not supposed to be exciting. It's not that type of song. Personally, I think it sounds lovely, which is apropos for the song itself.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
dramamama611 said: "When the OP STARTS in nastiness, hard to not answer in same.
I see nothing to like or admire in this. What am I missing? I find this pretty awful. The two voices do nothing for me. Nor do the vocal arrangements.
I'm not even sticking up for the show - I haven't seen it yet. I just hate when people bash things they haven't actually seen. (Or, as in this case, from one clip)"
Absolutely agree. I don't believe you can judge a show unless you actually see it. Then again, that could just be me.
I haven't heard a lot of examples yet, but so far, I LOOOOOVE the new arrangements. What impresses me is how the orchestral arranger has captured so much of the original score, and arranged it for instruments that are classified as rhythm instruments.
I am blown away by the incredible skill it takes to use a rhythm instrument to play melody, counterpoint and harmony simultaneously. Surry with the Fringe on Top is a very nice example of what I mean.
BenElliott used the word, "intoxicating". If I were to choose a froo-froo adjective (and why not, when the musicianship is THIS good?), I'd choose "sparkling".
The vocals, however..... mmnnnnyaaah... not so impressive (for me).
Except for Ali Stroker (Ado Annie). Wow!! She impressed me vocally and creatively with her interpretation. I thought she was a perfect match of vocals with the new orchestration. And I imagine I will also vocally love hearing Mary Testa as Aunt Eller - heck, it's Mary Testa!
This is an OC album I'm anxious to own primarily for the new orchestrations. It's a shame that the Curly and Laurie aren't so much singers, as they are catterwallers. I'm sure that works for some folks (especially in context of this production) - I'm just not one of them.
This is a very poor rendition of a duet that live was absolutely gorgeous. You kind of have to see it. But this awkward concert format took a lot of the magic out of the duet.
But what shiuld you like about it? I don't know how anyone can say that Damon Daunno doesn't have a gorgeous voice and doesn't look like a Sun-Records era Elvis.
It loses a bit from being taken out of the audio-visual context of the show (which is very strong), but I love how much feeling the actors put into their vocals - they're very expressive - and how successfully they have deconstructed, and reconstructed, it into a gentle, ambling, small-scale duet.
You HAVE to like this. Sorry. Every single one of the other million recordings of this song are going to be burned, along with all record of any previous incarnation of Oklahoma. This is all you have left.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
I saw Damon Daunno in Hadestown and did not care for his voice, therefore I put off seeing Okalahoma! at St. Ann's and now on Broadway because of it. FranklinDickson2018, thank you for posting this clip because I thought, let me give it another try, and proceeded to turn it off after 30 seconds.
You don’t HAVE to like anything you don’t like. That’s the beauty of having multiple shows running alongside this production of Oklahoma along with countless productions of Oklahoma that pop up all over the country every year: you have other options.
Now, the real question is “If you do like this, why?” For me, the answer was in someone else’s response: I found the duet absolutely intoxicating in the context of the show. I genuinely swoon when I think of it, it’s that memorable. Their chemistry was palpable and the band arrangement is absolutely perfect. Others will disagree, but this production will go down as one of the greatest I’ve ever seen of any show, anywhere. Can’t wait for the cast recording.
I don't have a problem with the singing style but I do with the acting. This ought to be a flirtatious duet, but the Laurie sings the song flatly without any particular emotion. She doesn't act it well.
From my understanding, this ^ is no longer the interpretation.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
I would never say that anybody should, or shouldn't like something. I have to say, I thoroughly enjoyed this. It was cute, their chemistry together on stage was enjoyable, and I found the new take on the song to be fun and refreshing.
Nothing can be for everyone. There are literally thousands of people out there who would ask the same question after having heard Gordon MacRae and Shirley Jones sing the same song.
Just watched this video and I absolutely loved every second of it. Acting is made up of actions ya'll and it is clear RNJ is doing specific things tailored to her Laurie. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean its bad,,, it just means its not for you.
goodlead said: "I don't have a problem with the singing style but I do with the acting. This ought to be a flirtatious duet, but the Laurie sings the song flatly without any particular emotion. She doesn't act it well."
I think she is acting it in the spirit of the new revival, but not the typical way.