Well, it is predominately a male cast. You know that Anita and Maria are there and Anybodys might look like a boy, but lets face it...Val and Grizabella (I think those are there names)along with the other women barely exist.
And im fairly certain this was discussed in the existing WSS thread if you want more info/thoughts
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.
Sethwp2 said: "UncleCharlie said: "Other than the women listed in the cast on ibdb and playbill, the remaining cast will indeed be all male."
Kinda funny, but not indeed true. Anybodys is non-binary in the upcoming film version."
But this is a theater board and we were or at least I was talking about the upcoming Broadway musical by clearly referring to Playbill and ibdb so the casting of the movie version is irrelevant to my comment about the casting of the Broadway musical, no?
The movie casting may be irrelevant, but the fact remains that just because part of the cast is female, the other percentage may or may not be all male. In whatever production- film, Broadway or otherwise. It is ignorant to assume that every cast member who is not female, is "indeed" male. Not necessarily true. That's all.
There's rumor that a few other iconic songs have also been cut. At least during previews anyway... until Sondheim and the Bernstein/Laurents estates see this version and give it their yay or nay.
We'll see how long this lasts! and whether or not they're required to stick to a more traditional approach in terms of song cuts and structure. There's a reason why they've got a whole 2 months of previews!
Sethwp2 said: "The movie casting may be irrelevant, but the fact remains that just because part of the cast is female, the other percentage may or may not be all male. In whatever production- film, Broadway or otherwise. It is ignorant to assume that every cast member who is not female, is "indeed" male. Not necessarily true. That's all."
So then say that in your original post instead of referencing the film version which it appears we both agree was an irrelevant comparison. And be sure for consistency to also lecture the OP on the ignorance of daring to refer to the cast as "all-male" in the first place. That's all.
Years ago in L.A., there was a fund raising production that had a 95% male cast. It was re-titled "West Hollywood Story", and no, I did not make that up. The same company also did a variation of "Gypsy" where Mama Rose was actually a gay man.
This new production is likely not more male than any other, but the ad certainly suggests that. Perhaps the ad itself is centering on the conflicts between the men as the scoring indicates (the opening number, very toxically male). The ad is very effective as is, so that might be a good thing - though it also keeps the women of West Side Story out fo sight.
I'm also not entirely sure that all the pics in the ad are of cis male performers.
On reflection, if the ad were the opening number - instead of the music of that number and pics of the (at least mostly or ostensibly) men in the cast - it wouldn't suggest "all male" at all. The ad presents the same kind of testosterone-driven energy without actually staging the show's dramatic, volatile opening.
Trousers said: "Be great to finally excise Gee, Officer Krupke which is an aberration in act 2 and kills the tension."
Yeah, and "Maria", "Something's Coming" and "One Hand One Heart" just slow things down so let's throw them all out, too. Hell, let's just ditch the whole score! They can call it Romeo & Juliet!
I actually find the advertising campaign to be more than a little homoerotic- even down to those padlocked chain necklaces. All rough trade with not even a hint of Maria.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."