THE GREAT GATSBY Broadway Previews- Page 4

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 9:15am

Kurtal, tonally, this musical of Gatbsy is to the original novel what PHANTOM, WICKED and LES MIZ are to theirs.  Ironically, what you are describing - an oppulant hollow stage version of the story in the guise of a standard ("vacant'" romantic musical is actually pretty meta for what Fitzgerald is painting relative to the world in his novel.

Updated On: 4/11/24 at 09:15 AM

[Dylan Smith4]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 9:29am

kurtal said: "Oh man, I hated this.

But did the creators of this show even read the book? The novel is a biting commentary on the emptiness of the American dream, the inability to transcend class, and the tragedy of chasing after something that you can never obtain. All of the opulence and decadence of the novel pulsates around a hollow core. Gatsby's wealth is a house of cards, and his parties are all part of that illusion.

And this musical turned the story into a musical comedy with a tragic ending.

I would have been open to a new take on Gatsby -- a feminist lens, a story about delusion, a contemporary take on wealth inequality. Any of that could have been interesting. But to reduce this story to a melodramatic love story misses the entire point of the novel.

And I would almost be able to forgive that if the music and lyrics were not so criminally awful.

I imagine there are people who are going to like this -- the people around me certainly seemed to enjoy themselves. But I haven't hated a show this much in a long time. What a missed opportunity."

Yeah, the book is the BIGGEST PROBLEM I have with this show! As someone who loves and cherishes the novel, I was BITTERLY DISAPPOINTED when I saw this at Paper Mill last year and really hoped they took the time to work on this show instead of rushing it to Broadway. I feel they only rushed this because the Paper Mill run sold out long before it even opened. Granted, if this had no big names like Jeremy and Eva, then this would've disappeared quietly after finishing in New Jersey.

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 9:52am

This team knows exactly what they are doing relative to the book. They have a clear vision for it.  The original book would not make for a commerical, appealing stage musical for broad audiences on Broadway. I suspect the version of Gatbsy at ART will be more faithful to the book and probably most mainstream audiences won't like it much.

Updated On: 4/11/24 at 09:52 AM

[Broadway Flash]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 11:15am

I think the key word here is “adaptation.”  They went in the direction of romantic musical theatre.  Future musicals of the novel will do something else.  I think the book writer actually said she didn’t care for the novel to begin with.  But it’s always tricky when people come in wanting it to be loyal to the source material. 

[kurtal]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 12:47pm

Broadway Flash said: "I think the key word here is “adaptation.” They went in the direction of romantic musical theatre. Future musicals of the novel will do something else. I think the book writer actually said she didn’t care for the novel to begin with. But it’s always tricky when people come in wanting it to be loyal to the source material."

Yes, but I would argue that, in the book at least, Gatsby and Daisy aren't a romance. It's a one-sided obsession that is built on a delusional fantasy of Daisy's willingness to leave her station.  And that could have been an interesting way to take the show...but that's not what the musical did.  It makes it seem like Daisy truly loves Gatsby, so when she decides to stay with Tom at the end, that decision seems to come out of nowhere.  And her final song about her daughter, which tries to wedge in a pseudo-feminist take on her decision, doesn't feel grounded in anything we have learned about Daisy in the show leading up to that point.  So whatever the creative team's vision is, it didn't feel cohesive to me.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 1:07pm

I disliked most things about this at PM, but this song/idea was at the top of the list. 

[rattleNwoolypenguin]

Posted: 4/12/24 at 2:37pm

There is something really depressing about intelligent poetic beautiful writing being watered down this much. 

McDonalds Gatsby

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/13/24 at 5:41pm

Caught the matinee today. I don't have much new to add. The Great Gatsby is the textbook definition of “flash and trash”. Aladdin and Moulin Rouge! are tame in comparison to what is on display at the Broadway Theatre right now.

The entire affair is pure bombast from start to finish without a hint of subtlety. Everything is gaudy and garish - the singing, the acting, the choreography, the sets, the lighting, the costumes…

Anyways, I really did not care for this at all, and I think the critics are going to eat this alive.

[MrsSallyAdams]

Posted: 4/13/24 at 10:48pm

Does the show allow for a GBQ reading of Nick? The films all cut Nick's ambiguous hook up with Mr. McKee but some lean into the idea that he's more infatuated with Gatsby than with Jordan Baker. 

Updated On: 4/13/24 at 10:48 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/13/24 at 10:50pm

I didn't pick up on anything like that. But it could also be how it's being played now and another actor could add some subtle hints to it. 

[Dirty Rotten Scoundrel]

Posted: 4/15/24 at 4:36pm

I can't recall from when I saw this at Paper Mill, so can anyone confirm if Jeremy Jordan was using that OTT mid-Atlantic accent in that production as well? I don't remember being so struck by it at Paper Mill, but I found it pretty jarring when I revisited on Broadway. Perhaps it's a deliberate choice to again show how Gatsby doesn't truly belong and he's doing whatever he can to put on airs, but it felt more like one actor choosing to do an accent when no one else did, ultimately coming across a bit silly and out of place. And this is coming from someone who loves Jeremy's work. 

[ClumsyDude15]

Posted: 4/15/24 at 5:05pm

The show has definitely gotten the Broadway upgrade. The money is literally on full display from the new sets, costumes, pyro, etc. 

The show feels more like something inspired by Great Gatsby than a direct adaptation. I really enjoyed the show at Paper Mill and had a very good time with the updated version on Saturday. Is it the best written musical of the season? No. Is it breaking new ground? No. But, it’s a damn good time. 

As stated by others, this show knows what it wants to be - it wants to be a romanticized 20’s musical dramedy and if you completely take out of the idea it’s based on the novel it works. If you’re expecting a deep and meaningful adaptation of the novel, this is not it. 

Jeremy and Eva continue to have never sounded better, their voices soar and sound gorgeous together. They have great chemistry and they fully take you on the journey of their “romance”. 

I love Noah Ricketts and I’m glad they adjusted it to allow Nick to be the first person we meet and sing the opening number rather than it having been Gatsby at Paper Mill. To address MrsSally’s question - there definitely are moments where you can tell Noah’s Nick is very connected to Gatsby in a way he’s not with Jordan, but they never really act on it. It felt more blatant in the final half of Act Two in Paper Mill then it does now, but I think it’s there. 
 

 

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

The only thing I personally still cannot get on board with is the Jordan/Nick romance. I just can’t get over the straight-washing of both of those characters when they are so blatantly queer in the novel. No disrespect to Samantha or Noah who are both fabulous, but I just can’t get behind that plot. 

Other than the opening number change and changing Daisy’s introduction song [RIP to Sophisticated], the music seemed pretty much the same. I really enjoy this score - it’s big, it’s overdramatic, and I can’t wait for a cast recording so I can listen to it non-stop. 

The only major book items I noticed that were different was how much more apparent Tom’s affair is to everyone, or at least acknowledged. I was a bit taken aback when Daisy is fully calling him out on it in the first scene when Nick arrives. 

The show is opulent, frivolous, and the audience I saw it with on Saturday was eating it up with a spoon.  

For stage door friends - all of the principal cast except Noah and Sara came out and signed, but did not take photos, but it was packed to the brim at the barricades. I was a little surprised given it was a two show Saturday to see most

I don’t think the reviews are going to matter much in the long term, but I’m happy to keep the party going!

Updated On: 4/16/24 at 05:05 PM

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 4/15/24 at 5:29pm

Dirty Rotten Scoundrel said: "I can't recall from when I saw this at Paper Mill, so can anyone confirm if Jeremy Jordan was using that OTT mid-Atlantic accent in that production as well? I don't remember being so struck by it atPaper Mill, but I found it pretty jarring when I revisited on Broadway. Perhaps it's a deliberate choice to again show how Gatsby doesn't truly belong and he's doing whatever he can to put on airs, butitfelt more likeoneactor choosing to do an accent when no one else did, ultimately coming across a bitsilly and out of place. And this is coming from someone who loves Jeremy's work."

I think Jeremy had a mid-Atlantic accent at Papermill but I don't think it was as pronounced as it is now, or at least I took a lot more notice of it on Broadway.  I seem to remember Eva doing more of an accent at Papermill as well, but I'm not sure if that's true either.  I did also wonder if Gatsby's accent was intended to show how much of a phony he was but I similarly also found it fairly distracting.

[pollster2]

Posted: 4/15/24 at 11:32pm

Call me crazy, but I had an absolute blast at Gatsby. Jeremy and Eva sound incredible -- the entire principal cast is firing on all cylinders. The sets and costumes are stunning. English teachers will HATE this production -- but audiences will eat it up.

[dearalanaaaa]

Posted: 4/16/24 at 12:36am

Ended up coming here for round two after seeing it off broadway on a student ticket! First of all, thank you to the box office for that wonderful seat: front orchestra row E for $25 at 4 pm is highway robbery for a show these days!

The changes to the first song didn't sit well with me, but honestly I forgot about them due to how stellar act two was. "Made to Last" was as stressful as I remember it being, "For Her" and its reprise are worth the $25 alone, and Samantha Pauly deserves a featured nomination for her amazing performance. She drew my eye all night, something that she didn't do Off-Broadway for whatever reason. WOW.

There was a tech issue with the car's arrival onstage during the first act, but that was quickly resolved and the cast handled it very well. The people around me who weren't familiar with the show didn't notice until the curtain went down, and those of us who did know what the error was understood it. Also, the manners in my section were good besides the person who was lipsyncing and somewhat gesturing during the songs. Not a fan of that, but it's very much the "Eva and Jeremy" show for a lot of people, and I didn't expect the best of audiences anyway.

I think a lot of the changes for Broadway worked, especially the larger ensemble. They were dancing for their LIFE out there and I can always respect that. I don't think anybody besides Samantha Pauly stood out though, and she was AMAZING fwiw. If the show ended after act one with her and Jeremy's leading songs, I would've thought I got my money's worth already. Great and fun night out! 

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 4/16/24 at 8:26am

dearalanaaaa said: "Ended up coming here for round two after seeing it off broadway on a student ticket! First of all, thank you to the box office for that wonderful seat: front orchestra row E for $25 at 4 pm is highway robbery for a show these days!

The changes to the first song didn't sit well with me, but honestly I forgot about them due to how stellar act two was. "Made to Last" was as stressful as I remember it being, "For Her" and its reprise are worth the $25 alone, and Samantha Pauly deserves a featured nomination for her amazing performance. She drew my eye all night, something that she didn't do Off-Broadway for whatever reason. WOW.

There was a tech issue with the car's arrival onstage during the first act, but that was quickly resolved and the cast handled it very well. The people around me who weren't familiar with the show didn't notice until the curtain went down, and those of us who did know what the error was understood it. Also, the manners in my section were good besides the person who was lipsyncing and somewhat gesturing during the songs. Not a fan of that, but it's very much the "Eva and Jeremy" show for a lot of people, and I didn't expect the best of audiences anyway.

I think a lot of the changes for Broadway worked, especially the larger ensemble. They were dancing for their LIFE out there and I can always respect that. I don't think anybody besides Samantha Pauly stood out though, and she was AMAZING fwiw. If the show ended after act one with her and Jeremy's leading songs, I would've thought I got my money's worth already. Great and fun night out!"

We need to start calling people out who lipsync, mouth along, do choreography at their seats- It's distracting and so obnoxious 

[MCfan2]

Posted: 4/16/24 at 10:10am

pollster2 said: "Call me crazy, but I had an absolute blast at Gatsby. Jeremy and Eva sound incredible -- the entire principal cast is firing on all cylinders. The sets and costumes are stunning. English teachers will HATE this production -- but audiences will eat it up."

As an English major -- many years ago, but once an English major, always an English major :-) -- and as a fan of the novel, I can see myself going as a guilty pleasure, even if it made me wince now and then. If I ever get back up to NYC, that is. I wonder if it will tour?

As for Daisy loving Gatsby, there's enough in the text of the book to support that interpretation ("She had told him that she loved him, and Tom Buchanan saw," etc.). One could argue that she doesn't REALLY love him but just gets caught up in the moment, but I think it's fair to go either way. Of course, not having seen the show, I don't know how far they go with it. A big hearts-and-flowers Romeo-and-Juliet type of romance would be a bit much.

[Owen22]

Posted: 4/17/24 at 12:15am

Saw this tonight and really enjoyed it. I love the novel, it is NOT the novel's characterizations .... but am okay with the adaptation. Actually, I think it's a very strong book. And yay for a good old fashioned Broadway score.  And I mean old fashioned in the fact there was actual MELODY!!!  Both up tunes and ballads, these were some songs! There were even real comedy numbers! I really didn't think I'd like the show this much, though I expected to like the leads.  But I loved the whole cast. Good job to all those involved! 

[quizking101]

Posted: 4/17/24 at 10:38am

Went again last night the vague hope of any kind of fixes since the invited dress and…NOPE.

The show continues to feel loud, overblown, opulent, and yet somehow completely hollow - actually feeling longer than before (which never happens to me on repeat visits). A friend who saw it recently said that “it’s looks and sounds like the entire thing was a construction of AI” and I think that’s probably the most apt description. Everything is just so basic and, while the audience ate it up, I was still rolling my eyes at some of the dialogue, lyrics, and songs. As I’ve stated before, this is the Broadway equivalent of “Look! Oooooh, shiny!”

The only part of this show I actually like is the choreography and Samantha Pauly since her Jordan Baker is so disaffected that she tends to nail the dry jokes her character has. Also, the queer subtext between Jordan and Nick was more visible this time.

All 8 credited leads and some of the ensemble came out the stage door last night. Highly organized and, with the exception of Eva (who had guests), everyone was out in 15-20 minutes. 

Sidebar: If you are over 6’0 (I’m 6’8), be prepared for a MISERABLE experience in the orchestra since there is virtually no pitch to the seats (like the Broadhurst) and one of my knees actually got bruised from being pushed into the seat in front of me with the patron in that seat pushing back. I had to move to a PV box seat at intermission.

[kurtal]

Posted: 4/17/24 at 6:34pm

QueenAlice said: "Kurtal, tonally, this musical of Gatbsy is to the original novel what PHANTOM, WICKEDand LES MIZ are to theirs. Ironically, what you are describing - an oppulanthollow stage version of the story in the guise of a standard ("vacant'" romantic musical is actuallypretty meta for what Fitzgerald is painting relative to the world in his novel."

The three shows you named at least have fully developed characters, memorable songs, and lyrics that don't make you cringe at every turn.  (And I loathe Phantom but appreciate that it works as a piece of musical theatre).  Gatsby does not.

[starlightlocamotion]

Posted: 4/17/24 at 9:18pm

To each their own … but I’m currently at the show and find it to be a wildly fun night at the theatre. Is it high art? No. Is it perfect. No. There are at least three songs in the first act that should be reworked IMO. But the comparisons to phantom are spot on. If you are a sucker for spectacle, romance & hummable tunes then this is for you. If it isn’t for you, that’s okay. Because the performance tonight is sold out. I expect it to outlast the rest of the new musicals this season. 
 

If you’re going to see it, just get off your high horse & let it sweep you away. If you analyze to closely you’re doing yourself a disservice. Again … not high art. That’s not what this is, nor what’s it’s trying to be. 

[kidmanboy]

Posted: 4/17/24 at 11:18pm

Just left the show this evening and the whole affair felt entirely rudderless. The actors felt like they were all in different shows and, while the scenic design was relatively fabulous, the staging and choreography really didn’t do anything to assist the storytelling. (Neither did the score for that matter). I’m rather shocked that this transferred from Paper Mill. 

[BdwayLife]

Posted: 4/18/24 at 7:26am

Saw yesterday's matinee.

This show is the definition of decadence.

The costumes, scenery, and lighting are breathtaking.

Jeremy Jordan's voice has never sounded better--it soars.

My GOD, Eva is gorgeous. Her acting is so nuanced. Her voice is crystal clear. 

Samantha Pauley is a STAR --I could not take my eyes off her, even when the full cast is on stage, and a bazillion things are happening.

I really enjoyed the choreography. By far, the best opening I've ever seen. I saw Cabaret and Tommy this week, and I'd definitely return to The Great Gatsby before those two productions. I'm so tired of seeing ensemble members on stage doing things with no purpose. Every move the ensemble makes during TGG, moves the story forward.  I have goosebumps thinking about their almost demonic, evolution of Roaring On at the end of the show. Gatsby is gone, but they continue. 

I legit stopped breathing during the Plaza scene, and gasped--the tension between Tom, Daisy, Jordan, and Gatsby was remarkable. I found myself constantly "checking in" with Nick, and viewing the scene through his eyes. I wanted to give him a big, tight hug. 

Run, don't walk to see this show, with THIS cast. 

Oh, they stopped the show a few scenes in--based upon an earlier comment, I'd say one of the vehicles continues to provide a challenge.  The break lasted less than five minutes. 

Updated On: 4/18/24 at 07:26 AM

[always bway]

Posted: 4/18/24 at 8:16am

oof this show was not for me. I thought the story was disjointed and stylistically all over the place. Direction and Choreography were splat- like. Set was overblown. They just threw up whatever they could to distract audiences from the bore, which of course just made it all worse and less sophisticated. I mean..we all know how the story ends, I wanted them to just get there so I could get out of there. 

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/18/24 at 9:23am

starlightlocamotion said: "To each their own …If you’re going to see it, just get off your high horse & let it sweep you away. If you analyze to closely you’re doing yourself a disservice. Again … not high art. That’s not what this is, nor what’s it’s trying to be."

I did see it, at Papermill, and I understand not much has changed. I saw it the first week of previews, so I could hardly have any preconceived notions, and in fact, was crazy excited to see it.

The notion that it's terrific if you just don't think about it, is perhaps the most ridiculous idea I've seen on this board. Shucked wasn't "high art"; Rock of Ages wasn't "high art" but they weren't masquerading around as a literary classic, so yes, this WANTED to be.

It's fine that you loved it, but it's also fine that others don't.