No happy Frogs...

[G]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 5:42am

I hear from a cast member in THE FROGS that it's quite a disaster at the moment. Has anyone actually seen it? Updated On: 7/26/04 at 05:42 AM

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 6:13am

Sondheim's finished!

[magruder]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 6:33am

There have been plenty of threads about The Frogs on this board with a number of people who have liked it. At All That Chat, it seems to be running slightly more positive than negative.
As far as Sondheim being "finished," they said the same thing about him after Merrily We Roll Along...

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 6:46am

I was there on Tuesday. This is a cut and paste of my reactions that I'd emailed to a friend when I got home:

How was The Frogs? This is one of those questions that, in the light
of all the negative chatter, makes me feel like there's something
wrong with me because I liked it a lot. It's very tongue-in- cheek and
over the top...intentionally, I believe. (Visualize Nathan Lane hooked
to bungee cords and spinning in the air...) But I thought it was
hilarious. The first act is much tighter than the second, but neither
was by any means a disaster. There is a lot of current and pointed
political commentary that is openly critical of the Bush
administration in this version. Not surprisingly, it didn't go over
very well with a certain segment of the Lincoln Center subscription
base. I couldn't believe that there were people leaving at
intermission...not a lot...but still, more than a few.

I am, by no means, well-versed in Greek mythology...so I'm sure there
were layers of parody that escaped me. There were also a lot of nods
to other shows...at one point, Nathan came out singing "I can do it. I
can do it...". There were more than a few other nods to The Producers.
And my daughter picked up a reference to Merrily We Roll Along ("it's
a hit...it's a palpable hit"). There were more, but that I just can't
recall.I think the show has multiple layers, and I love the concept of
Shaw and Shakespeare in a battle of words. Act II is still a little
bloated, but it worked.

Timothy Gulan (Kattan's U/S) was still playing the slave, and there is
nothing at all wrong with him in the part. He was appealing and funny.
That role truly *does* have Roger Bart written all over it, so I don't
question them adding him to the cast (and yes, I want to go back and
see him...). But really, they could have gone with Gulan in the role
and it would have been fine. I *do* understand, though, that the
marquee value of Lane/Bart....and the chemistry I expect will show in
their performances can't help but be a bonus.

::::

Addendum: It's not Sondheim's crowning achievement, but I still found a lot to like. And save the people who left at intermission (I didn't see many vacated seats...), there was fairly enthusiastic applause at the curtain call, and certainly no booing. It's a bizarre work...and there IS room for improvement. But it's really premature to be planning Sondheim's memorial service. I plan on a return visit to see it with Roger Bart.

[skingdom]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 7:06am

You're finished!

[TulitaPepsi]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 8:14am

I saw the show a few days before iflit, and loved it as well, despite Kattan's sluggish and amateurish performance (blessedly one of his last). And the audiences were extremely enthusiastic, and attentive to the second act debate. I saw no walkouts, either.

As this is the last week of previews, I suspect it is being tightened and refined every day - (G., you DO realize that that is what a "preview period" is for, correct?).

I did hear that Nathan has borrowed the guillotine from the Met (last used when the did ANDRE CHENIER) to use on assistants who fail to deliver his morning latte on time, and Stro has borrowed a horsewhip from a friend to encourage the dancers to hop higher.

Updated On: 7/16/04 at 08:14 AM

[G]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 8:20am

Oh, I know, Nat. Was just surprised to hear that it's a mess in the cast's eyes.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 8:58am

I've been hearing various reports of dissension from the cast, but all I can say is that I saw a preview a few weeks ago and thought that their work and that the show overall was very entertaining. I had some slight quibbles (which are posted elsewhere), but I enjoyed the show immensely. I'm not sure I get a few of the stronger negative reactions -- did folks expect another "Funny Thing..." because Nathan was involved. It's funny, it's smart, it's topical and political. its well-performed ...... what else do you want? Yeah, who wouldn't love another two or three Sondheim masterstrokes in the score, but, you know what? Even without them, there are a half dozen terrific numbers. The ensemble is flawless, and I loved Stroman's work as choreographer and director.

This is a different show -- different than, I guess, what some expect, from Sondheim, from Lane, from Stroman -- but, nevertheless, IMO it works. Perhaps some find the Shaw-Shakespeare confrontation off-putting in a musical..... I don't know. I don't get what people thought they were going to see. It fulfilled my exectations -- I hope it fulfills Brantley's next week. A fun show with eye-popping dance numbers, a good score and a brain in its head -- what so wrong with that?

Updated On: 7/16/04 at 08:58 AM

[TulitaPepsi]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:12am

Brava, Margo!

[LouW95]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:17am

Well wait 12 years and Roundabout will make something of it -at least for a few months.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:29am

One of the things I especially admire about successful artists, is when they don't rest on their laurels or stick to a formula that has always worked before (can anyone say Andrew Lloyd Webber?), and instead go out and try something a little different or risky. Some things will fly better than others, but really, shouldn't we be applauding Sondheim et al for their ambition to be innovative, instead of scripting their obituaries?

[SamIAm]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:41am

and you should know, I suppose!

PUHLEEZ...every show Sondheim writes someone says the same thing about him. You don't have to be a fan but why say he is finished? When he is gone I truly wonder who will take over the task of redefining Broadway. Let's not bury the guy before his time is over. I look forward to the new show he alluded to in his recent Bloomberg interview. Hope it's coming soon.

[Mamie]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:41am

So tell me - did anybody go last night? Was Roger in it?

[SamIAm]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:47am

A primer on theater, gossip and such

First of all, don't be so unprofessional as to skewer a show by saying you have the word from the horse's mouth unless you are willing to back it up with proof (who said it...when did they say it?)

This is really unfair to everyone concerned with the show.

Secondly, there are bound to be changes every day (you say this as if it is a sign that the show is doomed) the show is in previews and that's what previews are for.

Thirdly, there is a lot of stress involved with readying this kind of show for opening and people do get disgruntled and complain on occassion...doesn't mean the show is a disaster. It's part of the process AND if a dancer, chorus person or actor is not having a good time with the director they are also likely to complain...this is human nature.

Whether you have heard this from someone or not, does not mean you should be posting it to color people's opinions and start a rumor spiral about the show before it has even opened.

I saw the show and ALSO spoke to people in the know about it and everyone is working hard...very tired...and frustrated at the clock running out but making progress. I also heard a lot of other things that I won't repeat on the boards because they should stay backstage where they belong. The creative team on this show are doing their jobs and we should just let them do that and see where they come out.

This is not a show for everyone nor is it a show that I feel plays best to a center orchestra section made up primarily of subscribers who are 80% hard line republicans by profile...BUT it's at LCT and that's where it will stay for the run...so YES there will be some people walking out on occasion but the night I was there I was prepared for a disaster from what others had said and found the show entertaining DIFFERENT and refreshing.

It is NOT classic Lane nor is it classic Sondheim so people who are expecting Nathan in green face with a seltzer bottle need to stay away

Nuff said

[SamIAm]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:49am

Hey, Nat...don't I know you?

Oh, that's right...you helped me move that guillotine over to LCT last week. Good to hear from you again

[EddieVarley]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:55am

Bravo Sam!

I would be upset if there wasn't turmoil and exhaustion, you have the brightest minds in theater shaping a bold new production of a Sondheim work!

Please, Angela Lansbury said the F word during Sweeney Todd's rehearsal period....TWICE!

[Mamie]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 9:58am

It seems like the majority of folks who have seen this already are giving it positive views. There are bits and pieces they'd like to see polished, but most are quite positive about the direction it's taking. There's only one poster I've seen who constantly takes a negative view and he's so negative that you really can't take anything he says seriously.

Personally, I like Nathan Lane but feel strongly that too much Nathan is TOO MUCH NATHAN. I'm glad to see him go in a slightly different direction with this. I won't get to see it until the 28th and I'm really looking forward to it.

[Corine2]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:00am

I went this week and really found the show sexy.
It is Nathan's schtick that makes it a joy ride.
Is this the best show i have ever seen, no. Is it a thrill.
YES.
I have and always will love Nathan Lane. This show has his prints all over it and what a joy. I also loved the entire cast especially Kattan's understudy he was fantastic.
Nathan is such a comedic gem.
Thank god for good old reliable Nathan!Genius in New York.


Updated On: 7/16/04 at 10:00 AM

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:01am

I believe shows need to go back to the basics, and work out of town. This community has gotten too eager to pounce on a production from the first preview. Shows need a chance to work -I can think of a couple of shows over the past few years that were notorious flops that could possibly had worked had they time away from the cattiness of Broadway to work through their problems. I find it very sad that people seem to want shows to fail rather than prosper.

Updated On: 7/16/04 at 10:01 AM

[SamIAm]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:06am

in the case of The Frogs they couldn't have justified an out of town trial since the run is so limited. It IS sad that people seem to WANT shows to fail when they say they love theater...but oh well.

In any case, one wonders how a show opening IN TOWN in previews can pound it into people's heads that it is still a work in progress (perhaps a HUGE SIGN IN FRONT OF THE THEATER and fliers on the seats every night) :)

As my father used to say 'be patient with me, God isn't through with me yet'

[G]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:16am

Guess I touched a nerve there. Sorry, Sam - I'm really not out for stirring things up. But I think it would be unfair to name that person who I got this from. Let's just say, it's one of the principals - no one from the technical crew, swings, whatever. But let them just get on with things now as I don't want them to fail at all, and am in fact looking forward to seeing it myself. Updated On: 7/16/04 at 10:16 AM

[Corine2]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:18am

Nathan's expressions are priceless!
Don't you think Nathan would be an exceptional Edna in Hairspray.
Updated On: 7/16/04 at 10:18 AM

[Sumofallthings]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:20am

I don't think it is necessarily what you said so much as your approach to saying it.

[G]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:27am

I agree. Updated On: 7/16/04 at 10:27 AM

[robbiej]

Posted: 7/16/04 at 10:40am

'I'm really not out for stirring things up.'

Bull****. Bull-Sh*t.

You are either trying to stir things up or prove that you're 'in the know.' Is it possible that you are 'in the know'? Maybe.

But guess what...so am I. And there are plenty of people here who know me that would back me up on that. And ya know what I try to do when I hear things like that. I keep my f*cking mouth shut. I find it reprehensible that anyone would break a confidence in order to stir something up on a message board.

Updated On: 7/16/04 at 10:40 AM