LESTAT - The New Carrie!

[mwjr16]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 12:35pm

For those who have seen you know what I'm talking about. Lestat was one of those shows you have to see to believe is actually on Broadway! It is awesomely bad, and I love it!

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 12:36pm

I was expecting it to be awesomely bad, and it was actually quite good.

[mwjr16]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 12:38pm

It needs soooo much work to just stay open. I saw it on saturday and it was crazy! They need to like start over or something. I just don't know what they were trying to say.

[mwjr16]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 12:41pm

I wanted it to be good, but . . . I guess I should of been more specific. It was hilarious!

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 12:47pm

when you put it that way mwjr16 -- color me there!

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 12:52pm

Starting over is exactly what I thought after seeing it in SF. There were SO many things just plain fundamentally wrong with it, I found it pretty unsalvageable. The book, at least half the score, and especially the direction and lead actor were all so wrong...I just can't see how anything good could come of it.

Sounds like there hasn't been much improvement -- except that it's managed to at least become "awesomely bad," which it couldn't even muster in SF.
Updated On: 3/27/06 at 12:52 PM

[Anastasia_Beaverhausen]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:08pm

So what's next at the Palace?

[leadfootlouie]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:09pm

Do cheap seats exsists to this? I ain't laying out any major bucks for anything on Broadway after last night!

[Auggie27]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:10pm

What made CARRIE memorable was its startling dichotomy, its lightning fast cut from "what were they thinking?" to ambitious, artfully thought-out musical sequences (mom-daughter stuff, a mini-opera amid the detritus of the faux BYE BYE BIRDIE elements). Does LESTAT have that blend, that polarizing component? Or is it all just ill-conceived?

[DDdirector]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:12pm

umm... I don't know if "awsome" would be a word to describe it for me.... perhaps.. "Painfully bad".. the second act opening was just bad community theater 101. A pier coming off stage right, two guys sitting there, fishing.. with a stick for a pole and string hanging down. I felt like singing "If I Had My Druthers".
Updated On: 3/27/06 at 01:12 PM

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:16pm

^^ Is the ensemble still inexplicably over-dressed in silvery grey camouflage?

I just don't get shows that are this bad. I mean, this is not a new medium we're talking about here. There are established "do's and don'ts" of musical theatre. How can so many experienced people and and so much time and money be put into something like this? All of these people should have the artistic integrety and objectivity to realize that it's just plain bad and not working. Updated On: 3/27/06 at 01:16 PM

[mrkringas]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:23pm

Carrie for all its flaws had incredible scenes between Linzi Hatelt and Betty Buckley. All of their numbers just soar when you listen to them. So much raw power and sheer catchiness. tis a pity the rest of the show kinda bombed.

I will reserve judgement til I hear Lestat for myself however I have doubts that it can match the same musical achievment of Carrie at its best. Although I certainly have faith in Hugh Panaro and Carolee Carmello to sell whatever they have to work with!
Updated On: 3/27/06 at 01:23 PM

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:25pm

Hugh Panaro is one of the major things wrong with Lestat...unfortunately.

But Carolee is one of the few things that are right.

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:34pm

Did you actually SEE the show? Panaro is fantastic, and I wouldn't be surprised if come six weeks from now, he has himself a Tony nomination.

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:39pm

Did you actually SEE my posts? I saw the show the final weekend in SF. He was dreadful, and the cheesiest thing I've ever seen on a stage. He was a cartoon, completely superficial, and totally lacking edge and sexuality.

[jimnysf]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:44pm

I agree. I saw the last preview in SF. Hugh was dreadful, the music was horrid except for "I Want More" which woke up the audience the night I saw it in SF. People were actually asleep and many of those who stayed awake, did not return after intermission.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:47pm

From my SF experiences with the show:

Hugh was great to listen to. You could tell he was putting a lot of thought and care into the role. However, something still didn't seem quite "right" whenever he did, well, anything. I don't know if it was Roth's idea or his to do that accent and the stalk-walk, which didn't help...

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 1:53pm

I agree that Hugh has a beautiful voice, but it's just wrong for this character. As I said, there was just no edge to him, vocally or visually. The role needs someone with a more effortlessly raw sexuality -- someone like Steve Pasquale, Patrick Wilson, or even Adam Pascal...someone whose voice and appearance alone can make the audience collectively gasp at such raw masculine passion.

Instead, they just giggled and snored.

[poohnnova]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 2:00pm

This hands down has to be one of the worst shows I have seen in a long time. It actually made Dance of the Vampires look better. The first half was completely BORING, Gabriel and Nicholas could have been dropped from the entire show and it would have still made sense. This show has the problem of not knowing if it wanted to be taken serious or was trying to be funny.

I did find Claudia a VERY good character, but far too short on stage. Her singing "I want more" was amazing, but I kept thinking "MY GOD, am I seeing Oliver! or is this a show about the Vampire Lestat?"

[PK2]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 2:06pm

I have not seen the show so I cannot comment on Hugh Panaro on stage.

However, I can say that I did not like what I see in him in the TV preview. It's almost like a joke to see listen to him say that about something die young live forever. Just my opinion of course and I hope he prove me wrong when I see the show.

FYI, I like AIDA for whatever it is and I saw it three times.

Posted: 3/27/06 at 2:16pm

As for comments on Hugh...I will refrain. But what I will say that he is putting 110% of his heart and soul into this project. Everyone has an opinion and I respect that.

As for the people who saw Lestat in SF (myself included), were you at the Broadway preview on Saturday? I unfortunately wasn't able to attend, but I'm going to reserve judgement on if and how the show has changed (for better or worse) until I get myself to NYC in a couple months.

~Rosalynn

Posted: 3/27/06 at 2:19pm

As for comments on Hugh...I will refrain. But what I will say that he is putting 110% of his heart and soul into this project. Everyone has an opinion and I respect that.

As for the people who saw Lestat in SF (myself included), were you at the Broadway preview on Saturday? I unfortunately wasn't able to attend, but I'm going to reserve judgement on if and how the show has changed (for better or worse) until I get myself to NYC in a couple months.

~Rosalynn

[Mother's Younger Brother]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 2:21pm

No, I have not seen the Broadway preview.

Every actor puts 110% of his heart and soul into a project. Not only is acting their job, but it's their passion. Of course, I respect that. But no amount of effort changes the fact that he is fundamentally mis-cast and poorly directed.

[fishergirl819]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 2:30pm

I already posted my thoughts on the show in the thread dedicated to the first preview (basically, I found it very enjoyable and entertaining, but recognize it has problems still), but I just thought I'd pop in here to comment on the discussion on Hugh having the sexuality and whatnot to be the lead.

After having spoken to a friend who saw the San Francisco production, I realize just HOW heightened Lestat's sexuality is in the NY production as compared to SF. The sexual tension between basically all of the characters has been brought up to very insane levels, you FULLY understand that Lestat and Nicholas are lovers (as opposed to "best friends" as my friend originally thought w/ the SF production). The feeding scenes, it seems, are 100% more sexual than they were in SF...it is now blatantly obvious that Lestat is feeling incredible pleasure when both feeding and being fed from, and even his prey are feeling pleasure as they're killed. Between the lighting and the music, and the way Hugh and his partner on stage at the time move together...its INCREDIBLY sexual.

I personally don't find Hugh to be very attractive, but the way that he holds himself up on that stage is VERY commanding, and, in turn, very sexy. Lestat is confident and powerful and in control, and Hugh portrays that perfectly, which in turn makes Lestat a very sexy character, at least to me.

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 3/27/06 at 2:31pm

If you haven't seen the show in New York, you can't really comment. The SF Lestat is LIGHT YEARS different.