Happy Thanksgiving! Celebrate!

Hello there!  I hope everyone in cyberland has a safe, happy and wonderful Thanksgiving, no matter where you are.  I just want to jot down a few things I'm thankful for this year.  Well, I'm going to jot down a few random things, but there's one major thing I'm REALLY thankful for:

• having special friends to spend this special day with;
• the end of waterbug season;
• ABT;
• TDF;
• living in New York;
• the greatest friends, aka GNO and the Coterie;
• the most amazing family;
• the most special, wonderful, loving sweetheart of a nephew I could ever dream of;
• but most especially, I'm thankful this year for the fact that my sister survived the terrifying medical madness that happened in October.  I love her so much.  I couldn't bear to be without her.  We'll be able to go to Woodstock another time, thanks to her resilience and the dedication of all those doctors, especially Dr. Wonderful.  I'm thinking of sending him a gift basket with a recording of angels singing when he opens it... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review - Side Show

Well, hello there!  Have you missed me?  I've been fighting a mighty case of stomach flu, so I apologize for the radio silence.  I haven't seen much theater lately, though I do have a few things coming up.  I did, however, see a show a couple of weeks ago that I never got around to reviewing.  I figure I could offer up a few thoughts now.  My brain is still on post-flu-scramble, though, so you've been warned.

Backstory first:  I saw the original production of Side Show, mainly because a dear college chum played one of the twins.  I've known, loved and admired her for many many years, so when I saw Side Show, I could barely see the production itself, I was just too happy for her and overtaken by emotion the whole evening to really register the show.  Of course, I bought the cast album and I've been listening to it ever since.  From that original production, besides seeing and loving my friend, I also fell in love with Norm Lewis, so my biggest takeaways are those two performances.  I tried to get a ticket for the final performance, so I could watch the show again and see what I missed, but it didn't work out.  I enjoyed seeing the show, don't get me wrong, and I enjoy the cast album greatly, but I don't really remember all that much about that original production.  Therefore, I don't think I was bringing too much baggage with me into seeing the revival.  I could, of course, be wrong...

When a handsome friend asked if I'd like to see the revival with him, I agreed at once.  I was glad to get a look at the newly revised version of Side Show and looked forward to seeing the show without all the distractions I gave myself the first time.  Unfortunately, I find myself having a hard time crafting a review after seeing it.  I enjoyed myself again, without a doubt, but I certainly wasn't moved as much as my handsome friend (who sobbed audibly throughout, god love him) and I found myself vaguely dissatisfied throughout. Maybe I was influenced more by the original production than I thought I could be.  I can appreciate the show on a philosophical level, but it didn't really reach me emotionally as much as I wanted it to.  Well, except of course for the twins' two major ballads, they were quite moving, as always.  And the very end was striking. 

I think I missed the sungthrough apsect of the show, some of the book material dragged the pace, especially in the first act, in my opinion.  I can understand why the extended flashback sequence was put in, but it didn't really help me learn anything important.  There were some musical motifs that I really missed, and I preferred a couple of the original songs to their replacements.  The show is visually stunning, and I think it's excellently directed, but I also think I prefer the more expressionistic approach Bobby Longbottom used in the original production than the hyper-realistic one used now.  What I can imagine is always more than what I can see.  On the one hand, I can see they've tried to make the show more 'realistic' and 'gritty', yet I feel they've cleaned the show up too much, and made it a little too PC, which I know is a really strange thing to say.  The scrubbing removed some of the power within, but having said all that, the cumulative effect of all the changes made the ending MUCH more powerful.  I was quite breathless at the end of the show and wishing I had felt like that more throughout.

photo credit: Cade Martin

The ladies playing the twins are spectacular, very different from the originals, but still finding so much humanity and poignance.  They also mined a lot of humor in the new book sections, which was welcome.  I found most of the other performances a tad wanting, and I really missed Norm Lewis' warmth and empathy.  But I always miss Norm Lewis, whether he's supposed to be in a show or not, lol. 

I don't know.  I guess I'm still so emotionally attached to that first experience, I can't really open my eyes to the revival.  I wanted to love it.  I did.  I tried.  But I did like it and appreciated its message, as always.  The leads are giving spectacular performances and I think people should see it, especially to hear the gorgeous music.  I'm just not sure if the reception to the show will be any different than it was last time.  I hope I'm wrong.  Sorry for the scattered and slightly goofy review.  It's the best I can do the first day back...

Thoughts on The Band Wagon

You know, it's a good thing I don't smoke or take drugs.  I have no self-control.  When I saw that Brian Stokes Mitchell would be doing a limited run of a staged version of the beloved film The Band Wagon at City Center, did I consider how it would fit into my budget?  Did I think about the upcoming Christmas holidays and all the gifts for my nephew I need to buy?  Oh no.  I just thought, "I HAVE TO SEE THAT!"  I love the movie, I love Brian Stokes Mitchell (and the rest of the announced cast).  And so self-control, willpower and budgetary responsibility flew out the window...

I'm so glad I took the plunge and spent the money - I loved every single minute of The Band Wagon.  I had a smile on my face the entire evening and left the theater on a real high.  I desperately wish I could afford to go back, stat.  It has a new libretto by playwright Douglas Carter Beane, using some of the cut stuff from the 1953 MGM film and some new stuff, too.  I think I could tell where Beane's personal zingers entered the fray and they mostly made me laugh.  The songs are rearranged and there are other Schwartz/Dietz songs in the show as well.  So last night's production was rather a hybrid of the film and of something completely new.  I was mostly on board for that - it kept me on my toes.  I missed a couple of things that weren't in the same placement as the film, but I got over it.

from City Center's Facebook page

 On first blush, the casting is perfect.  As I was watching the show progress, the casting maybe isn't. But I really didn't care since I loved them all.  Brian Stokes Mitchell, one of my uber favorites, is suave and charismatic as Tony Hunter.  OK, so he's no Fred Astaire-level dancer, but who is?  He's game and he's having a great time, plus, hello, he's just so handsome and his singing is just so dreamy.  He had me at hello.  :)  Laura Osnes is lovely as the ingenue, Michael McKean and Tracey Ullman are absolute riots as the Comden and Green standins (Tracey Ullman has a solo in the first act that is so dazzling, you immediately want to hear someone announce her for a starring role ANYWHERE in ANYTHING on Broadway), Michael Berresse is silky slimy smooth, if underutilized, as the snob choreographer, and Tony Sheldon as Jeffrey Cordova.  OMG.  Tony Sheldon.  He steals the show, in my opinion.  I adored him in Priscilla, Queen of the Desert and he is perfection here.  He's funny, touching, a lovely singer and quite a smooth dancer.  What a performance.  I hope he doesn't stay away again from New York long.

There are rumors that they're hoping to transfer the show to Broadway.  Well, now, hold on a minute.  I wonder if it would have more of a set and more of an orchestra, if it did transfer.  This production is rather spare, and was only semi-staged and I'm not sure it would work in a bigger production, not like how Chicago fits anywhere.  But, you know what?  I'd buy a ticket if it transferred, so I should just shut up.  It's fast and funny and Brian Stokes Mitchell sings AND tap dances!  AND he sings gorgeous songs like "By Myself" and "Dancing in the Dark"!  And Tony Sheldon is a comic genius.  And the ensemble is also terrific.  So go ahead, people.  Transfer it.  But just in case it doesn't transfer, go people.  Go buy tickets right now. 

City Center sent me an e-mail, asking me to share You Tube links on Twitter.  I'm going to try to share it here.  If someone asks me, I'll take it down.  I hope no one does.  You'll have a smile on your face, too...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYz1hVTs-rY&list=UUHFTGKHHcLoPRbLDGS4ayXA&utm_source=wordfly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MKT15BandWagonPP141106&utm_content=version_A

Thoughts on Allegro

Because I am a crazy person and didn't plan ahead for my sister's medical emergency that would mean I would be paying for my Woodstock vacation without actually going to Woodstock when I should've been saving all the pennies I could, I bought tickets a few months ago for a couple of things.  Now they all seem to be coming up (I've got a show tomorrow night, too).  When Classic Stage Company offered a special "1947 Opening Night Discount" preview price for their upcoming production of Allegro, I pounced.

original cast album cover

I've never seen Allegro, I don't know the cast album, I knew nothing of the show's history before seeing it last night.  Since I saw maybe the third or fourth preview, I'll only offer a few thoughts.  I looked up Allegro on Wikipedia and got some historical background on it - the article mentions that Rodgers and Hammerstein were looking towards Our Town as a sort of model; a spare set, minimal props, and a story about the ordinary man.  I gather from the article that the original production was much bigger, cast-wise, and that the use of the Greek chorus was ahead of its time.  The show also ran about three hours in previous incarnations (I wish I had seen the production that was in Astoria early this season!).  I found all of this information so interesting after seeing last night's performance.  I can see all these influences and can appreciate them, though I found last night's production unsatisfying as a whole.  

This production of Allegro has been greatly streamlined to 90 minutes, no intermission, and a cast of twelve.  I've never seen or heard it before, as I said, so I don't know what's been cut.  I didn't feel as if I was missing any important textual information.  Of course,  since it's directed by John Doyle, the actors are playing all the musical instruments in lieu of an orchestra.  Sigh.  I believe I've mentioned that I'm not quite on the Doyle bandwagon, even when he doesn't use the actor-as-musician conceit.  I was intrigued by its use in the Cerveris revival of Sweeney Todd, but I really disliked it in the Esparza revival of Company.  I was glad he didn't have the actors play the instruments in last season's Passion, but I still didn't really enjoy his staging or his take on the piece.  I'm sorry to say I didn't enjoy his take on Allegro either and having the actors play the instruments just annoyed me to no end this time.

Doyle likes to keep his actors moving, always moving.  And when they're playing musical instruments, it's like everyone becomes a marching band.  It frustrates me.  It obscures the lyrics and turns everything into an uptempo march, even if it needs to be more contemplative.  I especially think the conceit doesn't work on a show that's so naturalistic (I know, there's a Greek chorus, but still).  This is a down home, homespun, really earnest story about Americans in small-town America; about not compromising your principles once you achieve a modicum of success.  Adding the surreal-ish sight of everyone walking around, playing musical instruments, was just too jarring to me; it took me out of the show and made it next to impossible for me to relate to anything that was happening on stage.  The earnestness versus the presentational directing style didn't work for me.  It was a long 90 minutes, unfortunately.

 



photo credit: Matthew Murphy

Again, it was an early preview, so I shouldn't really say any more.  I believe I read somewhere that Doyle is prone to overstaging shows and paring them down as the previews progress.  I can only hope that's what happens here.  The cast is good, the songs are good (of course they are, they're Rodgers and Hammerstein songs, even second tier R & H is better than a lot of stuff out there), the story is sweet, the libretto is probably the best feature of the production, though I may be inclined to give it the most credit because no one was playing the violin during the book scenes.  The confrontation scene between the mother and fiancee was fantastic (I tried to ignore the violins dangling at their sides).  But there were also other directorial choices I didn't understand - the heartbeat sound effect that came in now and then; the reason our lead character would sit downstage center with a spotlight on him as the action swirled around him; the reason our lead actor would sometimes go way upstage, turn his back to us and place his hand on the back wall.  I think I'm just not on the same theatrical wavelength as Doyle and I just can't wrap my head around what he's doing.  Which I guess is my problem and not his. 



R & H

The woman next to me HATED the show.  The couple behind me LOVED it.  I'm thinking there will be a lot of that, really opposite opinions of the production.  I hope to see another production of Allegro some day.  Then I can see if I would appreciate the show more in a more traditional staging, even though the show isn't completely traditional itself.  I just feel as if I could get more about what the original creators were going for in a production that doesn't layer so much on top.  Again, that's probably just me.

Review - Disgraced

I was at a committee meeting yesterday afternoon, minding my own business, when a Tony voter friend contacted me to see if I would like to attend Disgraced with him that very night.  Sure, I said!  I had been offered tickets to the opening night a couple of weeks ago, but had to turn them down in the wake of my sister's medical adventures.  I missed the show when it played Off-Broadway and before it won the Pulitzer, so I was glad to finally see its Broadway incarnation.  Especially from Tony voter seats.  :)

I'm now having a problem constructing this review because I made the mistake of discussing the play with my Tony voter friend (TVF) this morning.  I'm not absolutely certain, but I'm pretty sure he called me 'morally reprehensible' for not coming to the same conclusion he did about the play (he found it repugnant.  Well done, but repugnant.)  So...wow.  How can you even respond to something like that?!  I always have a hard time discussing plays with people who only deal in absolutes, such as, my opinion is the only opinion.  Well, no, actually, it's not.  A play is not a math problem.  There's no one answer.  Your being 'right' does not preclude my being 'right.'  But I guess this play does dig in and ask some really ugly questions, so now I'm wondering about myself and my reaction to it.  Actually, though, I guess that does fit right in with this play...

photo credit: Sara Krulwich

Disgraced is about Amir, a young, successful Pakistani-American lawyer who has spent his life rejecting his past and his Muslim roots.  He's changed his name to one that sounds more Indian, he's married a beautiful blond WASPy woman.  He is seemingly living the American Dream, wearing $600 shirts and living in a posh apartment.  He's constructed a life for himself that slowly becomes unraveled when he allows his nephew and his wife to convince him to visit a Muslim imam who has been jailed on, possibly, trumped up charges of terrorism.  The way his life systematically crumbles is both compelling and horrifying to watch.  He's a part of his own downfall, and yet he's also helpless as forces outside his control whirl around him.  Two other characters, an art curator and his wife (who just happens to work at Amir's law firm), come to a dinner party and that's where everything comes to a head.

There are a lot of coincidences in the play, and maybe situations line up a little too neatly, and maybe one of the characters is more of a mouthpiece than an actual character. BUT.  This is a powerfully smart, provocative play that dares to discuss topics that are generally not heard about onstage.  Especially on a Broadway stage.  Race, religion, terrorism, self-identification, tribalism - they're all tossed out in bald, ugly, completely realistic language that gets balder and uglier the more the characters drink during the dinner party.  The play is extremely well-crafted, well-directed and well-acted - even with all the clues written into the script, I was still completely shocked and appalled by some of the things that happened.  It's stuff that makes you cover your eyes and wish you had covered your ears, all told in a fantastically dramatic way.  I enjoyed the experience of seeing Disgraced very much, ugliness and all.

So...what does it say about me that I completely did not get out of the play what my TVF got out of it?  It makes me confused.  I'm pretty savvy.  He's pretty savvy (though way more cynical than me, if we're speaking truth here).  I saw the hope and self-awareness coming out of the ashes of Amir's destruction.  Yes, horrible things were said and these people have horrible qualities, but don't you find that anywhere?  My TVF seriously thought the playwright was advocating Islamic extremism and that it's my (and every other person/critic who has enjoyed the play) liberal guilt that makes me feel as if I have to say I liked it, but how could I like it when it says something so reprehensible?  I did not get that AT ALL.  At the top of the play, the wife is drawing her husband, Amir, and she talks about why she wants to draw him after an altercation they had the night before with a stupid waiter (and I'm paraphrasing here):  she was interested in 'exploring the gap between what he [the waiter] assumed about you and what you really are.'  I think the play is delving into many explorations of that.  This is a group of smart people who think they know themselves and what they believe, and slowly, over the course of an evening, they realize they don't know anything at all about themselves.  And maybe what they believed before isn't what they should be believing.  At the end of the play, I saw that Amir was ready to move beyond the life he's constructed for himself and could learn how to really exist in the world where he wouldn't have to loathe himself.  Yes, he had to lose everything first.  But it takes bravery to start over.  So I saw hope.  My TVF saw destruction.  He and I did agree that it's rather a miracle that a play on Broadway right now could inspire such impassioned conversation, so at least there's that.  But I'm glad I don't have such a nihilistic view of the world - perhaps I'm just too naive, like the characters at the start of Disgraced.  I just hope I'm never at a dinner party that ends like the one in the play!  Morally reprehensible or not, I can't wait to see another play by this author; we'll see what kinds of opinions it brings up in my world...

ABT Fall Season 2014 - Raymonda, Seven Sonatas and Thirteen Diversions

You didn't think I'd be satisfied with just one trip to ABT's fall season, did you?  Well, you would be right!  It seems like months ago that I bought myself a ticket to last Saturday's performance - even though the weather was cold and rainy, it was warm and wonderful inside!  You know what they say (or at least what I always say, thanks to Ed Kleban): everything is beautiful at the ballet...

First up was Raymonda Divertissements, which I've never seen before.  This is a new staging by ABT's artistic director Kevin McKenzie and Irina Kolpakova.  The music is by Alexander Glazounov.  According to the NY Times, this production is based on Petipa's last surviving classic, a three-act Raymonda, that has many different iterations out in the ballet world.  They put this one together using most of the Act III music for a suite of dances in a vaguely Hungarian style.
 

photo credit: Rosalie O'Connor

I really enjoyed the performance, everyone seemed to be enjoying themselves on stage and I was especially thrilled with Devon Teuscher's solo, which was quite exciting with many turns and leaps and extended moves en pointe.  She got a rousing ovation from the audience.  There were eight couples, plus the lead pair, danced by Paloma Herrera and Cory Stearns.  I'm not a huge fan of Herrera, as I believe I've mentioned before, and she didn't really change my mind here.  She seemed vaguely disinterested throughout and her solo had very distracting noises made by her toe shoes.  The music suggests a lightness and neither she, or Stearns, is really a 'light' dancer.  They were perfectly pleasant, especially in the final variation, and Stearns was quite nice in his solos, but they did not complement each other very well in their partner dancing.  The pas de quatre had four terrific gentlemen, though one of them seemed less prepared than the others and was out of sync throughout.  On the whole, though, I enjoyed the ballet and the music, outstandingly played by the ABT orchestra, and would love to see it again, albeit with another couple in the lead roles.


photo credit: Rosalie O'Connor

Second up was Seven Sonatas, choreographed by Alexei Ratmansky, whose work I always enjoy.  This ballet has three couples dancing to seven pieces by Domenico Scarlatti.  I really loved it, all the pas de deux were lovely, and although it wasn't a story ballet, all of the couples had characters and throughlines in their dancing.  Veronika Part and Blaine Hoven had the most moving pas de deux - very passionate and exquisitely danced; Arron Scott and Sarah Lane were perhaps the most playful with light, airy jumps and quick turns.  I also enjoyed the third couple, Christine Shevchenko and Alexandre Hammoudi.  I think I've only seen Hammoudi dance as Rothbart in Swan Lake before, so it was nice to see him in a more extended dance role.  He is very noble and secure.  The stage pictures were very intricate, yet intimate, and the solo pianist, Barbara Bilach, was fantastic.  At the end, there was a glorious part where all of the dancers but one moved beautifully, then suddenly they stopped and the one dancer began.  It was stunning.  I really hope to see this piece again soon. 

photo credit: Andrea Mohin

The final piece of the evening was Christopher Wheeldon's Thirteen Diversions.  I didn't remember seeing it before when I booked the tickets, but as I watched it, I had memories of previous viewings.  I took a look at past posts and yes indeed, I've seen it twice before, though not for a couple of years.  I really love this ballet, it has everything - exciting choreography, terrific pas de deux and group dancing, gorgeous lighting that tells its own story, and great music.  I wouldn't think that music by Britten would lend itself to such silky dancing, but I guess you can just never know.  There were four lead couples, and eight other couples.  The lead gents were Marcelo Gomes, Joseph Gorak, Thomas Forster and Calvin Royal - four of my absolute favorites.  They did not disappoint in the least.  The ladies were also terrific, especially Stella Abrera, who was oh so majestic and gorgeous.  I just love all the intricate stage pictures and the ending makes you hold your breath.  I was enchanted.

After the curtain calls for the last ballet, Mr. Perfection, Marcelo Gomes, got a microphone from offstage and made a plea for everyone to donate to DRA, Dancers Respond to AIDS.  This is the first time I've heard a fundraising plea at the ballet; I'm used to hearing them at Broadway theaters.  It was interesting.  Marcelo is a wonderful speaker and he was quite genuinely moved when he was talking about the impact the money would make on people's lives.  It was a lovely way to end the evening, even if an usher did come over and ask me to stop taking pictures.  Sigh.  They wouldn't make the person turn off their hearing aid which was making a high-pitched whine through the whole evening and my little no-flash-photography at the curtain call was bothersome.  Oh well.  Thank heavens I had gotten a few surreptitious shots before she came over... ;)

 

I received my summer season subscription renewal form in the mail, so I guess I'll just be dreaming of ballet until next year.  May 2015 seems so far off.  I'll have to start nagging my Tony voter friends for invitations, I guess, to take my mind off my ballet withdrawal.  We'll see how that goes.