CanMark:

Thanks for the info and link on this year's Tony nominations. I notice that two of the best plays, "Gem of the Ocean" and "Democracy" have closed.

The Tony organizers and producers have got to rethink their snobbism about nominating only plays that open, and quickly close, in midtown Manhattan.

Honoring plays and muscials beyond NYC's borders would do much to revive theater-going everywhere.

I saw "Gem of the Ocean" when it played here in LA and though I have liked--and sometimes was thrilled by--August Wilson's other plays, this one left me cold, especially Phylicia Rashad's "spirit of humanity" creature.

As for Albee's Lifetime Achievement Award--well, it's about time!

~Adam

Lord of the Rings (the musical) tickets went on sale over the Internet yesterday. Apparently they racked up $1 million in sales on the first day, plus have $3 million in group sales. 40,000 tickets have been show for a show that doesn't open for previews until February 2006! Tickets are around $80-125 CAD. The show plays at the 2,000-seat Princess of Wales theatre in Toronto.

I was in NY last week and saw "Altar Boyz," the mock musical about a Christian boy band on tour. It was hilarious fun. Nevermind that the five leads, Matthew, Mark, Luke, Juan and Abraham, are hot (and boy are they). The songs are pop fun and the lyrics are genius. It was really clever and loads of laughs, and the guy playing Mark, the closeted gay singer, was dead on hilarious. He stole the show.

I saw "Falsettos" in Boston this week, the William Finn (composer of this year's Tony nominee "25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee") musical from 1981. If you haven't seen it, I'd recommend it. Lots of humor and heart in the story. Some good performances, too.

If you have seen a past production of it, you will likely be more critical of it - as my guests at the theatre were. Both major Boston papers gave it good reviews today.

Was in NY this weekend. Saw Light in the Piazza Sat. night -- and it's a wonderful show. Lovely and touching; gives romantic love a good name. Matthew Morrison was fabulous. Victoria Clarke and Kelli O'Harra are getting arll the press, but for my money Morrison made the show live. He really persuades you of his feelings. It's more like a play with music than an full-out musical. The music is good enough ... but it's the "play" that stuck with me. The set and the costumes were perfect.

Also saw Virginia Woolf Sunday afternoon (Who's afraid of ...). What a great play! And a really fine production. Kathleen Turner actually ultimately made me forget Elizabeth Tayler (and that's tough to do -- saw Diana Rigg do it in London a few seasons ago, and she always came up short). But in re Turner -- even so, there was always this sense that you could glimpse the acting. Bill Irwin was outstanding also -- again, something of the acting showed through, but a fine interpretation of that character. What was amazing about it was how much humor it has. I don't think I've ever heard an audience laugh any more as we did throughout the first act.

(On a side note: Va Woolf is playing right across the street from Doubt -- and VW's second intermission just happened to coincide with Cherry Jones' exit from her matinee performance. So I caught her stage exit -- wherein she stopped to engage in full blooded, honest, conversation with her fan about the show. She is AMAZING! both in the part (saw it Thanksgiving) and in person. What an actress. What a woman.

Falsettos was a terrific show. I'd be interested to see how it holds up in 2005, but don't think I can make it to Boston to find out.

I found a recording of "Falsettos" available in its entirety online. Go to:

http://www.kpfa.org/highlights/index.php?a...date=2004-03-14

and scroll down to 7:00 p.m.

Haven't heard this music in years, but I remember seeing the tour about ten years ago at the Curran Theater in SF.

Finally got to see Blue Man Group. It opened in Toronto last month, and I got a free ticket from work to tonight's show. It was very good, polished, better than I expected.

They (re)opened the Rocky Horror Show as a late-night show here in town. It's an odd thing to see in an intimate-style setting, but it was still very fun.

LXN

Canmark...

Good observation on Blue Man Group. I have to admit when I was given free tickets from United Airlines to see it in Chicago, I went reluctantly. However, it was pure entertainment. Very riveting and enjoyable for ALL AGES - in fact in the row ahead of me there was a couple (had to be in their late 60's) , I was concerned about them in last part of the show (don't want to reveal, but if you've seen it you know what I'm talking about). But they LOVED IT! They had the biggest smiles on their faces - made me feel SO good!

Is there gay material in Blue Man Group? I'll be in the Toronto area in early August and would like to attend.

If it has gay content, that means some people will have to be left at home!

Unless they have updated their show, there wasn't any per se, when I saw the show in Vegas at the Luxor. I absolutely loved the show though, and had a total blast!

Just attended a Fantastic performance of the first and second parts of W Shakespeares King Henry IV, now directed by Nicholas Hytner at the National Theatre here in London.

The ensemble acting of the large cast, and their clarity of delivery, together with the outstanding performances by David Bradley as the king, Matthew Macfadyen as the prince, and especially Michael Gambon as Falstaff make this a memorable production.

Truley one of the finest Shakespeare performances I have ever seen.

A Miller's ”The Price,” is in its most recent revival at London’s Apollo Theatre. As is true of so many of Miller’s plays, it is family-based, striking an immediate chord in members of the audience as it asks universal questions about moral responsibility between parent and children, husband and wife, brother and brother. Larry Lamb is impressive as the Manhattan policeman Victor.

R

[ July 09, 2005, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: ITJock ]

There's no gay content in Blue Man Group. A good show for all ages (8+), although there is some loud rock-like music and quite a bit of strobe lights at the end of the show (which may be irritating to some).

The show opened last month in the 700-seat Panasonic Theatre, expressly re-built for the Blue Man Group. I would definitely recommend it.

---------------

I just saw a Fringe Festival production of "In Trousers," the first part of William Finn's Marvin Trilogy (the other two parts were put together as "Falsettos" on Broadway in '92-'93). I enjoyed it, particularly the Christopher Columbus story (Columbus was banished by his lover Queen Isabella after she discovered him cavorting with another man... he goes on to discover the New World, which Marvin sums up as 'An explorer discovers something that was already there,' alluding to his own homosexuality that he discovered after he was both husband and father).

Casting for Lord of the Rings, the musical, announced.

The largely Canadian cast includes Brent Carver (Tony Award-winner for Kiss of the Spider Woman) as Gandalf (Gandalf seems to be the gay role, as both Carver and Ian McKellen, the movie Gandalf, are gay) and Michael Therrialt (star of Toronto production of The Producers and currently Motel in Broadway's Fiddler on the Roof) as Gollum.

British actors include James Loye as Frodo and Peter Howe as Sam.

Galadriel, Gimli and Bilbo are yet to be cast... send in your resumes now. wink

Previews start in February. Opening night is March 23, 2006.

I am here in NYC and saw the show "Cookin'" on saturday night. It's a Korean show and a cross between "Stomp" and Iron Chef. I think the show closes on august 8th. The guy who played the nephew was really cute with a hot body.

The show I saw yesterday was "Altar Boyz" and that was a fun musical about five church boys (Matthew, Mark, Luke, Juan and Abraham (he's Jewish) who are also a NSync type singing boy band. We got the tickets at ticket ticket.

Today we may go and see Late Night with david Letterman. We put our name in the lotto and they called us. We may also see another musical.

Playwright Harold Pinter just won the 2005 Nobel Prize for Literature.

I did get to see The Producers when I was in London and me and the BF went to see Beach Blanket Babylon last night

gods, I love that show!

Saw a local production of West Side Story recently. It seems kind of dated now. I mean, the production was fantastic, the performances were superb, and the choreography was spot-on. But I couldn't get into the story. Don't know if it's showing its age, or if I am.

LXN

I'm a big fan of musical theatre, and I'm very appreciative of how musicals can convey the many levels of emotion in a story in a way that other mediums can't by the integation of lyrics, music, dance, and so on. But I must admit that I have trouble seeing how a musicalization of the story of The Lord Of The Rings is going to add anything to the existing interpretations of that particular work.

People who are not regular theatre-goers tend to think that musical theatre fans will stick the same kind of hokey "show-tune" music to any words from any story and get all excited because people are singing their way through a situation that no one would sing about in real life (as if people ever sing in real life). I can't help but feel that a musical treatment of an epic adventure story that has been made into one of the most successfull movie franchises of all time is going to do anything but support their opinion.

It's not going to do anything to make them more likely to enter a theatre to see Falsettos, Assassins, Sunday In The Park With George and all sorts of other shows which show what the artform of musical theatre can be in the hands of its most creative forces.

I think the first time I hear Gollum singing "My precious, my precious," I'll laugh my a** off!

Re: The Lord of the Rings musical.

Well, I don't know. Certainly, one wouldn't expect that, say, Les Miserables would make a good musical, or Oliver Twist. And from what I understand about LOTR, the production will be more of a theatrical experience, like Cirque du Soleil, with costuming elements like The Lion King. So it is potentially a very good piece of theatre.

There was a recent NY Times article on this production:

I was just informed I have tickets to Wicked coming to Hartford's Bushnell Theatre. I saw Idina and company September 2004, in NYC. I'm looking forward to seeing the differences in the productions. I hear Rue McClanahan is playing Madame Morrible. Needless to say, the soundtrack is in heavy rotation.

Since seeing the play, I've been captivated by the original book (which not the play at all) and Gregory MacGuire's other works. I'm addicted!

I saw Dr. Atomic Friday night.. <Yawn>.. I guess I am not a big fan of modern operas. The friends I went with along with my partner who loves the opera found it incredibly boring. I wanted to leave at intermission. I was also kicking myself for having that cup of coffee that prevented me from taking a nap in the 2nd half. Oh well, that's 3 hrs of my life I won't get back.

I didn't know whether to post this in this thread, or in a football discussion:

I was watching SportsCenter on Sunday night, and as they re-capped the day's NFL highlights, commentator Stuart Scott broke into a verse of "Popular" from Wicked to describe how popular a player was going to be after making several great plays that day. He did a nice little rendition of the song.

(edited to fix link)

[ October 18, 2005, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: OlympicFan ]

Thanks for that bit of explanation, OlympicFan. That went right over my head (and no doubt millions of others who haven't seen the show). It's hard to imagine Stuart Scott going from "boo yah" and his other catchphrases and such to singing Broadway. I guess he's versatile.

I saw a great play by Terrence McNally (Love, Valour, Compassion)last night at the NCTC called Crucifiction. It was funny, entertaining, clever, and very witty.
It has a great cast of characters and has been extended through Nov. 20th, so check it out if you can. Support the smaller theatre productions.

Saw the second last preview of The Lord of the Rings musical, which gets its world premiere Thursday night in Toronto.

The $27 million production has garnered international attention (Time, Newsweek, BBC, Sydney Morning Herald, Playbill) and the city of Toronto (which, along with the province, have kicked in money for the show) is counting on a theatre tourism boom, as the production will not play in London till next year, and in New York much later (Toronto has an 18 month North American exclusive).

I would say the show succeeds in being good... but not great. It's an accomplishment just having turned 3 beloved epic novels into one 3 1/2 hour stage production.

Having read about the production, prior to seeing it I would have said it was influenced by The Lion King and Cirque du Soleil. But now I'm reminded of Les Miserables: both are based on lengthy epic novels with many characters, and deal with heroism, bravery, tragedy, a battle/struggle, romance and love, and have a period setting.

But Les Miz succeeds by giving its main characters big songs which define their character and motivations. Lord of the Rings doesn't have enough songs, and often gives the big ballads to lesser characters (such as Galadriel) rather than the main ones.

Although the creators wanted to steer clear of Broadway style show tunes, one of the more popular numbers is the Broadway-esque song-and-dance number at the Prancing Pony (some reviewers liken it to Seven Brides for Seven Brothers; I was reminded of Oom Pah-Pah from Oliver!). And I still wish there were more songs because they would have helped clarify the characters' character and motivations, which is more difficult on the stage than in the film (Frodo/Sam/Merry/Pippin are too much alike on stage, even though in the film they are quite distinct; similarly, we don't get a real feel for Aragorn or Boromir--Faramir and Denethor are not in the show). In their haste to gallop through the plot, they forgot the characters.

Some of the effects are quite good. The rotating stage with over a dozen separate rising pieces is amazing (they must have some sort of supercomputer to program the stage and the innumerable lighting cues). The balrog scene is fun, as the audience is subject to a blast of hot air and smoke--and black confetti.



On the downside, Sauron's lidless eye is a boring projection, not a dazzling flame. And where are the two towers?!

The actors mostly pale to the movie actors... with the exception of Michael Thierriault as Gollum. A breakthrough performance, his Gollum is very much like the film version--except he's not an animation: he's real.

This is a very good show or LOTR fans. You need to know the book and film to fully appreciate and understand what's going on. I wouldn't be surprised if they tinker with the show a bit before it opens in London. But until then, it's only in Toronto, eh.

[ March 23, 2006, 04:59 AM: Message edited by: canmark ]

I saw Dirty Rotten Scoundrels a week ago and loved it. Nothingm deep, just fun entertainment. I'm glad I saw it with Jonathan Pryce (he replaced John Lithgow) as I imagine Lithgow's hamminess might have been too much to stand. And Norbert Leo Butz, who won a Tony, was out that night but his understudy was terrific. A very fun, frivolous show.

There's a totally lovely show at the Vineyard Theatre in New York City called [title of show].

I was literally laughing and/or crying for every moment of it--from first to last!

This is what the NY Times said about it.

Hmmm ... I saw Dirty Rotten Scoundrels also -- on the 10th. Loathed it. It's shallow, cynical, vapid and crude. Butz was terrific, as was Pryce. But the show is conceptually empty. I went b/c Brantley gave it a nice thumbs up after the addition of Pryce. He's good, as I said, and I could see how he might have improved things. But the show needs a lot more than good acting to make it worth seeing.

["title of show"] -- saw that on the 11th. And it's terrific. Perfectly lovely, as was said above. Fun, witty, engaging and thought provoking. OK, maybe not deep thoughts, but interesting and fun thoughts anyway.

Also saw "Well" in previews. Another fun and interesting show ... the fourth wall get smashed ... and so does the fifth ... And if you've ever had a parent with health issues, it'll strike home. It works for more than those of us of a certain age, but it certainly does work well for those of in that certain age.

I'm very eager to see WELL. My friend Christina Kirk is in it--her Broadway debut--very exciting!

I saw the gay version of "Swan Lake" on Broadway a few years ago with good friends back East, and hoped it would soon hit S.F. so I could take my partner to the show and enjoy the Swans all over again with my husbear. Well, after waiting and waiting, the show has finally arrived in S.F. and we're going to see it tomorrow night. Looking forward to watching the boys do their swanee stuff on stage and to my partner smiling at their dancing antics.

Merge: your friend, if I have her right, is terrific -- really the whole cast is. It's interesting b/c at first you think it's a play that's kinda going south and the cast is a bit, er, off?, and then all of a sudden, you realize that they've set you up for a wholly different kind of theatrical experience. And you end up thinking about theater, family, health, wholeness, relationships, "child being parent to the adult," and on and on ... it's a play that opens you up. And they put it across nicely. You'll also find yourself thinking back to "[title of show]" more than once, I'll bet. I look forward to hearing how you enjoy it.

[ March 24, 2006, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: jockpop ]

Saw the Toronto production of Hair. I had never seen the show before and thought it was.... OK. The mostly no-name cast was uniformly pleasant, although the production lacked passion and edginess. It was too clean-cut. Jamie McKnight, who played Claude, was definite eye candy, although I kind of liked Craig Burnatowski's Berger. Although the show was panned by the critics, the audience seem to enjoy the show.

Oh, what great news! There was a small but lovely blurb by Jason Zinoman about Christina in the Times, but now it's in their Select Archive. Anyway, I will report back!

I saw the Roundabout's Threepenny last Sat. Very uneven. First act is nearly incoherent. Actors seem to be coming each from an entirely different world. Cyndi Lauper sings wonderfully, acts well, but dances like she did on MTV. Ana Gasteyer hits a too strident single note. Jim Dale is terrific. Nellie McKay is too much liike a debutante, but appealing nonetheless. And then Alan Cumming: he hasn't figured out who Macheath is -- so he strikes a number of poses, some well, others less so. But they're disconnected. A second important problem is Elliott’s attempt to deliver Brechtian "in your face" theatricality with gender bending provocation and sexual titillation. It's like he tries to recreate Cumming's Cabaret's emcee success. Riveting then, but derivative, extraneous and distracting here. Threepenny is about economics, not sex. The second act pulls things together reasonably well, so that I at least walked out feeling like I understood what Brecht wants me to get. However, since Threepenny is set in a small, dingy world, there's something odd about performing it in shiny neon, as this show does. The production just feels too rich for a story about the underside of London. And too disjointed to be clear.

I haven't seen this production but the casting did make me go...hmmmmmm? I've seen some terrific productions of this classic Brecht show over the years - the best being in the Chicago theater world in the mid 80's. The tone has to be just right and so specific. Alan Cumming, delight that he is, can be quite the poseur...I love Cyndi Lauper but as Jenny? And what scares me the most is the whole fashion thing...designers tend to serve themselves not the piece...Of course, I'd love the chance to see it and might just love it...

Bryan: you're right on the money. I didn't mention Mizrahi, b/c his stuff was less problematic than others (it was part of what was too rich). Lauper actually was a nice surpise. No, she's not a dancer, but she pulled off the role of Jenny nicely ... and she did a wonderful job with Mac the Knife (the only problem being that it opens the show, and there's no reprise) and her other songs as well. The show does have to be just right, and this production isn't. My complaints aside, however, I'm really glad I saw it -- and wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anyone who loves theater. It has some fine moments.

And don't you love how Cyndi Lauper's voice has actually strengthened and improved over the years? I read that she undertook intensive voice training after she became a star with "Girls Just Want to..." She's awesome and a real talent...

Bryan: I really do. I loved her then and even more now. She starts the show singing Mac the Knife a capello. It's a fabulous opening moment -- and she completely owns the house. Her voice has deepened wondrously, and it's an honest, warm and open voice. She clearly has been taking lessons.

[ April 19, 2006, 06:54 AM: Message edited by: jockpop ]

We saw Wicked in Boston on Sunday. We didn't have tickets, but were able to win the daily lottery and buy two for 25 each. It's really a great show, a very clever look at the life of the Wicked Witch of the West.

I agree jockpop, hated "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels". The performances were great by a lot of talented big names in the theater but the material itself was new yet stylistically dated material.
HOWEVER
Last Saturday I saw "Sweeney Todd". Amazing!!! The most remarkable piece of musical theater I have ever seen (and I manage to see a quiet a bit). For those of you not aware of the current production with Patty LuPone it's a somewhat bare bones restructuring of the show. The entire cast acts as the pit orchestra as well as singing and acting. They play the entire score on stage, memorized w/o a conductor. All the while acting and singing at times while playing. Where do they find the likes of beautiful sopranos that are also accomplished cellists. This production is truly the most complete ensemble production I could ever imagine seeing. I was speechless.

mpls: wish I'd known you were in the city -- I'm there every 4 -6 weeks -- and try to catch as many shows as I can while visiting. I saw Sweeny in Jan. I think. And totally agree: it's an extraordinary production. Amazing really. I was not much of a Sweeney fan of before -- yes ... the music is special, but the straightforward Prince-type staging made me both uncomfortable and semi-bored. As in the story was just too out there to invite thought. BUT this staging puts it in a context that lands it squarely in the heart. And the whole cast is fabulous (interestingly enough, I was not much of a Lupone fan either -- am I REALLY gay? -- but I really appreciate how she works this one). This one should rake in the Tony's. You know the same director has staged Company in a similar manner (cast = orchestra)? It's supposed to hit Broadway next season.

I agree about "Sweeney Todd." This was the third production I've seen of it, and it was by far the best. It was also the best-directed show I've ever seen; not a single movement is without purpose.

I saw "Wicked" when it was in previews in NYC. It was by far one of the worst things I've seen on a stage. By Act II I wanted to stab cutesy Kristen Chenowith.

[ April 19, 2006, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: Munson Man ]

I'm so envious of you guys. Patti Lupone in Sweeney Todd is inspired casting and all I've heard is that it's a phenomenal show.

But that's the whole point!

Well 3 Glindas and 3 Elphabas later, and Wicked is still going strong on Broadway... As always it is the largest money maker for the week.

And lets not forget the show has set up shop in Chicago and is doing gang busters there and taking the country by storm in its tour. Also it is setting huge pre opening box office numbers across the pond in London.

Guess I would rather be a successful "worst thing you ever saw" then a "wonderful" flop!

Absolutely. As someone once said: nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American people.

"Wicked" is a huge commercial success, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a reputable theater person who thinks it's an artistic success.

I'm glad you enjoyed it, though. Ultimately that's what it's all about.

I guess if Munson Man doesn't like it, it must be artistically flawed.
So are all commercial successes tasteless or only the ones you don't like?

Anyway, I recommend Wicked. Stories that blur the line between good and evil appeal to me. I think they did a fantastic job taking a black and white good-evil story of The Wizard of Oz, and make it much less black and white. It's clever, poignant, and apropos of current politics.

I have to agree - I saw DRS & myself & the audience loved every minute. Also saw the Light in the Piazza - good show - well done, but if I had to choose one to see again - I'd take DRS. Leo Butz is a hoot. I have tickets to the Pajama Game revival with harry Connick JR - anyone seen it? :confused:

[ April 20, 2006, 07:03 PM: Message edited by: copman ]