449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on May 3, 2017 20:06:08 GMT
Don't bother going for Haydn Oakley - he was fine, but you shouldn't pay anything to see him particularly. Can't comment on the principal lead, but don't see how he could change the whole show. Agree about wanting them to hook up. Was that intentional?
On the plus side I'm at Carousel interval and it's a train wreck, so at least I relatively got some quality from An American in Paris
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on May 3, 2017 20:03:25 GMT
Oh my God this is awful. Interval. Does it get better or should I go home?
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on May 3, 2017 18:03:41 GMT
I remember Kerry Ellis! Wasn't she turned down on The Voice once then begged to be let on Tom Jones team anyway?
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on May 3, 2017 17:31:55 GMT
Seeing this tonight from the Gods...
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on May 3, 2017 17:26:58 GMT
Saw today's matinee.
Impossible show to rave about. Loved some of the staging and slickness, the set designs and beauty of the show.
Very, very underwhelmed by the material and some of the performances. Difficult to root for anyone, lots of meandering twenty minute blocks of (very pretty looking) nothing going on. Huge lull towards the end of act one, exaggerated by elderly chap fast asleep behind me, being nudged awake to a jolt by his embarrassed spouse. I wasn't bored to that extent, but it was hardly riveting.
Starts off as a very promising near speech-free dance piece - and I wish it had stayed that way. Would've worked as a ballet. IF anyone actually danced en pointe. Was shocked to see Michael Billington's Guardian review advertising the show on a sandwich board outside at the interval, playing up the dance credentials of the stars. Leanne Cope's dancing was passable at best. Hardly the jaw dropping "star turn" the part requires to carry the show. Her dancing was loose as f***; no pointe, even out of time at points. Injured? Not good enough.
Ashley Day, alternate, who I previously liked in The Drowsy Chaperone and The Wizard of Oz -and LOVED as cover Elder Price in The Book of Mormon, is passable in this. His dancing is decent but the character is so bland. In the previous roles he was the same, all big white teeth and limbs, but in this I found him grating. He actually reminded me of Barrowman. So contrived and picture perfect with no hint of true personality.
Haydn Oakley was fine as Henri and I thought Zoe Rainey as Milo made a far nicer and kindlier character than was probably intended. I liked her character... Jane Asher's accent was terrible. Truly awful. Out of her depth and embarrassing. Luckily her small supporting part was insignificant so it didn't draw too much focus. The dancing from the ensemble was fine, not outstanding.
There are some magical moments but they all come from the imaginative staging. I love the "hand drawn" projection effect, the use of set pieces and the general aesthetic, which is honestly the one major thing I took from the show.
Amazed it got all the rave reviews it did; it's almost a homage to old fashioned Broadway musicals with some beautiful staging thrown in. The theatre is an absolute barn and the show fills it nicely in terms of set; but it could've done with adding to the ensemble by 8-10 bodies.
Got a £20 rush seat (stalls, row R 23) which was fantastic value (TodayTix app), but I wouldn't go back even at that price. The staging is gorgeous, but the material, story and performances are far from extraordinary.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on May 3, 2017 17:02:41 GMT
Best available seats @ TKTS for £35 tonight. Nothing for Les Mis except rear stalls restricted view @ £35
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 28, 2017 21:22:20 GMT
Don't seem to be many Hayden Tee fans here. I wonder if his followers are known as Tee-totallers. Liked his Marius back in 2005, haven't seen his Javert yet. Saw Donnelly previously as JVJ, I tipped him for the role full time "one day". I knew he'd have to leave and come back though - they're not keen on promoting understudies in key roles full time. After Sean Kingsley, it's easy to see why.
While we're on Kingsley, he played Enjolras, JVJ and Thenardier. Did he go on as Marius or Javert?
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 28, 2017 11:53:05 GMT
Made my second trip tonight - this time from the end of the front row - and just fell even more in love with the show. It's pure joy, and seeing all those smiling faces up close was just so infectious! There was a show stop mid-Act Two where CJ Johnson took over from Sheena Easton - she only went on for About A Quarter To Nine but her voice was lovely, it would be interesting to see her do a whole show as Dorothy Brock. I have a feeling I'm going to be making many visits to Drury Lane while this show is in town... How long was the stop and was an announcement made?
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 26, 2017 8:04:43 GMT
I don't know if it's badly received, per se. It's a very popular show still and regularly is revived with smaller productions.
Speaking more generally, it's in a bit of a bracket in my eyes with Spring Awakening and Next to Normal as an angsty American teen type of musical. A lot of shows are designed to pack in tourists and I don't know if Rent fits that criteria in the West End.
Personally, I can't stand Rent but I can appreciate why people do.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 25, 2017 17:47:07 GMT
Freelance Stage and Production Manager
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 25, 2017 17:32:57 GMT
Attended today's matinee. Very strange show!
Uneven, confused tone and overly long, but nonetheless ultimately enjoyable. The show deals with a very serious subject matter, but it's very unsure of what it is actually trying to be. "Guys and Dolls" meets "Sweet Charity"? Yes, but those shows both have a much clearer identity as musicals in terms of tone and content. Part of this musical wants to be taken seriously - evidenced in the engaging, dramatic finale - but so much of it is frankly ridiculous it's hard to feel any pathos in the piece.
Solid performances. Sharon D. Clarke plays Sharon D. Clarke with aplomb. Always exactly the same, always great at what she does. In great voice as ever. The standard gospel belting, finger wagging and head wobbling in full force. John Addison I've seen in loads of stuff over the years and he's always a very solid hand. He's suitably smarmy in this. T'Shan Williams as Queenie (not the Blackadder one) who has fantastically comical hair, but struggles vocally a little in places. Very easy on the eye though (despite having a fully grown black poodle growing out her head). Also nice on the eyes is Joanna Woodward as Mary, who is one of the few characters to actually have a "journey". We get to see her semi-nude too which was an unexpected bouncy bonus. Cornell John is imposing and sinister as gangster pimp don Memphis. Weird singing technique, lovely sound though! Much better in this than his Javert back in 2005, where he was over-exposed opposite much better singers. It's very much an ensemble piece and the (small) cast is solid enough throughout.
Two major things struck me; firstly, this production felt cheap, cheap, CHEAP. Even for this venue, with its volunteer ushers et al. The projections on the back wall were out of focus, and appeared to be low resolution stock photos or displayed on very poor equipment. One scene had a rickety coffee trolley at a supposedly luxury locale, but it was visibly broken with one wheel not even touching the floor. No excuses for the fakest plastic strawberries I've ever seen either. The "dance podium" set piece - the bed without the mattress on it I think - was rickety and loudly creaked when stood upon. Why are these things an issue? Well, being merely inches away from the action, these become glaring and distracting issues to a miserly old theatre snob.
Secondly, the sound quality and mixing was abysmal. Everything sounded tinny and the mic balancing left a lot to be desired. I don't know if it's the audio equipment in the venue at fault or what, but it sounded awful acoustically.
Neither of the above issues did I notice at my only other visit for a musical at the venue (the absolutely outstanding Mack & Mabel, a few years back), and I can only judge on what I see and hear.
But for £20 this was well worth a visit. Entertaining, if befuddled and, as I say, too long at nearly 3hrs.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 20, 2017 22:15:40 GMT
The last time I remember there was such vehement disapproval of a Phantom was back in 1997 when Simon Bowman got bumped up from playing Raoul to Phantom. Speaking of which, it's interesting that this never happens anymore. There was a long period of time when Raoul was a a stepping stone to Phantom. Yes, La Bowman was playing The Phantom when I saw it in Dec 96 (my first time) Didn't realise he was unpopular. The only thing more unpopular than Bowman's Phantom is Bowman's Valjean...
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 20, 2017 16:12:14 GMT
I won't go back until he's gone. Even then I hope they don't do anything boring like bring back Earl, again, or JOJ, again.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 20, 2017 15:16:38 GMT
It's poor at the moment (Phantom) and BF is the main problem. Scott Davies is better but not much. Desperately needs new blood
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 19, 2017 22:13:16 GMT
What a bizarre performance from Ben Forster on tonight's Palladium show on ITV! Singing was just about ok, but he was all flailing arms and manic eye movements. Very "Carry on Phantom" Like in the show then. Camper than Joback.
|
|
449 posts
|
Evita
Apr 16, 2017 20:35:32 GMT
via mobile
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 16, 2017 20:35:32 GMT
Che is meant to be an Everyman. Literally "buddy" or "friend". The concept was he would be whichever was needed in that scene. I.e a waiter in the Junin scenes, or a reporter during Peron's Latest Flame for example. It was Hal Prince who created the Che Guevara concept, not the writers. So the Grandage production uses Che meaning "just a guy", and the Kenwright/many other productions ldress him up as Che Guevara. That is literally the only difference - a change of costume. It shouldn't make any difference to one's understanding of the narrative.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 15, 2017 22:05:58 GMT
Just some thoughts on the Miss Saigon revival, typed up to kill time while on the train to work.
I saw the 2003 original tour and didn't enjoy the show, which I put down in hindsight to a weak cast (Leo Valdez, Ima Castro, David Shannon), being too inexperienced in theatregoing (although I loved Les Mis/Phantom) to appreciate/understand the show and seeing it from the back of the Southampton Barnflower. I then saw the cheaper 2006 tour with Jon Jon Briones, Ramin Karimloo and I don't remember the Kim. The cast were strong (Ramin in particular) but the show looked small and the projected helicopter was such a disappointment (the helicopter having been the only part of the 2003 tour to leave any impression on me).
Then I filed it away as a bit "meh" in my mind, akin to "Martin Guerre" or "Elisabeth". I simply didn't understand why people liked it or how it ran so long.
I saw the West End revival in the first few weeks as a matter of course and mostly down to the hype, with the show booking out and breaking records. And I "got" it.
I was in floods of tears by the end and absolutely adored everything, every second. Even the set designs, costumes and orchestrations which I think may have been part of the previous tour, which had left me cold. It was just an entirely different experience than the West End. That summer it opened, it really was the tightest, strongest show in town. I had seen them all and Miss Saigon was the one I wanted to see again and again.
I became something of a regular thanks to readily available day seats, regular agency comps and normal paying, going some 15 times in all. As I grew bored with the performances, I started going in order to see covers.
So seeing as I'm on the subject, I might as well rank the casts I saw:
Engineers:
Jon Jon Briones - absolutely brilliant. Gave identical performances every night which is a dream for Cameron Mackintosh. Not a single ad-lib, blown note, flubbed line. Funny, decent singer. Dare I say definitive?
CR Marbella (1st U/S) - very, very different take on the character. Extremely flamboyant, not as sinister. Yet weirdly less likeable. Vocally the weakest. By no means bad, but felt understudyish.
Romeo Salazar (2nd U/S) - brilliant! More like Marbella's take than Briones, but with a lot more nuance and likability. Cracking singer too and looked the part.
Kims:
Tanya Manalang (Alt.) - mind blowing. One of the strongest female lead performances I have ever seen in a musical, alongside Imelda Staunton in Gypsy and Alice Ripley in Next to Normal. Incredible talent. After seeing her first, then seeing the rest in subsequent visits, I made sure to book only on her scheduled days. She is absolutely tiny with a huge voice which seems to come from absolutely nowhere. Her acting is heartbreaking, particularly in "Too Much For One Heart" and the finale. So much energy, passion and technical skill.
Eva Noblezada - personally I really didn't enjoy her performance. She came off like a spoilt, brattish American on stage, screwing up her face when she was sad, like she was about to have a tantrum. Her voice was strong but indistinct. She had a leading lady air about her, but I found her performance "safe.". In fact, she reminded me somewhat of Kerry Ellis. Competent, strong singer who doesn't seem to try (I'm sure they do really, they just mask their effort) but never seem to fully commit to a role acting wise. I subsequently saw her as Eponine and had all the same problems as with her Kim, so I think she's just not my cup of tea. She didn't seem to share great chemistry with the Chris's I saw her with either.
Julia Abueva (1st U/S) - looked extremely young, like a lost child on stage. Admittedly, she was only 17 and I happened to see her first ever performance as Kim. Real deer in headlights time for her, but no horrible mistakes, and considering how little rehearsal she had I think she did okay. Vocally okay, but very nervous.
Sooha Kim (2nd Cast U/S) - terrible diction. Not sure English was her first language. Sweet voice, largely forgettable performance though. Very flat show I saw her perform in, which won't have helped.
Chrisii:
Alastair Brammer - the real surprise package, because my hopes were so low. Yet he was terrific. I had memories of his very weedy voiced, weedy looking Marius. But he has filled out and his voice has improved exponentially. He looked the part, sang and acted convincingly. A brilliant Chris! Just goes to show that the potential was always there! Genuine chemistry with Tanya Manalang in particular.
Niall Sheehy (1st U/S) - a carbon copy of Brammer, almost a clone. He looked like him, sang like him (but struggled with the higher notes and the Confrontation breakdown both times I saw him, cracking on high notes both visits). Exactly what Cam Mack wants in a cover!
Dale Evans (2nd U/S) - exactly as above! He was at least visually distinguishable. Solid cover, no added touches.
Chris Peluso - oh dear. He was so wooden, had no charm or charisma. A charisma vacuum, in fact. Stiff as a board, a mediocre-at-best voice. A big downgrade on Brammer and certainly, in my eyes, the cast change was the death knell for this production.
Johns:
Hugh Maynard - WHAT a voice in Bui Doi. Show veteran, very solid and consistent. Not a lot to add - strong performer in a supporting role.
Kurt Kansley (1st U/S) - weaker voice than Maynard, his "Bui Doi" was underwhelming. Came off a little... hmmm... camp. Went on for the final two scenes at one show I saw after Maynard injured himself offstage.
Ellens:
Tamsin Carroll - looked far too old opposite Brammer. Didn't really work for me. Good voice and her "Maybe" was nice.
Carolyn Maitland (1st U/S) - much better than Carroll and a better fit with the Chris's.
Siobhan Dillon - not great either. I know it's not the juiciest part, but I struggle to remember anything interesting about her performance.
Gigis:
Rachelle Ann Go - wow, what a find! Vocally incredible, gorgeous on the eyes and performed "Movie in My Mind" with enormous passion and conviction. It was this scene in my first visit which won me over to the show in general! It was like a belting contest with Tanya Manalang, but it totally worked. Subsequently not too wowed by her Fantine, but perhaps it's that expectation thing again.
Marsha Songcome (1st U/S) sounded and looked like a cover. Had that understudy feel about her (this isn't a criticism, just an observation). Not bad vocally, but not in Go's league. Essentially the role is ensemble with one song, so that song has to be extra strong. I liken it to "Another Suitcase in Another Hall" in Evita.
Natalie Mendoza - thought she was great in Here Lies Love, but seemed to really struggle in this. The worst one I saw and the third main part of a very disappointing cast change.
Thuys:
Kwang-Ho Hong - brilliant!!! What a voice, intense acting. Incredible, can't rave enough. Would make an excellent Phantom. Clearly worked very hard on his diction as I believe he spoke little English.
Sangwoong Jo - erm, pretty bad. As with Hong, his English (Engrish) was a bit cringey. If I didn't already know the words, I would've had no idea what he was garbling about. His voice was nothing to shout about. Clearly trying to replicate the original casting, but this one was a failed experiment.
CR Marbella (1st U/S) - as with his Engineer performance, he at least tried to make the role his own. I didn't like it much, but I respect the effort!
Ethan Le Phong - bad, very bad. Couldn't act for toffee and weak voice. Not sure how he got the role!
After the initial buzz and strong advance sales, business and, later, standards really tailed off for this show. The cast change effectively saw several of the best cast members leave, and be replaced by inferior performances. The energy was sapped from the show and towards the end it felt extremely flat and tired.
As for the "new" tour, which I imagine will be the West End show with slightly smaller everything, it doesn't appeal to me as the West End show was so recent and the idea of paying top dollar for a slightly inferior product seems unnecessary to me.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 14, 2017 1:38:51 GMT
Left at the interval of yesterday's matinee. Knew within minutes it wasn't for me. The gender swapped gimmick felt completely unnecessary - and I'm not convinced the play is good enough to withstand such a bizarre creative decision. The stalls were sadly barely half full and I'm getting inundated with comp or very cheap ticket offers. Whilst I may have hated the hour or so I watched, I hope this has a market (maybe, somewhere) and it's never nice to see a show struggle, speaking as a theatre bod.
Incidentally, I didn't see the play staged "properly", where it had much stronger buzz and reviews. But I did see one of Laura Wade's earlier works "Alice", at the Sheffield Crucible, which I absolutely loathed, but stayed for the duration as I was on a review ticket. I freely admit therefore perhaps this playwright's style is simply not my cup of tea.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 5, 2017 15:04:33 GMT
Yes, there's obviously something wrong with him because he didn't like the show. Obviously, if he had loved the show, there would be nothing wrong with him.
I asked a few pages back and met with an attack calling me cynical, but is this show crowdfunded? Why such high feelings about this musical? I will see it and may well love it, but whether I do or don't I'll respect other people's opinions on it.
All of this hype feels extremely contrived though and it's rather off putting!
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 4, 2017 7:29:12 GMT
Is this all one big viral marketing campaign?
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 2, 2017 12:01:08 GMT
Also, if it helps, Google is a newfangled "search engine" whereby you can look up things just by typing in what you want to find. It's marvellous!
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 2, 2017 11:55:52 GMT
I'll wait until it's at TKTS...What's that? Not that I particularly care, but the amount of people who put initials on here (sorry, I've picked on you SageStageMgr) and I haven't a clue what they're on about! Apologies. Rant over. What an insanely brilliant post.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 2, 2017 11:42:33 GMT
I'll wait until it's at TKTS...
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 1, 2017 22:19:14 GMT
I'm a stage manager so I need you to be literal. We have no imagination.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 1, 2017 22:14:41 GMT
Is it actually good though? I saw a tour a few years ago (UKP I think) which was piss poor. Is this the same kind of standard? Please only comment if you saw the tour I mean.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 1, 2017 20:39:38 GMT
I'd assume the lack of understudies would be down to budget. It's a complex piece definitely and they've done well throughout without understudies. Its unfortunate that it's fallen apart these last few days Again, that's all very well and good but not the fault of the guest...
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 1, 2017 18:33:14 GMT
That being the case, why no understudies? Knowing that just one or two missing performers means cancellation, is that not extremely poor form?
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Apr 1, 2017 15:01:49 GMT
This is the definition of a poor "customer experience". These fringe venues are meant to be all about getting people into theatre and providing a quality, homely experience...
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Mar 31, 2017 11:14:50 GMT
Well, this was pretty much exactly as expected.
I found the musical forgettable. I thought the staging was tidy, if unspectacular. A couple of laughs (I laughed out loud when Dewey calls the kids "douchebags" - nobody else around me did) but the funniest moment from the film "I've been touched by your kids... and I'm pretty sure they've touched me." is criminally thrown away as a sung line. The show is peppered with current pop culture references, which are all very safe and family friendly. Not funny in the slightest, but everyone "got" the references and nobody was offended. SO rock and roll. In fact, generally speaking there was lots of pandering to the audience; a game of Guitar Hero on stage (kids love the video games, you know), a rock concert (natch), digs at the "establishment"... but it's all done through the cynical eye of the white upper-middle class. So what's the point?
Unlike Matilda audiences, which seem to be mostly family groups, last night at SoR hoards of young teenagers made up the numbers. The stalls looked full, I was in a dress circle "restricted view" seat (£35 from TKTS, row C seat 6) which was in no way restricted. Nor could I possibly see how it could ever have been marked as such. A brilliant discounted seat and a great view, highly recommended.
I am absolutely not a fan of the New London Theatre, along with the Adelphi and Apollo Victoria theatre, it just feels like a barn. Plus the elevators and numerous stairwells are a chore...
Essentially, SoR is a very child friendly family musical, which tries to please fans of the movie. The children are undeniably talented, but ala Matilda, it's hard not to view them with a degree of suspicion, the little programmed robots. They're all there as per the movie and the audience lap up the saccharine - the minorities are all covered; the gay one, the Black one, the Asian one. I didn't spot a disabled one or fat one, though. Being triple threat performers in their own right (with instruments to boot!) I am loathe to lay into the kids too much - but the singing was noticeably "meh". The girl playing the "quiet one", when she sings "Amazing Grace" is written to leave the audience awed. The problem with this kind of writing, is that it assumes each performer will be good enough to actually deliver a world class moment. She wasn't.
As for Dewey himself, David Fynn was exactly as I expected. A Jack Black impersonation with a reasonable voice. Some decent comic timing, just a solid, completely unremarkable performance. Oliver Jackson channels Brad Majors, in a small supporting role. Preeya Kalidas is really, really hot. But has little to do. She's there to make the plot tick and does fine. The kids are alright (Offspring reference!) but it's not like you come away with a particular character, moment, song... anything really.
The whole show just plods along nicely, not ruffling any feathers. It's slick, capably if unspectacularly performed and packs in the kids. It's hard not to compare this show to Matilda. The family nature of the show, the cast of children, the glossy sheen which covers every scene.
But Matilda is much, much better show in every department.
And really, for as long as SoR runs, it'll always be a nice little show with good availability and a cheaper, less memorable alternative to Matilda.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Mar 30, 2017 18:02:59 GMT
Anyone who bought through TKTS was given a refund without even asking. I went back for a ticket to something else and get a refund and they already had my refund slip processed and waiting, saying I'll be refunded within 2-3 days.
|
|