|
|
Post by Mr Snow on Nov 27, 2017 19:53:01 GMT
And at the Hackney Picturehouse and several others.
We have complimentary seats after I wrote and told them how bad the live screening was.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2017 23:31:09 GMT
Not that Dominic Cooke has slavishly followed the printed stage directions elsewhere, but it's written into the script that the entire cast is onstage for Ben's breakdown. If anything, at the preview I saw, the chaos section at the end of 'Live, Laugh, Love' didn't go on for quite long enough. From page 104 of the original 1971 published script: (The Follies drops begin to rise, and bit by bit we're back on the stage of the Weismann theater. Not literally, however. We're inside BEN' s mind, and through his eyes we see a kind of madness. Everything we've seen and heard all evening is going on at once, as if the night's experience were being vomited. Ghosts, memories and party guests - all there. They stand on platforms which are moving insanely back and forth, they mill about the stage, and all of them are doing bits and pieces of their scenes and songs. And through it all, downstage, BEN' s chorus line continues dancing. The cacophony is terrible, and we can barely hear BEN as he races from one group of people to another screaming.)
If only he had slavishly (love that word!) followed the original directions. They sound thrilling as Ben races around all the commotion on stage, all the noise, different parts of the evening being thrown back at him and then his final scream of anguish silences them all. Instead the cast now come on in different costumes from the evening. Stand there silently and walk off again. Dull and not really effective. How was it staged at the preview you saw sf? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2017 0:11:28 GMT
Well this lived up to the hype and made it worth the trip from the States. So many things make more sense now given the book being used and the staging. The pathos of the piece comes through much more powerfully than in the recent Broadway revival (which I also like, but for different reasons)
Loved pretty much all of it ... the magnificent orchestra especially. I was a tad underwhelmed by Solange and Hattie in their respective numbers, particularly Solange.
|
|
1,970 posts
|
Post by sf on Nov 28, 2017 0:13:21 GMT
Not that Dominic Cooke has slavishly followed the printed stage directions elsewhere, but it's written into the script that the entire cast is onstage for Ben's breakdown. If anything, at the preview I saw, the chaos section at the end of 'Live, Laugh, Love' didn't go on for quite long enough. From page 104 of the original 1971 published script: (The Follies drops begin to rise, and bit by bit we're back on the stage of the Weismann theater. Not literally, however. We're inside BEN' s mind, and through his eyes we see a kind of madness. Everything we've seen and heard all evening is going on at once, as if the night's experience were being vomited. Ghosts, memories and party guests - all there. They stand on platforms which are moving insanely back and forth, they mill about the stage, and all of them are doing bits and pieces of their scenes and songs. And through it all, downstage, BEN' s chorus line continues dancing. The cacophony is terrible, and we can barely hear BEN as he races from one group of people to another screaming.)
If only he had slavishly (love that word!) followed the original directions. They sound thrilling as Ben races around all the commotion on stage, all the noise, different parts of the evening being thrown back at him and then his final scream of anguish silences them all. Instead the cast now come on in different costumes from the evening. Stand there silently and walk off again. Dull and not really effective. How was it staged at the preview you saw sf ? More or less as you describe, with the cast not moving much and not enough cacophony. I believe Ben's breakdown during the song, before the ensemble come on, is now rather bigger than it was at the performance I saw (at least, according to a friend who saw the show the day before I did in previews and then saw the NT Live broadcast). |
|
19 posts
|
Post by countryjames on Nov 28, 2017 10:48:46 GMT
Another unpopular post but.......the live screening only highlighted the excruciating vocal inadequacies of the majority of the cast. The sound was truly awful too. Dominic Cook told us it had taken a year to cast this....what a waste of time! Late to the party on this but the sound was very poor in the local Kino in Rye too in terms of balance and I had wondered if part of that was the lack of vocal strength from too many of te cast - I didn’t think Imelda Staunton well suited at all vocally and only Tracie Bennett, Alison Langer and Philip Quast seemed to hit the spot (I’ve always been a bit allergic to Dame Josephine Barstow even in her halcyon days and the physical and vocal mannerisms seemed as irritating as always). Seeing it live tomorrow, so may gain a better perspective... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2017 17:25:00 GMT
Went to the Staging Sondheim's Follies talk at the NT today. 10.30-3.30. Rather good. Opened with a presentation on the origins and history of the show. This was followed by a panel discussion with four directors who have staged Sondheim's works at the Landor, the Menier, the Watermill and the Royal Exchange. Then on to a panel discussion with three actors who have been in his shows. Hannah Waddingham was the only one I knew. Each was followed by a Q/A session. The last (longest) session was on staging this particular production. Lots of interesting bits and pieces- the director decided that Heidi's backstory was that she has a terminal illness. She turns up to the reunion knowing that she'll sing one last time. (One More Kiss was the first song to be composed for Follies apparently.) We were treated to the two understudies performing it, accompanied by MD Nigel Lilley, which was sublime. The dance captain talked lots about the different styles of movement and dance in the piece, and how each character had their own moves and gestures. She also revealed how she ran a quick rehearsal backstage of the new routine when the revolve broke down mid-show! Nigel Lilley revealed that there was a click track for the taps in Mirror Mirror! Carlotta's understudy performed I'm Still Here for us, with moves as they are set in the show. In the Q/A session at the end, someone claimed that they had seen Tracy Bennett doing something quite different earlier on in the run. It became obvious that Miss Bennett has a bit of a mind of her own! Oh, and the company on stage for Ben's breakdown at the end never know when Philip Quast will falter. He changes it all the time and a different chorus boy prompts a different line every performance so that the looks on the others' faces are genuinely confused or thrown!
|
|
4,976 posts
|
Follies
Nov 28, 2017 17:58:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 28, 2017 17:58:58 GMT
Thanks for posting 😄
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2017 22:53:12 GMT
Saw it last night and tonight and the entire cast comes on and the noise becomes a deafening crescendo.
Having seen many Follies productions over the years, I believe this may have been the most thrilling on the whole despite a few minor flaws (how Solange cannot land her number is beyond me). The themes of choice, loss, and regret come alive unlike any other production I have seen.
And I found the set, the orchestra, the intentional mirroring of the ghosts with their older selves, and the use of the revolve to be spot on. I almost postponed my flight back to the States today when I saw seats had opened up for the matinee and the evening performance, but two times will have to suffice.
|
|
524 posts
|
Post by callum on Nov 29, 2017 17:41:09 GMT
Had a fabulous second visit to the matinee this afternoon. I still find Solange perfectly fine - can someone please address why she's so problematic on this board, I'm stumped lol.
The actress that usually plays Norma (Rain on the Roof) was out today, so we had an understudy. I would imagine that she's not directly suited to the part and she couldn't hit the notes (listen to the... lovely RAIN) at the end of their bit. In the words of Matt Lucas' Shirley Bassey impersonation - she doesn't have the range! I definitely preferred the women rather than men in drag for Buddy's Blues. Imelda was a bit croaky and broke at the end of Losing My Mind. If anything, I think she snarled the song a bit more than she did the first time I saw it, though perhaps I'm still entranced after hearing Barbra's fabulous version in her Netflix special.
This time around, my favourite moments weren't the massive showstoppers (though they were still terrific), but quieter songs like Too Many Mornings. Perhaps because I was sat in Row C this time as opposed to Row J.
Janie Dee is still an amazing dancer, Philip Quast's voice is still heavenly and Tracie B still brings the house down with I'm Still Here. Loved the show and am saddened I can't fit in a third visit before it close. It really brings to life all of the important themes already mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2017 23:43:31 GMT
My issue with Solange is that she does not land the laughs in that number because of poor enunciation (I think), and she does not sell it enough.
It is fine (B/B-), but in better hands I have seen it be much more of an audience pleaser.
Hattie also does not ring as much humor out of her number as I have seen others do, but her big belt pulls in the extra applause.
|
|
423 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Nov 30, 2017 9:05:22 GMT
A couple of things - but I can't figure out how to quote from some of the comments above so please bear with me.
It's true Miss Merman was famous for knowing how she wanted to play a role but in the case of the "Birdseye " remark she had made it clear to all of the creatives that she had a date after which she wouldn't incorporate changes in "her" show , the creatives had gone to her after that date and she said no.
Follies: The Young Buddy and Young Sally furniture in the Follies number has always been there - even at the first preview. It just makes its entrance later in the the number.
The Drag Margie and Sally in the Buddy Follies number were an idea of Mr Sondheim's and it never worked, they were converted to real women about a week ( or maybe two) before the NT Live transmission.
Also Janie Dee now sings " I could tell you someone who" three times before the final dance break in Lucy and Jessie when previously she only sang it once.
Ben's breakdown even in the first preview involved the entire company but the staging was very messy, since then it's become the sort of a regimented circular breakdown that has been described, a version of which has always been in the show no matter who has staged it. Personally I like it because it's given more focus to Ben's losing his place in the number rather than the whole evening falling apart. And I think the ensemble clearing the vast stage at the conclusion of the number and just the two couples left there is a devastating and thrilling image.
|
|
1 posts
|
Post by joshs on Nov 30, 2017 11:29:57 GMT
Carlotta's understudy performed I'm Still Here for us, with moves as they are set in the show. In the Q/A session at the end, someone claimed that they had seen Tracy Bennett doing something quite different earlier on in the run. It became obvious that Miss Bennett has a bit of a mind of her own! Oh, and the company on stage for Ben's breakdown at the end never know when Philip Quast will falter. He changes it all the time and a different chorus boy prompts a different line every performance so that the looks on the others' faces are genuinely confused or thrown! Hello, I'm the Staff Director on this production and was leading the Staging Sondheim's Follies afternoon session. I wanted to respond to your comment about I'm Still Here, as I feel perhaps we weren't entirely clear in our explanation of this moment. The number is not rigidly staged, as that would not be suitable for such a personal, confessional number, which is entirely led by the energy of one performer. The marvellous Tracie Bennett has freedom within the staging to adapt to the emotions the number evokes within her performance on any particular night - hence the comment from the gentleman in the audience about having seen a different conclusion to the number. As seen in the response to the production, and in many posts on this message board, Tracie's powerful performance is deeply, spontaneously felt every night, and so it would not be suitable for the number to be giving a 'locked down' staging as you would with a more choreographic song, such as Who's That Woman. In terms of the understudy performance you saw on the afternoon, the fabulous Julie Armstrong performed her own version of the number based on Tracie's journey through the song created in rehearsal, as is usual with an understudy, rather than 'set moves'. I hope this clears up any misunderstanding with regards to this question. I'm glad you found the afternoon interesting! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 13:03:03 GMT
Carlotta's understudy performed I'm Still Here for us, with moves as they are set in the show. In the Q/A session at the end, someone claimed that they had seen Tracy Bennett doing something quite different earlier on in the run. It became obvious that Miss Bennett has a bit of a mind of her own! Oh, and the company on stage for Ben's breakdown at the end never know when Philip Quast will falter. He changes it all the time and a different chorus boy prompts a different line every performance so that the looks on the others' faces are genuinely confused or thrown! Hello, I'm the Staff Director on this production and was leading the Staging Sondheim's Follies afternoon session. I wanted to respond to your comment about I'm Still Here, as I feel perhaps we weren't entirely clear in our explanation of this moment. The number is not rigidly staged, as that would not be suitable for such a personal, confessional number, which is entirely led by the energy of one performer. The marvellous Tracie Bennett has freedom within the staging to adapt to the emotions the number evokes within her performance on any particular night - hence the comment from the gentleman in the audience about having seen a different conclusion to the number. As seen in the response to the production, and in many posts on this message board, Tracie's powerful performance is deeply, spontaneously felt every night, and so it would not be suitable for the number to be giving a 'locked down' staging as you would with a more choreographic song, such as Who's That Woman. In terms of the understudy performance you saw on the afternoon, the fabulous Julie Armstrong performed her own version of the number based on Tracie's journey through the song created in rehearsal, as is usual with an understudy, rather than 'set moves'. I hope this clears up any misunderstanding with regards to this question. I'm glad you found the afternoon interesting! Hello, Josh, and thanks for your comments... I think the confusion was due to your initial suggestion that Tracie Bennett had only once changed what she did towards the end of this number. In the case brought up by the gentleman in the audience it was her running back to the back of the stage to sing into the mirror, although I believe another gentleman said that he too had seen her singing towards the crumbling circle area of the set. Your comments here help clarify. It was a most enjoyable day; please thank everybody who worked hard to put it all together. |
|
328 posts
|
Post by barrowside on Dec 1, 2017 15:09:24 GMT
I think Josh's explanation perfectly sums up why this production is so stunning - allowing a talented actress like Tracie Bennett this kind of freedom to respond to the song, the character and the audience as she sees fit on any given evening is why it feels like she's doing it for the first time every night. It explains why so many of the great moments in this show feel so new despite everyone knowing the songs so well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2017 13:41:27 GMT
I emailed NT regarding - what I perceive to be - sound issues with the Follies cinema broadcast. I've had half a reply, pending further 'investigation', but their response leads me to think that the vocals mix overpowered by the orchestra was actually a deliberate move. So in their mind its not a technical issue, its a creative choice.
Someone has happened to make a naughty version available online. Not that I have acquired and viewed it *wink* but it seems this version has exactly the same audio mix as in the cinema where I viewed it. Vocals lost completely in parts and lost for orchestra. One of the most painful examples (for me) was the end of "Broadway Baby" where 4 principals could be seen to singing but the voices were completely lost.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2017 13:53:08 GMT
What email address did you use? Perhaps if they receive a lot of emails making the same complaint they'll reconsider their less helpful artistic choices in future.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2017 14:00:15 GMT
NTLive@nationaltheatre.org.uk is the email they gave me on Twitter to contact.
Really I do urge people who were disappointed to get in touch.
They also inferred that the sound system at the cinema I attended wasn't set up correctly. Hard to believe given the nationwide opinion I've read on twitter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2017 17:02:20 GMT
These are mixed for six channel sound (as per many home cinema setups) and the likelihood is that the vocals are able to be tweaked by raising one or other of the channels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2017 17:12:39 GMT
These are mixed for six channel sound (as per many home cinema setups) and the likelihood is that the vocals are able to be tweaked by raising one or other of the channels. NTLine provide guidelines to the receiving houses to stipulate setup and levels, its not a case of cinemas being able to tweak levels to suit. |
|
83 posts
|
Post by brenth on Dec 5, 2017 6:26:53 GMT
I loved this production and everything about it, however I think that Imelda was miscast! I saw her 3 times in Gypsy and she was a force of nature giving the greatest performance I have ever seen. I tried to love her as Sally, but couldn’t, she acted brilliantly as ever, but I was never convinced. I have been listening to Julia McKenzie in the 80s version, and I saw her I’m it. To me she was perfect, vulnerable, a little silly and soft, which made her demise all the more heartbreaking. Imelda has a core of steel, which makes her a great actress, but it cannot be fully hidden. Sally is a dreamer, Forever a young girl, listen to Julia singing on YouTube, the hearing and despair is all there amongst the beauty.
|
|
913 posts
|
Post by karloscar on Dec 5, 2017 11:12:05 GMT
You're spot on brenth. Sally's vulnerability needs to be more subtlety portrayed at first, and Julia got it just right. Most people meeting Imelda's Sally at a party would make a quick exit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2017 16:24:41 GMT
Mackenzie had the softer script, hence the portrayal, Staunton is working with the harsher, more desperate version.
I suppose having so many versions of the script is unhelpful, people comparing to versions that are different to the one being used.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Dec 5, 2017 16:47:20 GMT
The scripts aren't THAT different to be honest to explain the somewhat exaggerated nature of Staunton's performance, which has its moments, to be sure, but is not a patch on McKenzie, whose Sally remains one of the greatest musical theatre perfs I have ever seen - I can still hear and see her opening remarks upon arrival at the party. Quast, Forbes, and Dee by contrast are all STREETS ahead of Daniel Massey, David Healy, and the wearisome Diana Rigg.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2017 17:54:58 GMT
Well, it’s an opinion but not one that I share as regards Mackenzie who I always found fine but unremarkable, cast only because she could negotiate the notes where better actors couldn’t. That version of Follies was just not Follies but a gussied up monstrosity in its place.
As for scripts it only takes a few words here and there to make a vast amount of difference. Whole interpretations can be hung on very little.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2017 23:54:36 GMT
There was an elaborate media piece about Sondheim a few years ago on radio (I think - maybe online) and they interviewed loads of famous Sondheim interpreters including Julia McKenzie, who admitted that Stephen offered her either Sally or Phyllis, whichever she wanted, and she said she couldn't stand the thought of sitting there for the whole evening watching somebody else sing In Buddy's Eyes, she was so taken with the devastation of Sally's character and how perfect the musical and lyric writing is for the part that there was no question. I too think she is still one of the top performers to have played this role, never overdoing the quirks or neuroses -- as someone's already said, her innocence made the portrayal all the more heartbreaking... I could go on. Anyway, I just think vocally and dramatically Julia was A+.
|
|
