|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2016 20:04:19 GMT
Reminds me of all male or female production of Sweeney Todd I have heard about which sound really cool.
|
|
133 posts
|
Post by whygodwhytoday on Nov 25, 2016 20:25:05 GMT
Trying to keep an open mind. Luckily Company isn't a musical known well by "non-theatre nerds" (I call them muggles), at least in the UK, so this new dynamic won't seem so foreign to audiences.
I get nervous when people temper with my favourites, but at least I still have that TV recording of the Donmar production.
|
|
4,988 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 25, 2016 23:52:15 GMT
Other theatres could be maybe the Garrick or Vaudeville but the season seem to me to appeal to a non West End Audience. Vaudeville is a bit too small and the Garrick has just finished a year long season with Kenneth Branagh so I'm doubtful they'll commit to another year long season Why would they ? A year long booking is fulll of money and not of a dark theatre |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Nov 26, 2016 8:24:27 GMT
Company may be my favourite musical so I've been thinking about this and it seems to me that Marianne Elliott and her crowd are seeing the show from a narrow perspective. Is it really a show about getting Bobby married? Or is it a show about getting Bobby to conform? None of the marriages on display are entirely successful. The men all envy Bobby, to one degree or another, for his freedom. The women say they worry about his future but they don't really think any other woman is good enough for him. Their concern is overdone, deliberately.
Bobby is of their social group but he's not. He's the outsider. People have a hard time with that. And when the piece was written, 1970, it seems to have been an issue that was in the air. I have never had anyone say to me that they thought Company was "dated" in its attitudes, nor have I ever thought it. I think Ms Elliott has concocted a straw man to justify her desire to do something different. I understand that desire because here we are talking about it and it's bound to be a controversial production. But I think she does a disservice to a great show.
|
|
642 posts
|
Post by AddisonMizner on Nov 26, 2016 9:17:40 GMT
This sounds interesting, but I understand the concerns voiced here. I for one, will be booking.
|
|
4,988 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 26, 2016 9:28:46 GMT
I do agree with a lot of the concerns. But this production will come, go and may even be repeated while conventional staging will carry on - great art always survives. Look at Sweeney Todd, Carmen, Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet
|
|
19,787 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Nov 27, 2016 8:36:21 GMT
Sounds like Sondheim took a fair bit of persuading to let them do it. Not surprised.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Company
Nov 27, 2016 9:14:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by kathryn on Nov 27, 2016 9:14:24 GMT
Well it'll be interesting, that's for sure.
|
|
4,988 posts
|
Company
Nov 28, 2016 12:47:45 GMT
via mobile
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 28, 2016 12:47:45 GMT
I've listened to multiple recordings this weekend and I'm fascinated to know what will stay and how it's going to be adapted
I may read the script tonight #theatrenerd
Have I got a girl will it remain, perhaps sung to the audience - Symbolising the male dominated world Bobbie lives in
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Nov 28, 2016 15:59:58 GMT
I've listened to multiple recordings this weekend and I'm fascinated to know what will stay and how it's going to be adapted I may read the script tonight #theatrenerd Have I got a girl will it remain, perhaps sung to the audience - Symbolising the male dominated world Bobbie lives in According to the DM article that HG posted, it will turn into 'Have I Got A Guy For You'! |
|
513 posts
|
Post by Deal J on Nov 28, 2016 22:26:01 GMT
I've listened to multiple recordings this weekend and I'm fascinated to know what will stay and how it's going to be adapted I may read the script tonight #theatrenerd Have I got a girl will it remain, perhaps sung to the audience - Symbolising the male dominated world Bobbie lives in According to the DM article that HG posted, it will turn into 'Have I Got A Guy For You'! Girl! To be in your slingbacks, what I wouldn't give! |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Nov 28, 2016 22:40:23 GMT
A terrible confession about Company. I was once dating a gent in new Zealand, and one night I met him after he had had a lesson in his 'Singing Sondheim' course, and that night they had learnt Being Alive. I looked forward to a healthy discussion about the complexities of the song. What had the teacher said about it, how had she interpreted this masterpiece, I asked hopefully. Nothing, and he had learnt the notes without once questioning what the song was about, singing it as a lyrical, bland love song. I'm afraid that was the end of any potential romance. Terrible and shallow I know, but not to question or ponder the meaning of the song, well, there we go. a what a lousy teacher to teach no sense of character or performance.
Any one else got any suitably shameful confessions.
|
|
258 posts
|
Post by notmymuse on Nov 29, 2016 0:41:28 GMT
I'd probably pay to hear Rosalie Craig sing pages from the phone book so I'm just happy she's going to be back on stage before long! Such a lovely voice. I remember hearing her sing Love Is Like An Aubergine years ago (no, really) and she even made that sound grand.
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Nov 29, 2016 9:22:58 GMT
Sondheim has throughout his career resisted strongly folk meddling with his work. So I don't understand him granting permission for this honestly. It will completely change the dynamic of the piece to the point it is completely different. He either was persuaded or more likely thought "oh I just cant be bothered any more - whatever!"
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 10:02:43 GMT
They wanted to do a gay version with Daniel Evans and Alan Cumming as Joanne but this sounds more exciting! Things I didn't know I needed until now.
I'm intrigued by this, I trust Elliot's directing and judgement enough to shelve any reservations until I actually see it. Though I'd be in favour of a less heteronormative mixing it up too (and perhaps a twist on the ending too)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 10:26:39 GMT
Also, as someone who only today has been ranting about married friends shunning us single ones I think themes of the show whether male or female remain relevant. Either that or I just have arsehole married friends...
|
|
4,214 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Nov 29, 2016 19:04:27 GMT
What about You Could Drive a Person Crazy? Will it be three guys?
Or Barcelona?
Company was the first professional musical I ever saw in 1987 The school took up to see it at the Sydney Opera House as a break from out Higher School Certificate (HSC). This is your equivalent go the GCSCs.
Simon Burke was Bobby.
No too sure how I feel about this production. I can't seem to get past the 90'sDonmar Warehouse production with Adrian Lester, Sheila Gish and Sophie Thompson.
|
|
364 posts
|
Post by dazzerlump on Nov 29, 2016 19:07:54 GMT
its going to need a fair few rewrites, unless Bobbie is bisexual and just wants someone to love of any gender, which I imagine is the way they will go with this
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2016 8:43:19 GMT
This article in The Atlantic was interesting I thought. www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/11/company-sondheim-sexual-politics/508895/I keep thinking about this production, and for me, as a woman who will be about Bobby's age when it comes to the stage, I think it's bang on. It's not so much about stigma of *not* being married it's about not being bothered about being married. Bobby's ambivalence as much of his lack of marriage is what bothers his friends most, and transpose that to a woman and BANG HOW VERY DARE YOU WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU WOMAN. The reaction to a woman who really wants to get married versus one who isn't bothered are very different, and Bobby being perfectly happy as he/she is for me makes this a really interesting flip in terms of how society reacts now in 2016. Because while it's ok for a woman not to have someone it's not ok not to want someone. |
|
617 posts
|
Company
Feb 13, 2017 7:36:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by loureviews on Feb 13, 2017 7:36:38 GMT
It's gone a bit quiet on this one. Is it going to happen or not?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2017 8:34:31 GMT
It's gone a bit quiet on this one. Is it going to happen or not? Isn't it slated for either late this year or next year some time? after Marianne Elliot leaves the NT? and (I might be wrong) wasn't this down as the second production from her new company? |
|
4,988 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Feb 13, 2017 12:31:07 GMT
SJS is working on this but also his new show. 3 rd workshop for new piece is due in spring and then hopefully opening autumn / winter at the Public Theatre
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Feb 13, 2017 14:14:04 GMT
This article in The Atlantic was interesting I thought. www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/11/company-sondheim-sexual-politics/508895/I keep thinking about this production, and for me, as a woman who will be about Bobby's age when it comes to the stage, I think it's bang on. It's not so much about stigma of *not* being married it's about not being bothered about being married. Bobby's ambivalence as much of his lack of marriage is what bothers his friends most, and transpose that to a woman and BANG HOW VERY DARE YOU WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU WOMAN. The reaction to a woman who really wants to get married versus one who isn't bothered are very different, and Bobby being perfectly happy as he/she is for me makes this a really interesting flip in terms of how society reacts now in 2016. Because while it's ok for a woman not to have someone it's not ok not to want someone.
Is marriage an issue at all any more? Company presupposes a world in which a committed relationship = marriage and not simply moving in with someone. Obviously, that's not the world we live in. So any attempt to have it reflect contemporary life will flounder on the marriage thing, however it's genderized. It's not a problem when the show is played as written because we accept the social parameters of the period. But when we try to update it or make it more relevant, all the issues arising from the solemnification of a relationship through marriage suddenly have to be dealt with.
Where, in this case, is the conflict? Why doesn't Bobby or, rather, Bobbi just shack up with some guy? The biological clock thing doesn't require marriage. Nothing does. So why, now, give yourself the task of making a big deal of something which is not the big deal it once was? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2017 14:31:45 GMT
ooh mallardo drag up something I wrote months ago and expect me to remember it! haha I think there IS still pressure to marry, particularly on girls. Even ones I know who live with long term partners get pressure to 'make it official' or asked why they don't want 'their special day'. It's obviously not in the same manner as it was in the 70s, but it's there. Also depending on background/community/class/religion delete or increase these pressures as appropriate. And I think it translates even without the actual 'marriage' bit- simply the pressure to 'find yourself a man' which IS still levied at women. I think I said up thread it's more actually Bobby/Bobbi's indifference that would drive married women/men mad-people who have the coupling drive just cannot fathom someone like Bobby (or me haha) who just are indifferent about being a part of a couple (married or no). |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Feb 13, 2017 14:39:12 GMT
I agree with what you say, Emi - and I agreed with your comments in November. I understand the pressure to couple. But my point is that Company is specifically about marriage. Perhaps that will change in the rewrite to just "finding a man"? If it's to work and be as contemporary as they're suggesting I think it will need to.
|
|
