|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2017 22:14:45 GMT
Have ticket sales picked up with the reviews? Yes 🤗🤗 I also think the trailer has impressed many people |
|
1,346 posts
|
Post by tmesis on Apr 10, 2017 23:23:33 GMT
Just back from tonight's performance - God it's good! For sheer, life-enhancing joy it's got to be the best show in town.
Great slick production and those dance routines are so tight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 18:32:06 GMT
Forget about standing ovations. This show is so glorious, Sheena Easton had to physically restrain me from running up on stage to join in the tap routines the night I saw it.
She has unusually strong upper body strength as it happens.
|
|
35 posts
|
Post by boq1984 on Apr 12, 2017 22:43:36 GMT
So to give my ten pence worth! Saw the matinee today and throughly enjoyed it. Thanks goes to whoever first publicised the £15 seats - the absolute bargain of the year. Was mid Row A at 6'1 legroom was limited at best but for the view I could put up with it, wish on reflection had booked AA but definitely not complaining.
As for the show my thoughts really echo what has been said by others on here. Story is questionable but for pure spectacle you cannot fault it. Sets are big, bold and impressive and make for a seamless show transition wise. The dancing is outstanding and on the whole the cast give it there absolute all - full cast for the matinee. There is something quite tongue in cheek about Sheena Easton playing the role - she does her best but the show really doesn't need her to sell it. Also agree she really shouldn't get the final bow!
Standing ovation wise - pretty full standing ovation at end of show though there was a Lone Ranger standing at the end of 42nd Street step number. Very few empty seats and theatre felt very busy going in.
Special mention to the lovely FOH staff Hannah who spotted my Mum who walks with a stick and instantly escorted to the stalls through step free access, she was really lovely and made a really pleasant start to the evening.
All in all a great afternoon and would definitely re-visit.
|
|
1,346 posts
|
Post by tmesis on Apr 13, 2017 11:47:13 GMT
There has been a lot of discussion on here in the past regarding standing ovations and whether they are warranted in every show. Yes I think it might be a "fad"in some circumstances but ovations have been around for a very long time indeed and it's by no means a new thing. 42nd Street is one show that deserves the ovation in my opinion just for the tap alone. Totally agree - couldn't care less whether people ovate or not but if one show Is worth it this is; I absolutely loved it. |
|
1,346 posts
|
Post by tmesis on Apr 13, 2017 11:57:26 GMT
West end Whingers has just posted an extremely favourable and witty review.
|
|
8,107 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Apr 13, 2017 12:06:11 GMT
West end Whingers has just posted an extremely favourable and witty review. Thanks for that, will go look for it now. I love their reviews, always so funny |
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 15, 2017 10:32:17 GMT
|
|
660 posts
|
Post by Oleanna on Apr 15, 2017 11:29:10 GMT
|
|
1,997 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Apr 15, 2017 16:30:27 GMT
I saw a production of it 5 years ago at Leicester Curve. Thought it was OK (for the dancing mainly), but didn't hold my attention. The storyline was back-of-a-fag-packet stuff. Predictable and schmaltzy. The stuff that Americans do so incredibly well.
|
|
1,997 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Apr 15, 2017 16:38:00 GMT
Yes, the book is almost non-existent, but who cares when the singing, acting and most of all dancing is this good! Every single person on that stage was fantastic, even Sheena Easton, who I didn't expect much from but suits the role of Dorothy Brock perfectly. See, I just can't get past that, not in any musical - my mind is wandering by about half hour in if I don't get strong character development and a developed plot. |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Apr 15, 2017 16:52:44 GMT
The book is what it has to be to stay true to the spirit of the film and its era. If one tried to make it more sophisticated or character conscious it would spoil everything. We want those flimsy characters and corny moments the show is so full of - they're absolutely necessary. They're iconic. The creators of 42nd Street got that just right.
What IS sophisticated and contemporary is the stagecraft which is appropriately stunning while staying very much within the parameters of tradition. The combination of corn and dazzle is what makes this show so watchable and wonderful. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017 16:57:01 GMT
Yes, the book is almost non-existent, but who cares when the singing, acting and most of all dancing is this good! Every single person on that stage was fantastic, even Sheena Easton, who I didn't expect much from but suits the role of Dorothy Brock perfectly. See, I just can't get past that, not in any musical - my mind is wandering by about half hour in if I don't get strong character development and a developed plot. Ah see I love dancing and music, so I can forgive both this and An American in Paris for their weak books given the other aspects are so good. For me, musical theatre is about more than just the plot - if the plot is the the most important thing then surely plays will almost always be more satisfactory? |
|
1,349 posts
|
Post by CG on the loose on Apr 15, 2017 18:01:30 GMT
See, I just can't get past that, not in any musical - my mind is wandering by about half hour in if I don't get strong character development and a developed plot. My mind was so bedazzled by the spectacle, it had no need on this occasion to wander in search of character or plot. While I do, as a rule, prefer both to be present and handled deftly, I hope there never comes a time when their absence renders me incapable of being moved and/or entertained by the sheer talent in front of me, my world would be the poorer for it. |
|
5,817 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Apr 15, 2017 18:27:27 GMT
Have they done souvenir brochures with production shots yet?
|
|
170 posts
|
Post by jess173 on Apr 15, 2017 18:50:54 GMT
Have they done souvenir brochures with production shots yet? Yes, I bought one three days ago. They were 5£ if I remember correctly. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017 21:19:54 GMT
I tell you
How lavish this show is
The red fur coat in the second act
Is real mink
American in Paris
Meanwhile
Can't even run to real liquid in the glasses
They have painted colours
😂😂😂
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017 21:20:32 GMT
I saw a production of it 5 years ago at Leicester Curve. Thought it was OK (for the dancing mainly), but didn't hold my attention. The storyline was back-of-a-fag-packet stuff. Predictable and schmaltzy. The stuff that Americans do so incredibly well. As musicals are well known for their complex plots And highly developed characters 😂😂😂 |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Apr 15, 2017 21:29:49 GMT
So I saw this this afternoon, and loved it. I was due to sit in an aisle seat second row stalls (not cheap) but gave my seat to a less abled gent who was literally crammed into the corner seat on the front row (cheap seat). he was happy and comfortable and I was more. than happy but not so comfortable. Very happy to be as near as you can be, catching all the detail and the actors counting in the wings. I have recently posted hoping that the show might have been reinvented in some way, with a bit more depth, and yes they have made it bigger and bolder and brasher, adding a song and number here and there, and that huge staircase, but what did disappoint me was the set. Yes, it is hugely impressive and worth every penny, but I still wanted one overall design idea/concept, or some cohesion in the design, and certainly I wanted some difference between the onstage visuals and the 'real life' story - it was just one gaudy, colourful mish mash of styles and ideas. Impressive, but how impressive it might have been to have subdued tones or monochrome backstage, leading to those explosions of colours in the numbers. As it was as the curtain rose on that famous scene, every pair of shoe was a different bright colour. But heck I enjoyed it, with every actor so focussed, and seldom do we see 55 people on stage. I hope this has a long life. A brash, bold piece of theatre. And how strange to have a show that has no concrete romance, except with the theatre itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017 21:40:01 GMT
So I saw this this afternoon, and loved it. I was due to sit in an aisle seat second row stalls (not cheap) but gave my seat to a less abled gent who was literally crammed into the corner seat on the front row (cheap seat). he was happy and comfortable and I was more. than happy but not so comfortable. Very happy to be as near as you can be, catching all the detail and the actors counting in the wings. I have recently posted hoping that the show might have been reinvented in some way, with a bit more depth, and yes they have made it bigger and bolder and brasher, adding a song and number here and there, and that huge staircase, but what did disappoint me was the set. Yes, it is hugely impressive and worth every penny, but I still wanted one overall design idea/concept, or some cohesion in the design, and certainly I wanted some difference between the onstage visuals and the 'real life' story - it was just one gaudy, colourful mish mash of styles and ideas. Impressive, but how impressive it might have been to have subdued tones or monochrome backstage, leading to those explosions of colours in the numbers. As it was as the curtain rose on that famous scene, every pair of shoe was a different bright colour. But heck I enjoyed it, with every actor so focussed, and seldom do we see 55 people on stage. I hope this has a long life. A brash, bold piece of theatre. And how strange to have a show that has no concrete romance, except with the theatre itself. My friend made same comment on the many pastel tap shoes as the curtain goes up The attention to detail for this show particularly in the costumes Is unprecedented |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Apr 15, 2017 21:50:47 GMT
yep I agree about the detail, from the front row I was looking at the fastenings on the tap shoes, and the taps themselves. One paper criticised that they had lost the green and white from 'We're in the money', but actually all the lapels on the jackets were made out of dollar bills, and obviously the large sequins were coins. The harsh white lighting on the finale costumes after the big staircase number made those costumes look breathtaking.
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Apr 15, 2017 22:30:07 GMT
Anyone care to hazard a guess as to what the plot of Pretty Lady is; or is it just a revue? It's certainly a little cynical - Shuffle off to Buffalo sings of the relief of divorce, and then there's the Boulevard of broken dreams, and the murder of the title song, but then does have the sarcasm of we're in the money. We should try to construct a plot
|
|
2,850 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Apr 15, 2017 22:43:27 GMT
Before trying to construct a plot for Pretty Lady we should write one for 42nd Street tbh.
|
|
1,349 posts
|
Post by CG on the loose on Apr 15, 2017 23:49:49 GMT
Buzzing my TITS OFF to see this on Saturday afternoon from the front row! Couple of pics have been released. Unfortunate that 'Katharine Hepburn' is 'Katherine Hepburn'. And 'The Gay Divorce' should really be 'The Gay Divorcee'. Oops. Someone's not done their homework - though this is quite a fun game. Any others?! Rapsody in Black... Noticed last night that Katharine Hepburn and Rhapsody in Black have both now been corrected. That 'The Gay Divorce' has not, supports the assertion made by @cardinalpirelli and Dawnstar that this spelling correctly represented the stage show, as opposed to the later film. But more importantly, again, WOW! |
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Apr 16, 2017 0:10:29 GMT
Noticed last night that Katharine Hepburn and Rhapsody in Black have both now been corrected. That 'The Gay Divorce' has not, supports the assertion made by @cardinalpirelli and Dawnstar that this spelling correctly represented the stage show, as opposed to the later film. But more importantly, again, WOW! Oh wow - that's really interesting to hear and I'm glad they noticed & fixed it!! A bit of a shame it was noticed after official pictures and the trailer, though. Even more-so that it even happened in the first place considering the amount of detail that has gone into the rest of the production. And in reference to the 'The Gay Divorce' matter, if I'm gonna be a real nit-picky dick, it may well be that they're representing the stage version, but the stage version is simply 'Gay Divorce', whereas the film is 'The Gay Divorcee'. If it's still unchanged, then they still have a mismatch of both the film & stage titles which unfortunately is still incorrect which is a huge shame. Surely it must be someone's job?! But still, nowhere near important enough to damage the most sensational night at the theatre! |
|
