4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Aug 10, 2021 17:40:09 GMT
Thought this was ok. Act I much better than II. I liked the choreography although sometimes it looked like it belonged in a different show. My main issue is that the two leads have no chemistry whatsoever, so I didn't care enough about their story. They are both good performers, but didn't think it was a good match. The performances were good in general. 3 stars In fairness I would have zero chemistry in the rain.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Aug 10, 2021 17:46:17 GMT
It is a wasted opportunity, the Open Air Theatre is one venue where an actual working Carousel could be used for realism.
|
|
18,823 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 10, 2021 17:58:12 GMT
It is a wasted opportunity, the Open Air Theatre is one venue where an actual working Carousel could be used for realism. Yes. I agree that’s really disappointing. The last production I saw had a projection of a carousel and a Nettie who was indisposed on a rainy Monday night in Manc. I’m sure Lesley Garret had something much more important to do. Billy B also had false muscles stuffed into the bicep area of his Breton style top. Can’t remember who played him.
|
|
4,462 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Aug 10, 2021 19:02:02 GMT
Interesting that theres a fair few 5 star reviews knocking about but no one who has seen it on here has given it such...
I agree mostly with the stage review of 3 stars (although I'd have given it 2) as it talks most about Act 2's problems. Been thinking about how I'd likely have liked it even less without the revolve... amazing the different a piece of staging like that does make.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Aug 10, 2021 20:26:30 GMT
It is a wasted opportunity, the Open Air Theatre is one venue where an actual working Carousel could be used for realism. Yes. I agree that’s really disappointing. The last production I saw had a projection of a carousel and a Nettie who was indisposed on a rainy Monday night in Manc. I’m sure Lesley Garret had something much more important to do. Billy B also had false muscles stuffed into the bicep area of his Breton style top. Can’t remember who played him. That was at the Savoy Theatre production. If they left the projection of the Carousel just there it might have been alright. Unfortunately they replaced the ballet with the projection and having Billy B going to different galaxies and milky ways, it was barking.
|
|
185 posts
|
Post by harry on Aug 10, 2021 23:23:24 GMT
I was there tonight. A beautiful warm dry evening helped I’m sure and the audience response was very enthusiastic with a good number of standing ovators, especially for the principals. There were some magical interactions between the music, the haze and the gentle breeze that you simply don’t get in any other venue.
I think I’d echo a lot of what’s been said already - first half is pretty wonderful - what songs! - and everyone in fine voice. Billy as a reflection of modern day toxic masculinity worked perfectly for me. I don’t think I’d ever realised quite how poisonous his soliloquy is in the past.
They try very hard after the interval and I really admire the attempt to make the show morally “right” but you can’t just cut a load of it and expect the plot and pacing to still work. So it just sort of fizzles out with nothing vaguely resembling a resolution. If I hadn’t known the show I’d have been very surprised that that was it when the lights went down for the end of the show.
But having said all that I’m still pleased they’re making these non-traditional productions of old(er) musicals at Regents Park. I’d 100% book for whatever they programme in 2022, and possibly even be a little miffed if it was even relatively unaltered.
|
|
4,596 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Aug 11, 2021 5:45:27 GMT
It is a wasted opportunity, the Open Air Theatre is one venue where an actual working Carousel could be used for realism. Nooo! Theatre shouldn't be so literal leave that for film and telly as they do it so well. Theatre is abstract and imaginative.
|
|
2,149 posts
|
Post by richey on Aug 11, 2021 7:00:25 GMT
Well I've never really ever fancied a production of Carousel before, but the reviews of this have got me intrigued enough to get a cheap ticket to check it out. It's during the last week of the run so fingers crossed the weather holds out.
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Aug 11, 2021 22:36:12 GMT
I saw this tonight and thought it was a decent 3 stars. It kept my interest throughout (even Act 2). (Although if I'm honest, I thought about starting my comments with "it didn't suck", so the bar was fairly low to start with.) Parts of the ending were quite imaginative. The shadows of the poles were quite pretty and resembled a wire fence around the stage. {Spoiler - click to view} I also think it's ironic that Billy does what he does to stay out of prison, yet ends up 'behind bars'. The women moving within the circles reminded me of wiccan rituals, although 'avenging furies' also came to mind. And I really liked when the women turned to face the audience, leaving the men facing the other way.
Billy hypocritically reprising If I Loved You after smacking around his daughter was just annoying. Yes, I know the song is articulating how hard he finds it to articulate his feelings. But it felt like he was justifying his actions.
I had a harder time interpreting Louise's dance. I thought at one point she was dancing out Billy and Julie's story, as she looked like she was stabbing herself in the stomach, but I suspect that wasn't intended.
And I do wish the play ended with her taking a more decisive step toward breaking out, as she declares she's leaving, then other stuff happens and that kind of gets lost. Although that's the message I'd prefer, I suspect the message that's intended is more along the lines of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". By the way, if anyone is mosquito bait, beware, especially in the restaurant area. I was bitten twice on my hand as I was eating, and the woman at the next table mentioned she'd been bitten.
|
|
868 posts
|
Post by karloscar on Aug 11, 2021 23:46:58 GMT
The Los Angeles opening of the Hytner/Macmillan Carousel got some TV coverage. Great clips from the production with a very young Patrick Wilson as Billy. Quite interesting how they handled the violence in this production. Julie is cowering expecting to be hit when she tells Billy she's pregnant, and instead he gently takes her in his arms. The second he slaps Louise he realises he's ruined everything again and screams at himself. They found ways to play against what's written without rewriting the script. Worth a watch! ( And you get John Raitt singing 16 bars of Soliloquy that never made it to Broadway that he remembers 50 years later).
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Aug 12, 2021 2:49:21 GMT
Quite interesting how they handled the violence in this production. Julie is cowering expecting to be hit when she tells Billy she's pregnant, and instead he gently takes her in his arms. The second he slaps Louise he realises he's ruined everything again and screams at himself. To be fair - apart from the bit about Julie cowering, that's all in the original script. The cowering bit seems at odds with Julie telling Billy that's she's not scared of him (or anyone else) and the way that she makes him sit down and drink his coffee, while she tells him she's pregnant. The scene when Billy hits Louise's hand, ironically, when he tries to comfort her, is also followed up by a display of guilt in the original script. I find the original Hammerstein book a challenge, in a good way. The "improvements" tend to miss the point completely.
|
|
868 posts
|
Post by karloscar on Aug 12, 2021 7:44:21 GMT
Quite interesting how they handled the violence in this production. Julie is cowering expecting to be hit when she tells Billy she's pregnant, and instead he gently takes her in his arms. The second he slaps Louise he realises he's ruined everything again and screams at himself. To be fair - apart from the bit about Julie cowering, that's all in the original script. The cowering bit seems at odds with Julie telling Billy that's she's not scared of him (or anyone else) and the way that she makes him sit down and drink his coffee, while she tells him she's pregnant. The scene when Billy hits Louise's hand, ironically, when he tries to comfort her, is also followed up by a display of guilt in the original script. I find the original Hammerstein book a challenge, in a good way. The "improvements" tend to miss the point completely. Maybe it was just the subtleties of how it was played. Seeing Patrick Wilson do it reminded me how different this version of Billy felt from previous productions at the time. And yes, if you see Billy as beyond redemption, what's the point of doing Hammerstein's show?
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Aug 12, 2021 10:27:36 GMT
The scene when Billy hits Louise's hand... Doesn't he slap her face in this production? The audience really gasped when it happened.
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Aug 12, 2021 10:52:44 GMT
The scene when Billy hits Louise's hand... Doesn't he slap her face in this production? The audience really gasped when it happened.Quite and it's not the first production to add this, but originally, he hits her hand - "impulsively, involuntarily". Louise runs off, calling for Julie, Billy looks guiltily at the Heavenly Friend, who calls him a failure for striking out. Billy is there, after all, to break the cycle...
|
|
4,965 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Aug 12, 2021 22:49:27 GMT
There's an offer in the Evening Standard that may be of interest. If nothing else, I suppose it proves its review was independent and honest.
The £65 seats are reduced to £45 with the promo code UPGRADE65.
Monday to Thursday evenings and Thursday matinees.
|
|
2,780 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Aug 14, 2021 0:14:06 GMT
Took my daughters to see this tonight - my third time in two weeks. Very interesting responses from them - but first some observations. I saw the whole cast (no covers) for the first time. I understand better what OAT was trying to do with this now. Casting Jo Eaton-Kent as Mrs Mullin chucks in the curve ball of gender fluidity and provokes questions that might otherwise never see the light of day in a conventional staging. Is Billy so aggressive due to living a lie? Does he try to be one of the lads to conform, hence the exaggerated male behaviour? Is the carousel symbolising relationships - people jumping on and off for a ride, Billy the barker is a magnet for the girls but does he perhaps prefer or yearn for Mrs Mullins company? Is Billy conflicted beyond the stereotypical domestic abuser? So many questions... Second half was much tidier again - my daughters preferred the second half to the first, and the dance sequence told the story better for them as they found some of the songs in the first half "a bit long". Having enjoyed the first half, they raved about the choreography in the second half.
I've absolutely no problem with gender-blind casting, as the portrayal of Mrs Mullins by Jo Eaton-Kent provoked many thoughts that wouldn't otherwise have crossed my mind (which is surely what art should do). However, I must confess I far preferred Charlotte Riby's interpretation of the role as understudy - her's was authentic, grounded, believable, and somewhat vulnerable. Jo Eaton-Kent's interpretation felt quite shallow and they didn't make me believe in (or care about) the character. They also didn't seem present/in the moment on stage, whereas Charlotte Riby truly inhabits her characters, even just performing as a member of the ensemble.
They're still tinkering with this production - the music is still the most impressive element of the whole show.
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Aug 14, 2021 17:35:22 GMT
Oops wrong thread!!!
|
|
|
Post by sleepflower on Aug 15, 2021 19:27:29 GMT
I saw this last week and enjoyed it. This may be because I've never encountered the show before, so had nothing to compare it to! So I'm not sure how it works as a less traditional interpretation. I wasn't sure if the songs fitted the 'new' setting, and the second act was definitely anti-climactic, but it had plenty of good moments. Also my first time at Regents Park, what an amazing theatre! Can't wait to go back there.
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Aug 21, 2021 16:33:10 GMT
Just heading home from seeing this. I thought it was great for the most part, but there was some questionable choreography in the ballet and the ending was definitely an anti-climax (though I don't think the original ending is much better, but bear in mind I've never seen a full production before so I'm only going off of what I've read and listened to). I understand them wanting to decentre Billy in favour of the female characters (obviously Julie in particular) to give them more agency/power in the dynamic, but I think there's a more satisfying middle ground between completely axing Billy's lingering influence from the ending and giving him a total redemption. I didn't like that they cut the 'felt like a kiss' line because, although you run the risk of seeming to condone/excuse abuse as long as it comes from a place of love, I think if properly directed it could serve as a haunting reminder of the cycle of abuse and inherited trauma and I think there's something more interesting to mine there even if it's difficult to avoid the battered woman trope. I dunno, it's a messy show with a messy ending anyway so I don't blame them for falling at the final hurdle, it was always going to be difficult to navigate.
Overall I came out positive on all aspects except those last 20 or so minutes (and also the cutting of music from act 1, it's the best part of the show so why get rid of it if you're already cutting down the book anyway?)
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Aug 21, 2021 21:25:11 GMT
Oscar Hammerstein's Glaswegian grandfather, an old rogue, pointed out a man in the park to young Oscar, saying, "There's the devil". But he told Oscar, not to worry, because the man (the devil) had a wonderful smile, love in his heart and sweeties in his pocket (I paraphrase). This little story, for me, is at the root of Hammerstein's morality based on the beliefs of his liberal Protestant upbringing, which centred around the idea that the possibility of redemption is something that resides in us all, if we are prepared to do something about it ourselves, even presumably, the devil. That is the essence of Carousel.
Really the book isn't messy, directors, not trusting their audiences and the material, make it messy.
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Aug 21, 2021 22:49:27 GMT
I may have missed something in the final ballet scene... I didn't get the impression he'd earned redemption at all. In fact, I thought he'd blown it. Doesn't he walk offstage by going down? If I'd thought about the symbolism, I'd have thought that was going 'down' to hell. (Although it's been a couple of weeks since I saw it, so I might be misremembering.)
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Aug 22, 2021 4:20:53 GMT
I may have missed something in the final ballet scene... I didn't get the impression he'd earned redemption at all. In fact, I thought he'd blown it. Doesn't he walk offstage by going down? If I'd thought about the symbolism, I'd have thought that was going 'down' to hell. (Although it's been a couple of weeks since I saw it, so I might be misremembering.) That ending is Liliom's, which Hammerstein rejected, it's not Carousel.
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Aug 22, 2021 6:17:33 GMT
I may have missed something in the final ballet scene... I didn't get the impression he'd earned redemption at all. In fact, I thought he'd blown it. Doesn't he walk offstage by going down? If I'd thought about the symbolism, I'd have thought that was going 'down' to hell. (Although it's been a couple of weeks since I saw it, so I might be misremembering.) Normally he is redeemed but this production does away with that. I think that's the right call because I don't think he does anything worthy of earning his redemption in the original book but maybe I need to see a production with fewer changes to get a better idea.
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Aug 22, 2021 9:01:00 GMT
The redemption lies in his choice to go back to try to help Louise, the second time, and not give up (as Liliom does). He gets the choice because of his obvious remorse, after the first attempt.
This production was such a mess in the second act, I was nearly tempted to leave, it was like watching an old friend being mugged.
|
|
|
Post by fluxcapacitor on Aug 22, 2021 9:35:07 GMT
Saw this last night, and absolutely loved the first act. I was very sceptical of this production from the start - as I posted on this thread months ago, I find Carousel a questionable choice of show to do these days due to the issues with the narrative, and I also wasn't convinced of the British reimagining and new orchestrations. But that worked brilliantly, with a heavy British-seaside nostalgia and nicely varied and rounded characters which never felt awkward taken out of their original American context. I also saw the 2018 Broadway Revival and this version is much stronger and fresher in so many ways.
But then the second half of Act 2 (or, the traditional Act 2 - they've moved the interval here). Ugh. This reminded me why I don't think Carousel should be done. They seemed to hit a wall, cut all text which could be deemed inappropriate (which doesn't leave much to work with in the climax...) and didn't know where to go with it so just gave up, with Billy Bigelow literally just walking off stage and never coming back.
I get what they were going for, and a final tableaux empowering women is nicely done and built to with a clever reimagining of the Starkeeper role. But unfortunately the production just dribbles to an unsatisfying and abrupt ending after an inventive and entertaining first 2/3rds.
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Aug 22, 2021 9:54:27 GMT
The redemption lies in his choice to go back to try to help Louise, the second time, and not give up (as Liliom does). He gets the choice because of his obvious remorse, after the first attempt. This production was such a mess in the second act, I was nearly tempted to leave, it was like watching an old friend being mugged. I understand I just don't think that's enough of a change of heart to demonstrate he's worthy of redemption. All throughout the show he is shown to be quick-tempered and resort to violence against those he supposedly loves, even doing so in his first meeting with his own daughter. Remorse is not good enough when there's no actual change in behaviour and I don't think the book does enough to show such a change in behaviour and just comes off as excusing abuse as long as the abuser is sorry and comes from a place of love.
|
|
|
Post by FairyGodmother on Aug 22, 2021 11:25:35 GMT
I think it must depend on the performance you see quite a bit — the last one I saw was am-dram, and it came across that he hit Julie once, and was horribly ashamed of it but didn't know how to apologise/make their situation better. That was what he did "right" in the end — he went back to Louise after hitting her the first time and did help her.
In fact, I think even Julie said he only hit her once, but it was in part the way everybody assumed he hit her often that made him find it even harder to behave better in a "they all look down on me because I'm from the fair, and they all think I hit her all the time, they'll think that whatever I do" sort of way.
Writing that makes it sound like it was an apology for domestic violence, but it really didn't come across that way when I saw it! I think it's very difficult source material to manage.
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Aug 22, 2021 11:29:37 GMT
I think it must depend on the performance you see quite a bit — the last one I saw was am-dram, and it came across that he hit Julie once, and was horribly ashamed of it but didn't know how to apologise/make their situation better. That was what he did "right" in the end — he went back to Louise after hitting her the first time and did help her. In fact, I think even Julie said he only hit her once, but it was in part the way everybody assumed he hit her often that made him find it even harder to behave better in a "they all look down on me because I'm from the fair, and they all think I hit her all the time, they'll think that whatever I do" sort of way. Writing that makes it sound like it was an apology for domestic violence, but it really didn't come across that way when I saw it! I think it's very difficult source material to manage. He only hit her once, sure, but his first instinct is always to resort to violence anyway (Mrs Mullin has to intervene when Julie tells him 'no' when she's trying to tell him she's pregnant for example). Even in their first meeting he's threatening to slap these women. And then in his first meeting with his daughter he hits her. He may not have beat Julie repeatedly up to this point, but I don't think there's a good chance it would have stayed a single instance if he hadn't died when he did.
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Aug 22, 2021 11:59:23 GMT
The redemption lies in his choice to go back to try to help Louise, the second time, and not give up (as Liliom does). He gets the choice because of his obvious remorse, after the first attempt. This production was such a mess in the second act, I was nearly tempted to leave, it was like watching an old friend being mugged. I understand I just don't think that's enough of a change of heart to demonstrate he's worthy of redemption. All throughout the show he is shown to be quick-tempered and resort to violence against those he supposedly loves, even doing so in his first meeting with his own daughter. Remorse is not good enough when there's no actual change in behaviour and I don't think the book does enough to show such a change in behaviour and just comes off as excusing abuse as long as the abuser is sorry and comes from a place of love. Billy's ability to change his behaviour is severely limited. Killing himself and admitting his guilt are big statements, but selfish. Heaven, definitely, has something else in mind, and this is for Billy to save his own daughter from repeating his behaviours. But if a director cuts and/or diminishes that, then we're not really watching Carousel and the point of the show is lost.
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Aug 22, 2021 12:33:27 GMT
I think it must depend on the performance you see quite a bit — the last one I saw was am-dram, and it came across that he hit Julie once, and was horribly ashamed of it but didn't know how to apologise/make their situation better. That was what he did "right" in the end — he went back to Louise after hitting her the first time and did help her. In fact, I think even Julie said he only hit her once, but it was in part the way everybody assumed he hit her often that made him find it even harder to behave better in a "they all look down on me because I'm from the fair, and they all think I hit her all the time, they'll think that whatever I do" sort of way. Writing that makes it sound like it was an apology for domestic violence, but it really didn't come across that way when I saw it! I think it's very difficult source material to manage. He only hit her once, sure, but his first instinct is always to resort to violence anyway (Mrs Mullin has to intervene when Julie tells him 'no' when she's trying to tell him she's pregnant for example). Even in their first meeting he's threatening to slap these women. And then in his first meeting with his daughter he hits her. He may not have beat Julie repeatedly up to this point, but I don't think there's a good chance it would have stayed a single instance if he hadn't died when he did. Julie tells Billy, "no" and that's she not scared of him. Mrs Mullin's "let her alone" is dismissive. There's nothing in the script to suggest that there's violence, Billy is taken aback by Julie's answer. In the first scene - Billy says that the late,lamented Mr Mullin would probably have given Mrs Mullin a sock on the jaw; yes, he chases her off with her with a pretend "sock". Depends how it's played but is it really violence. Yes, he says the same to Julie, but I've never really felt that was a real threat. As for Louise's slap on the hand, that is a mistake, not purposeful - but it obviously screws up Billy's chance to try comfort her and talk to her. He is guilty about that and the Heavenly Friend calls him a failure. Arguably, Billy's ultimate and worst example of violence is against himself. I think we may also have to consider that this is a different, rougher society - Carrie's response to hearing of Billy hitting Julie, is to ask, "did you hit him back?" And on the subject of Carrie - 7 or 8 children in 15 years seems as much an attack on a woman's body,as one slap...
|
|