|
|
Post by sfsusan on Apr 10, 2022 22:48:47 GMT
What I heard right now they’re going for out of tune, flat, behind the music rank amateur ... I think they tried to signal that when she was introduced as "Sally Bowles" rather than Amy Lennox. But I'll bet for occasional theater-goers, more will be interested in seeing 'Moulin Rouge' than 'Cabaret', based on the performances at the Oliviers. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Apr 10, 2022 22:48:52 GMT
Having now seen the performance in question, I can say that they made a mistake in choosing that number to promote the show on TV
I am sure the direction makes better sense in context but it just sounded awful without it. It was painful.
As someone who loves the piece, I can understand the effect they are trying to achieve but it doesn't sell the show.
I saw a performer who was not yet fully immersed in the interpretation. It was too placed. Too much thinking about what to do next.
It won't put many more bums on those expensive seats. And that is bad for the cast as a whole
|
|
|
|
Post by stagebyte on Apr 10, 2022 22:52:04 GMT
Yes I was wondering what the average punter who’ve never seen the show and won’t know it’s a directorial choice would make of it.
Any casual onlooker would think the actress was having a very off night and the audience were high applauding it so enthusiastically.
|
|
|
|
Post by minniecatmonster on Apr 10, 2022 23:16:06 GMT
Darn. I wish I had publicly predicted this. I kind thought Redmayne would come back after fantastic beasts. He isn’t in production for anything else now |
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Apr 10, 2022 23:39:45 GMT
I just listened to the performance, and having seen the show a few days ago I'm confused why they chose that song to be performed. In the context of the show it really does work, but at an awards show? Surely Maybe This Time would've been a better option? I have posted on the Oliviers thread already but I was there in person. This got a great reception. HOWEVER. Maybe This Time would have been a far better choice!!! |
|
|
|
Post by budd on Apr 11, 2022 3:07:21 GMT
I highly doubt that. His agent / manager and lawyers would not be stupid enough to let him do that. |
|
639 posts
|
Post by ncbears on Apr 11, 2022 3:23:58 GMT
I haven't seen this production (being in the states and all) but did watch (most) of the Oliviers on YouTube and I thought Ms. Lennox was brilliant - Granted I know the show and can see what they were going for - so, that performance sold the show for me. And while we will be in London in late June I see she will be gone as of 25 June. I can't speak to how non-regular theatregoers will react who are expecting Liza Minelli and big belting singing - but then, how many non-theatregoers will even watch?
|
|
8,163 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Apr 11, 2022 9:14:37 GMT
Agree with others that a different number for Cabaret would have maybe worked better. You need to see the show to put that performance into context as it did look like she was out of tune at the beginning and had smudged her lippie which, of course, was intentional.
I'm sure many people who are not regular theatre goers and don't know about this current production will have thought it was very strange.
It was a great performance though and not that much different from Jessie's, maybe less shoutey.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Apr 11, 2022 10:02:17 GMT
Agree with others that a different number for Cabaret would have maybe worked better. You need to see the show to put that performance into context as it did look like she was out of tune at the beginning and had smudged her lippie which, of course, was intentional. I'm sure many people who are not regular theatre goers and don't know about this current production will have thought it was very strange. It was a great performance though and not that much different from Jessie's, maybe less shoutey. Yup - the last note Amy did was very different to Jessie, maybe the placement - I found the latter more guttural whereas Amy was belting. Different interpretations. |
|
5,200 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Being Alive on Apr 11, 2022 10:54:48 GMT
I highly doubt that. His agent / manager and lawyers would not be stupid enough to let him do that. ...I don't know what to tell you - the entire production is Eddie's idea, he's the reason it happened, so erm...yeah! |
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Apr 11, 2022 11:00:56 GMT
The production was Eddie's idea and he is one of the producers. He chose Frecknall and he chose Jessie. Would this not have been known by the cast, even in early rehearsals? His recounting of the conversation with one of the cast makes it seem it wasn't. (I will add that the clearly tight relationship between the headliners and the Kit Kat Klub Kids in the balcony was very touching.) |
|
5,200 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Being Alive on Apr 11, 2022 11:06:37 GMT
The production was Eddie's idea and he is one of the producers. He chose Frecknall and he chose Jessie. Would this not have been known by the cast, even in early rehearsals? His recounting of the conversation with one of the cast makes it seem it wasn't. (I will add that the clearly tight relationship between the headliners and the Kit Kat Klub Kids in the balcony was very touching.) The anecdote to me sounded a bit exaggerated for effect (why let the truth get in the way of a good story etc) |
|
2,859 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Apr 11, 2022 11:09:19 GMT
Would this not have been known by the cast, even in early rehearsals? His recounting of the conversation with one of the cast makes it seem it wasn't. (I will add that the clearly tight relationship between the headliners and the Kit Kat Klub Kids in the balcony was very touching.) The anecdote to me sounded a bit exaggerated for effect (why let the truth get in the way of a good story etc) Yeah and she was probably just being supportive. He had been trying to make this revival happen for half a decade, he chose the director and the leading lady. I doubt it was a secret in the rehearsal room. |
|
101 posts
|
Post by filendile on Apr 11, 2022 11:13:39 GMT
I interpreted it as Eddie looking for an opportunity to make sure Emily Benjamin's name was heard and applauded.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 11:25:22 GMT
New show trailer
|
|
584 posts
|
Post by princeton on Apr 11, 2022 11:28:59 GMT
They've never made any attempt to hide the fact that Eddie Redmayne is the driving force behind this production. In almost all of the interviews he did prior to the show opening he mentioned how he had wanted to play the part for a very long time (indeed Baz's tweet on the very first post of this thread refers to this), and once he had a producer on board and they had got the rights he had approached Jessie Buckley to play Sally Bowles and then together then went to meet Rebecca Frecknell to see whether she would be interested in directing it.
|
|
7,193 posts
|
Post by Jon on Apr 11, 2022 11:34:06 GMT
In regards to Eddie investing in the show, it’s highly plausible because he’s a known actor and probably got a fair whack from appearing in the latest Fantastic Beasts movie
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Apr 11, 2022 16:06:52 GMT
The anecdote to me sounded a bit exaggerated for effect (why let the truth get in the way of a good story etc) I was disappointed the anecdote went a different way than I expected. I thought he was giving her credit for trying to inspire him. Even after he said "I kind of cast myself", I thought she'd be quoted as coming back with "then trust yourself" or similar, but the story just petered out. Still, he mentioned her and gave space for the applause at her name. |
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Apr 11, 2022 16:51:43 GMT
Agree with others that a different number for Cabaret would have maybe worked better. You need to see the show to put that performance into context as it did look like she was out of tune at the beginning and had smudged her lippie which, of course, was intentional. I'm sure many people who are not regular theatre goers and don't know about this current production will have thought it was very strange. It was a great performance though and not that much different from Jessie's, maybe less shoutey. I realise I'm saying this as someone who posts on a theatre message board, but I think it was obvious and most people would understand that the out of tune bit was intentional and part of the characterisation. Even if they weren't sure at the start, it would be very obvious by the end, especially with the smudged make-up. And as a huge fan of the film Moulin Rouge, I didn't think their performance did much to sell the show. Too obvious - and in more than one way. |
|
19,799 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 11, 2022 17:18:28 GMT
Smudged make up really is the last chance motel of cliched directorial choices surely?
“She’s gone a bit loopy,. Smudge the lippy”
Really. I’m sure I must have met someone in the midst of an emotional breakdown in my time on this planet but I’ve never met anyone with smudged lipstick. How about acting it instead of using stupid cliches?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 17:28:20 GMT
I was curious about seeing this to see Fra Fee, but that trailer really hasn't sold it to me. It seems all the focus and budget has gone on renovating the theatre for the concept, the show itself looks like something from the Menier
|
|
|
|
Post by minion on Apr 11, 2022 17:36:40 GMT
People aren't that foolish. It's easy enough to grasp the context of the song, especially once she starts talking about Elsie.
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Apr 11, 2022 19:10:31 GMT
In regards to Eddie investing in the show, it’s highly plausible because he’s a known actor and probably got a fair whack from appearing in the latest Fantastic Beasts movie I don't see it as that mad either. Yes, the received wisdom is that you shouldn't invest in your own shows, but someone has to invest in them and they can't all lose money. In Eddie's case he will have advisors who would make sure that he didn't invest too much and that he got the right people to work with him. Presumably he didn't invest more than he could afford, and if it allowed him to do his dream role then it was a worth-while investment. I've no idea how rich he is, but I expect he's got more than enough for him to live very well for the rest of his life without needing to work ever again. Assuming he doesn't want to blow his earnings on super-yachts or drugs, then why not spend some of it on theatre? I remember stars of stage and screen used their screen earnings to donate to pandemic schemes to support those who normally worked in theatre and theatre itself. Some of those donations were substantial, but nothing they couldn't afford, and a good investment if they hoped to return to the stage themselves. It may be that Eddie sees his investment in the show along similar lines. |
|
61 posts
|
Post by TheatreTwittic on Apr 11, 2022 20:04:04 GMT
Interesting to see post Oliviers, either every single £30 seat has been sold in a big rush for the entire run, or the balcony has been closed off for the time being to try and sell the higher priced tickets.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2022 20:15:06 GMT
Maybe not in retrospect, but that sounds like a very huge risk Depends how much he put in and if he took a significant salary as well. At worse he could write it off as a tax loss if things hadn't gone well. |
|
