| "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | dramedy 04:41 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | Titanic Revival - EvFoDr 03:12 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| that's how the Independent called it. A string quartet, 2 keys and a percussion is the new orchestra. It doesn't look like the set tilts either. | |
| Link | http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/news/theatre-review-titanic-southwark-playhouse-london-8741481.html |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Chromolume 05:06 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - dramedy 04:41 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| I don't seem to see anything that specifically says that THIS "chamber version" is the one that's going to be produced in Canada/NYC, despite the director being the same. (And yes, I certainly do hope it's not the same one - that production may have been very successful in its small London venue, but I imagine it would seem way too small for Broadway.) | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | MikeR 05:34 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Chromolume 05:06 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| I was thinking the same thing... Although it's the same director, the wording in the Playbill article doesn't make it clear if he's remounting his chamber production. Fingers crossed that he isn't... | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 06:04 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - MikeR 05:34 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| "Although it's the same director, the wording in the Playbill article doesn't make it clear if he's remounting his chamber production." No, the article doesn't make it clear. But is it likely that someone who has just directed a well-received chamber production of a formerly big musical would then be hired to direct a large-scale production of the same show? Maybe it will be somewhere between "chamber production" and "large-scale?" I guess we'll see. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | sf 07:43 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Michael_Portantiere 06:04 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| The number of personnel involved may or may not change - I've no information - but the theatre it's going into in Toronto is orders of magnitude larger than the Southwark Playhouse, and has a significantly larger stage (the Royal Alex is about the same size as the Shubert). Which is not to say that the director's concept and staging won't remain fundamentally the same; I assume they will, but perhaps with some tweaks to help it fill the larger space. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Singapore/Fling 07:53 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - sf 07:43 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| It would need to be significantly repackaged. The staging in London was all about fitting into the postage stamp, three-quarters stage, and using whatever height was made available in the small space. My main frustration with Southerland's production in London was that it was just too big a show to try and pull off in that tiny space. Hopefully, by being given a full canvas to work with, he can do it properly this time. I can guarantee everyone that his take on "Mr. Andrew's Vision" will not fly in New York. And hopefully he'll also gotten rid of having Ismay sing the opening, rather than Mr. Andrews. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Chromolume 10:58 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Singapore/Fling 07:53 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| I can guarantee everyone that his take on "Mr. Andrew's Vision" will not fly in New York. And hopefully he'll also gotten rid of having Ismay sing the opening, rather than Mr. Andrews. Do tell, what did he do to "Mr. Andrews' Vision"?? I definitely agree that Ismay should NOT sing the opening. Terrible idea. About "Mr. Andrews' Vision" by the way - no one has brought up the national tour adaptation of the show, which I thought was very poorly done -- but I admit that I did buy the conceit for that one song, having Andrews amid the passengers on deck, instead of below them in the smokeroom (as there was no lower level). It still worked dramatically - though for me there's still no comparison to the original, Andrews being assaulted by the items and furniture in the smokeroom as the ship lurched, the passengers above screaming as they held onto the rail...the last image of the grand piano about to crush Andrews...that scene was a real coup de theatre. My main frustration with Southerland's production in London was that it was just too big a show to try and pull off in that tiny space. Despite a general belief that we'd all like to have that theatre can be done anywhere, I do think there are some shows where size IS the point. Titanic is, IMo, absiolutely one of these. I'm not saying it can't somehow be made to work in a smaller venue, but I really think that without the big playing area, a big set, and yes, a big orchestra, you really lose the, well, titanic feel of the piece, which I feel is integral. It just wouldn't be the same. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Singapore/Fling 04:01 pm EST 01/17/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Chromolume 10:58 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| Southerland tried to do something with ropes that rose and fell; the night we were there, one of the ropes got snagged, which was unfortunately comical, and added to by an actor trying to fix the ropes and then tripping (in one of those moments of "gee, I hope he doesn't forget about that other rope and trip on it"), and taking a face splat onto the upper platform. But even if they had done what they were meant to, it's hard to imagine that it would have achieved any real effect. I don't think that "Titanic" necessarily needs a production as epic as the original Broadway - for a long time, there was video on YouTube from an Australian production that made do with a two level sit that did not tilt, and it worked perfectly well. It's just that in the Southwark, everything about it -- from the settings to the lighting, to the just-too-small cast, to the out-of-focus projector -- were chafing at the seams of the tiny space. This became particularly apparent in Act Two, when the production really hit against the wall creatively, in terms of how to show the evacuation and the sinking. Their stripped down orchestra, though, worked well. And in some ways, with a little less instrumentation, it makes the beauty of the vocal harmonies all the more stunning. Despite my growing frustrations with the many changes made to the material as the show wore on, I was definitely in tears at the end of that magnificent opening. I've asked this before, but does anyone out there know about approved changes to the performance script? This version had a full duet for Caroline and Charles in Act 1 (either a new song, or the song that was cut in Bway previews), and also took out some musical bits here and there, and also took out the great sequence of text quartets after the Lifeboats scene (the one that was staged in NY with the faces at portholes while the set was changed behind them). I presumed that the cuts were to do with the lack of actors, but am still flummoxed by that new duet. (As I said here before, they were right to cut the Caroline and Charles duet the first time around, as it adds nothing to the show.) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Singapore/Fling 06:57 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Michael_Portantiere 06:04 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| The London run was a bit too scaled-down, with the reduced casting necessitating script changes (good-bye poker game in the First Class State Room in "No Moon/Autumn"), as well as a bit too much doubling, even for a show that had a bit too much doubling in its original state. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | shadowlight 07:25 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Singapore/Fling 06:57 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| "(good-bye poker game in the First Class State Room in "No Moon/Autumn")" There goes one of my favorite lines. Mrs Cardoza goes into the men's smoking room in search of a card game. One of the men says: "Where is your sense of occasion, madam? I understand you just lost your husband!" "Yes" she replies, "...but not at cards". | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Live_From_London 07:51 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - shadowlight 07:25 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| That scene was definitely in the Southwark Playhouse production. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Singapore/Fling 07:55 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Live_From_London 07:51 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| No, it was not, unless they put it in right after opening. They had the music, but turned "Autumn" into a dance between Alice and Edgar - was that not in it when you saw it? At the interval on the night we attended, there were quite a few people who remarked on the absence of that scene, and the larger tapestry of seeing all three classes on stage at the same time (for the first time, since they got on the boat). | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Live_From_London 08:05 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Singapore/Fling 07:55 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| I dont remember Autumn being a dance between Alice and Edgar at all.... i saw it early on in previews. I'm positive it was in there, as its one of my favourite lines too. Will check with someone who was in it and let you know :) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Singapore/Fling 08:14 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Live_From_London 08:05 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| It's comforting to hear that it was in there at some point. Perhaps they lost an actor at the last minute and had to make a drastic fix. If that's the case, it does improve my opinion of the show. Look forward to hearing more. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Singapore/Fling 07:58 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Singapore/Fling 07:55 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| And to prattle on (sorry, this is one of the few shows that I get super nerdy about): I knew they wouldn't be able to do the Charlotte Cardoza scene from the opening song, because they had the same person doubling Cardoza who played one of the major characters... I think the main Kate. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" | |
| Posted by: | Chazwaza 06:44 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Michael_Portantiere 06:04 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| But certainly no one expects that there would be a revival of Titanic that is as "full scale" as the original was? Unless a producer really thinks they can return their investment with a spectacularly note-worthy set and a few stars, it's not exactly a sure-fire hit. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Saw the production at Southwark Playhouse.... | |
| Posted by: | bway1430 06:56 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - Chazwaza 06:44 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| It was mesmerizing. Did not expect much from a chamber production of what I always thought should be a "Big" show but it was terrific. The focus on he characters was spot on and I was quite surprised the show did not get a limited West End tranfer. It deserved one. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Saw the production at Southwark Playhouse.... | |
| Posted by: | Live_From_London 07:53 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Saw the production at Southwark Playhouse.... - bway1430 06:56 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| Agreed. I thought it lost its way a bit in the staging of the lifeboats, but the singing in the first 15 minute opening was some of the best i have heard in many years. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Just what Broadway needs... | |
| Posted by: | peter3053 05:03 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | "brilliantly scaled-down chamber version of the piece" - dramedy 04:41 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| Another tiny budget-conscious epic. Come back Julie Taymor, all is forgiven! Will everyone be in the band? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Just what Broadway needs... | |
| Posted by: | sf 07:44 pm EST 01/16/14 |
| In reply to: | Just what Broadway needs... - peter3053 05:03 pm EST 01/16/14 |
|
| |
| It wasn't an actor-musician production in London, so there's no reason to assume it will be in Toronto and New York. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
All That Chat is intended for the discussion of
theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)
Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.
[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]
Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]
Time to render: 1.032968 seconds.