They made too many textual changes from the original, all for the worse. (Well, there was one added line that I liked, but I mostly did not like the other added lines or the cuts.) Sometimes it was as if the person who did them did not even care about making basic sense. I guess he thought (probably correctly) that audiences don't pay much attention.
The only person in the cast I especially liked was Mary Louise Wilson, even though she was frail and went up a couple of times when I saw her. But she created the right sort of character, and she basically knows how to play it (even if her frailty sometimes keeps her from nailing moments)
I feel like too many other people in the show are either miscast but valiant, or walking through it, or not really invested in the specifics of a role even if the performance is energetic. (I know that some people here either don't like that sort of Acting 101 talk — "not invested" — and think it's pretentious or simplistic or stupid or something. I find it sometimes the most useful and best way to express something.)
For one example of what is wrong, I like Michael McGrath and Mark Linn-Baker a lot as performers, I've seen them do some wonderful work over the years, but they seem interchangeable up there. They should be creating contrasting characters. I was surprised to see them so completely walking through it.
I found the staging too often lackluster and aimless. Other times it was energetic but wrongheaded. I guess I'm alone, but I don't like the staging for the porters at all.
I felt that generally there was a lack of appreciation for and understanding of Comden and Green's verbal humor, some of which was simply cut.
Example of clueless direction (many others could be chosen): One of my favorite moments in the show is "My cigarette is . . . . Saved!" Which gets funnier each time it's repeated. Ellis has the ensemble chattering and laughing over "My cigarette is" every time so no one hears it. A moment that often got laughs, sometimes big ones, in the original is completely lost here. That is an example of what I mean by a lack of appreciation for Comden and Green's humor.
Why is Mildred's back to the audience during the "Indian's Maiden Lament"? And the cut in the brief song undercuts both the build to what should be a big moment and makes nonsense of what's going on. Lily can't tell Imelda "This time it goes up a fourth there" even if it's the first time Imelda has sung the phrase. But she does, or at least she did when I saw it. At least "This time" should be cut, if someone is paying attention to sense. But no one is, and that's just the kind of thing that just keeps going on.
On the subject of Imelda, why does she sound like a housewife from Queens instead of a great stage star of the 1920s?
"Veronique" seemed totally out of period.
Anyway, I could go on and on, and in earlier posts a couple of months ago I did go into more detail. Those are just a few examples of the kinds of missteps that I feel go on all through the production. Maybe if I didn't know the show at all, I would have had a great time or maybe I would have thought, "Why does anyone think this is a good show?"
I don't really care much about the steam. I don't recall ever mentioning it here, though maybe I did. I think that others have mentioned it.
|