Threaded Order Chronological Order
| HELLO, DOLLY! Last Night | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 03:18 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| So I went to catch the new cast of HELLO, DOLLY! last night, mainly because I've always been a big fan of Bernadette Peters, but also I had really enjoyed the show last fall with Bette Midler. I'd tried to go and see Donna Murphy do it, but I just could not ever work it out. As I'd read here, Peters is still warming up to the role and it felt that, for much of the first act, she'd been given the note "Do it faster!" There were scenes where it felt like she was just spitting out words as fast as she possibly could and it seemed like she was having trouble with her voice in some of the numbers. But, the best parts of her performance were the ones when she was able to just slow down and take her time telling the story. The first act can be a bit frenetic, but suddenly Peters is alone with the audience for "Before The Parade Passes By" and the performance gels right in front of our eyes. The second act was a totally different experience. From the moment she enters at the top of the staircase in Harmonia Gardens, she's at the top of her game and is not only the star, she's the whole universe. I never thought of that red dress and feathered headdress as sexy before. That number blew the roof off the theatre and worked even better than it had with Midler. The first time she sang "It's so nice to be back home, where I belong" at the bottom of the stairs, the audience erupted in applause and she had to pause until we stopped. I honestly was not expecting that performance based on what I'd seen over the first act. It was extraordinary. This was a true star claiming her turf. I cannot even find words to adequately describe it, so I'm going to move on. Peters kept up the momentum through the entire second act and I was in tears by the end. When she figures out exactly how to calibrate the first act prior to "Before the Parade Passes By," this is going to be one of the legendary replacement performances. By the way, the crowd went wild...WILD...at her entrance and it seemed that even she was surprised by how long she had to hold. It was just as big or bigger than the reaction that greeted Midler and she was going to stand there and bask in our love for as long as she had to and it was wonderful. That said, I do wish Peters had been given the leeway or the time to come up with her own schtick for scenes like the courtroom eating, rather than just aping Midler's bits. Peters did the "tired" bit in "Hello, Dolly!" in a much more organic way than Midler did and it worked beautifully, but, as far as I could tell, all the eating of dumplings, etc., seemed like she was doing business as directed and rehearsed. Oh, and Peters messed up lyrics in both "Before the Parade Passes By" and "So Long Dearie," but covered beautifully. It appeared as though she either jumped a verse or repeated a verse and, as soon as she realized it, she got right back on track. I don't think I've ever seen her make a mistake like that before. Victor Garber isn't the revelation that David Hyde Pierce was as Horace, but he's trying to offer up his own thing and not copy Pierce any more than necessary. Most of it works, but Pierce was so perfect and so surprising that I found myself missing some of his line readings and reactions. He has a really good rapport with Peters and I totally bought the journey he goes on. "Penny In My Pocket" was nicely done and Garber, as Pierce did before him, made a strong case for its inclusion. The other newcomers, Charlie Stemp and Molly Griggs, as Barnaby and Minnie were in top form and I preferred them to their predecessors. Stemp is a true leading man dancer and I hope that somebody is inspired to write a new show to showcase him. All the extra dance added in for him was delightful and felt of a piece with the character, rather than showboating. He and Griggs had a sweet chemistry together and I kind of wish that Stewart and Herman had given these characters more to do. Griggs was charming and fun and her performance seemed more grounded and real (as absurd a sentiment as that is in a show like this) than her predecessor's had been. During her monologue prior to the hat shop scene, Kate Baldwin entered to a round of thunderous applause and, without skipping a beat, Griggs paused in the middle of a thought and, when the ovation died out, she began thanking the audience as though it was for her. Even Baldwin had to laugh. It was just so utterly...charming. Griggs has to cope with the old trope of having another character come over and remove her glasses as though her blossoming romance somehow cures her vision issues. I was hoping for some kind of business of an impaired Minnie feeling around in vein for Barnaby until he retrieves the glasses and puts them back on her face, but that didn't happen. I was pleased to see the glasses return to Griggs' face for Act II though. I didn't remember this from the first viewing, but there were a lot of details I didn't notice the first time because I was so intent on Midler whenever she was on stage. Gavin Creel and Kate Baldwin continue their peerless turns as Cornelius and Irene. The relationship between Cornelius and Barnaby has changed a bit with Stemp and the two feel more like contemporaries and equals, rather than romantic hero and sidekick. There was one hilarious moment in the courtroom scene when Cornelius first says that he's fallen in love. Within the general crowd hubbub here, Stemp's reaction might lead one to think that Barnaby thinks...for a moment...that Cornelius is talking about HIM, rather than Irene. It was very funny and passed so quickly that it might have gone unnoticed had Stemp not been such a presence. So this show is in top form and I'd love to return in a few months when Peters has ironed out the kinks. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Gavin Creel/Peerless | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 11:45 am EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Last Night - JereNYC 03:18 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| While I enjoyed Mr Creel's performance - he's always more than fine in everything he does. But I quibble with calling his Cornelius 'peerless', which means 'inimitable, incomparable, unsurpassable'. For my taste, both Cornelius and Barnaby were wide eyed, youthful, and energetic - but I didn't get much sense of character. As originally imagined Barnaby was the eager wide eye young one, Cornelius quirkier, maybe a but more knowing. And as created by Charles Nelson Reilly and Jerry Dodge, much funnier, and ultimately much more winning. I think Mr Nelson Reilly was peerless. Mr Creel was very fine indeed. |
|
| reply to this message |
| totally agree | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 01:11 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Gavin Creel/Peerless - NewtonUK 11:45 am EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| I enjoyed Creel very much, but I thought he was better in other things, and certainly not the best Cornelius - not better than Michael Crawford who imbued it with comedy and character and timing that Creel just doesn't have as an actor or singer. Again, I love him and admire his enormous talent, but he hasn't been quite *peerless* in probably anything, I'd say, including Hello Dolly. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: totally agree | |
| Posted by: BruceinIthaca 10:31 am EST 02/11/18 | |
| In reply to: totally agree - Chazwaza 01:11 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| You liked Michael Crawford in the film of "Hello, Dolly!" Really. De gustibus....I guess, but even defenders of the film (and I enjoyed it a lot when I was twelve) tend to find his performance embarrassingly bad. A friend recently pointed out that it seems like he was trying to imitate Charles Nelson Reilly (whose brand of comedy I do enjoy--so, de gustibus to me, I guess), but CNR was sui generis--what could be kooky and endearing in him just seemed annoying in Crawford. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: totally agree | |
| Posted by: KingSpeed 10:44 pm EST 02/10/18 | |
| In reply to: totally agree - Chazwaza 01:11 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| Peerless would suggest that he is better than everybody of his type in his generation. Michael Crawford and CNR don't count as peers. Does Gavin have equal peers these days? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: totally agree | |
| Posted by: AC126748 10:49 am EST 02/11/18 | |
| In reply to: re: totally agree - KingSpeed 10:44 pm EST 02/10/18 | |
|
|
|
| I could probably think of 10-20 male musical theater actors who are roughly the same age as Creel who sing, dance and act at reasonably the same level. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: totally agree | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 01:30 pm EST 02/12/18 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 01:28 pm EST 02/12/18 | |
| In reply to: re: totally agree - AC126748 10:49 am EST 02/11/18 | |
|
|
|
| Yeah - i'm not sure about 10-20 but 5, sure. I've always liked Creel - he's very talented and very good at what he does. But so far, having seen the majority of his roles on Broadway, I don't think what he does is super unique or special outside of how special it is to be a wonderful singer, good actor, good mover, charming and good looking, all at the same time and on stage. (and don't get me wrong, that list isn't meant to undermine his talent or the difficulty of being a broadway performer at his level) I think this will probably keep him from ever being iconic in his talent or Broadway career, but he will probably always work and always be good. For what it's worth, I would EASILY have given the Tony to Lucas Steele last year over Creel. (And I wouldn't have given it to him for Millie or Hair either, despite thinking he was excellent in both) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: totally agree | |
| Posted by: AC126748 02:27 pm EST 02/12/18 | |
| In reply to: re: totally agree - Chazwaza 01:28 pm EST 02/12/18 | |
|
|
|
| I've always liked Creel - he's very talented and very good at what he does. But so far, having seen the majority of his roles on Broadway, I don't think what he does is super unique or special outside of how special it is to be a wonderful singer, good actor, good mover, charming and good looking, all at the same time and on stage. (and don't get me wrong, that list isn't meant to undermine his talent or the difficulty of being a broadway performer at his level) Dead-on. When I hear the term "peerless," it evokes a once-in-a-generation talent, someone totally in a class of their own. That is certainly not Creel, although he's quite talented. Honestly, save perhaps Audra McDonald, I'm not sure I would call any current musical theater performer "peerless." |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| "peerless" | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 02:36 pm EST 02/12/18 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 02:34 pm EST 02/12/18 | |
| In reply to: re: totally agree - AC126748 02:27 pm EST 02/12/18 | |
|
|
|
| Yeah that word peerless is tough because even legends have peers. To me it is about the specific mix of their talents and qualities as a performer i.e. their sound, their abilities, their look. Is Donna Murphy peerless? Sutton Foster? Kelli O'Hara? Jessie Mueller? Ben Platt? No one really does what Bernadette does the way she does it. Nor Patti LuPone, so I'd put both of them in there. Mandy Patinkin also. Joel Grey, though he doesn't really perform in any notable way anymore. Tommy Tune. Chita Rivera still. Nathan Lane is probably peerless. Savion Glover, though he also doesn't perform much. Lin Manuel Miranda is currently peerless in the specificity of what he does on stage, not because he does it so well, there are better rappers, actors and singers than him, including those in his own show or replacing him, but he has a quality that sets him apart. Kristin Chenoweth is pretty specific in her mix of talents and qualities, perhaps she's peerless. Maybe Charlie Stemp will prove to be peerless. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Beanie did it too | |
| Posted by: barberg 06:10 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Last Night - JereNYC 03:18 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| When I saw the show in December (with Donna Murphy) Beanie Feldstein did the same thing, acknowledging Baldwin's entrance applause as if it were for her. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| same when i saw it (nm) | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 06:10 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: Beanie did it too - barberg 06:10 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| nm | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Nice report, thank you. nm | |
| Posted by: Holland 06:00 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Last Night - JereNYC 03:18 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| nm | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 03:53 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: HELLO, DOLLY! Last Night - JereNYC 03:18 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| I've been wondering this since I saw it, and much more when the ridiculous choice to do it on the Tonys was made... you say you think both DHP and Garber make a case of including it, so I'm curious if you or anyone else here can explain why they think it should be included. From what I got from it, it gives very little insight into the character, has no purpose where it is or in the show at all, and just makes the night longer, though it is a mildly amusing song it's nothing special. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: allineedisthegirl 11:02 am EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Chazwaza 03:53 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| Yes I believe the song is slightly problematic, since it tacks on another beginning to Act II where we don't need one. But the song is amusing. There are worse songs in this score. Most important, it gives meaning (and feeling!) to the penultimate moment when Horace takes the penny out of his pocket and gives it to Dolly. I loved that! db |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? Well ... | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 03:04 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - allineedisthegirl 11:02 am EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| ... in the original version, Carol Channing was a star, and David Burns was a wonderful, reliable, funny, Broadway character man. He didnt need any extra material to make him happy or fill out his role. The recent revival had two stars - yes Ms Midler was a much bigger star than David Hyde Pierce, but David is a star in his own right. Without PENNY IN MY POCKET, Vandergelder's only number is IT TAKES A WOMAN, early in Act 1. I was more surprised that neither of the songs that Ethel Merman sang in the show (which Channing couldnt, and didnt sing) were put back into the revival. World Take Me Back is a terrific song, and Love Look in My Window isn't bad either. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 01:37 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - allineedisthegirl 11:02 am EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| Am I wrong in thinking that moment was added because of the inclusion of the song? I don't remember that being there before. But then I'm much less familiar with the stage piece than the movie. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: allineedisthegirl 01:43 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Chazwaza 01:37 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| I saw the original production in 1970 with Merman, and the most recent Channing revival. I don't remember that bit of business in either of them (but who knows?). That bit wouldn't make much sense without the song. db |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: garyd 03:35 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - allineedisthegirl 01:43 pm EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| The "bit" is not in the script of the original stage production and , until the current production, I have never seen it performed. FWIW, I think it is charming. It also adds a touch of sincere sentiment to Horace's rather profound and "sudden" change of heart regarding marriage to Dolly. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: ChipL955 10:39 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Chazwaza 03:53 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| I think there's a strong case for "Penny in My Pocket," all found in the second verse of the song. We learn a lot about Horace's character from Jerry Herman's excellent lyric: - When impoverished, he's inventive ("With my only shirttail, I shined a rich man's shoe") - He's charitable ("I gave the nickel to a blind man") - He's hard-working ("I bought myself a wagon and started hauling ice") - He's business-savvy ("I cut the ice to ice cubes and got a higher price; I crushed the cubes to ices for still a higher fee") - He's polite ("En route to work next morning, I helped a lady cross") - He's sentimental ("But proudly I confess that in my pocket is that penny") Yes, he's also benefitted from luck and coincidence, but he's earned his half-million mostly from his own strength of character. This song softens Horace--he's not just a curmudgeon--and reveals that his apparent disdain for Ambrose, Cornelius and Barnaby is actually high expectations. And I think it helps us root for Dolly to find happiness with him. Does the audience grasp all of this? I don't know, but a friend of mine with whom I watched the Tonys, who had never heard the song before, completely got it, and could recite Horace's good qualities as soon as the number was over. Does the song belong in the show when not in the capable hands and lungs of a David Hyde Pierce or a Victor Garber? I think there's an even stronger case there. I've seen plenty of community theater productions of Dolly, and most of the Horaces are one-dimensional gruff, bumbling old grouches. (The last one I saw we nicknamed Horrid Vandergelder.) The poorer actor needs "Penny in My Pocket" even more than the better actor. Dolly works best when we all want to see her end up with him. In my opinion. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: Ned3301 07:39 am EST 02/10/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - ChipL955 10:39 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| There's also the odd moment when he says his wife died and the song abruptly stops for a moment. He seems utterly expressionless--as if he has soothed the pain by burying it in an emotionless existence. Then the music picks up again (almost immediately), and we realize that his cantankerous front protects him from having to care about anyone, or at least it is supposed to. But he does care. He can't help it--and he is especially graceless with Dolly (at first) because he likes her, and that threatens to explode his protection. When he finally proposes at the end, he is simply giving in to feelings he has suppressed earlier in the action. The penny that he gives her--his original penny, apparently--is symbolic of that. That's my guess, anyway. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: CCentero 11:16 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - ChipL955 10:39 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| Very good analysis of the song. I agree that Herman's lyric is excellent. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 10:46 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - ChipL955 10:39 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| Does the song belong in the show when not in the capable hands and lungs of a David Hyde Pierce or a Victor Garber? I think there's an even stronger case there. I've seen plenty of community theater productions of Dolly, and most of the Horaces are one-dimensional gruff, bumbling old grouches. (The last one I saw we nicknamed Horrid Vandergelder.) The poorer actor needs "Penny in My Pocket" even more than the better actor. Dolly works best when we all want to see her end up with him. But - does the song really rescue a one-dimensional grouch? (That's assuming that the song will be made available for future productions, which it may not be.) I think if the actor (or director) has already made Vandergelder nothing but a cardboard villain, I doubt that the song would do much to change that. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: ChipL955 11:11 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Chromolume 10:46 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| Does it really "rescue" him? Really, really rescue him? As in: this song will consistently, inevitably work to add dimension and likeability to Horace's character, even if in Act One he's been "nothing but a cardboard villain"? I don't know that there's any song in any musical that has a consistent surefire effect. But it can't hurt--except that it "just makes the night longer," as Chazwaza said, yes, sadly, two minutes and 51 seconds more stuck in the Shubert Theatre watching that production. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 12:19 am EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - ChipL955 11:11 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| Does it really "rescue" him? Really, really rescue him? As in: this song will consistently, inevitably work to add dimension and likeability to Horace's character, even if in Act One he's been "nothing but a cardboard villain"? I don't know that there's any song in any musical that has a consistent surefire effect. Where did all that insane hyperbole come from? That has nothing to do with the question I posed in my post. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: ChipL955 04:39 am EST 02/09/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Chromolume 12:19 am EST 02/09/18 | |
|
|
|
| I think it all depends on the performance. I always thought "A Little Priest" did wonders for the character of Sweeney Todd--it lightened him up, it showed us his intelligence and humor, it showed us why Mrs. Lovett might love him and it developed chemistry between them that made the end of the show more emotionally impactful. Then I saw the movie, and Johnny Depp's joyless performance of "A Little Priest" did none of those things. It made no sense to me whatsoever. They're playing a game, which implies fun, but Sweeney's not even smiling. So, to (try to) answer your question, I think the song "Penny in My Pocket" can give an actor a chance to give Horace some additional dimension, but the song won't do it for him automatically. Without the song, there are few other chances to accomplish that in the show. So it serves a useful purpose (on paper, at least) and makes a case for itself as part of the score. "Does the song really rescue him?" Whether talking about "Penny in My Pocket" or "A Little Priest," my answer is no--the performance does (or doesn't). |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| its a cheap number for the tonys. | |
| Posted by: dramedy 04:15 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Chazwaza 03:53 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| Since he couldn't do a taped production number at Shubert, Rudin chose a one person song for a nearly sold out show. Would a splashy number last June really be selling tickets for Peters? I doubt it. It cost spring awakening $200k to present a number at the Tonys. I was surprised falsettos did, but it is touring so maybe they thought it was a good investment. I doubt penny number cost $200k. I agree it doesn't add much to thenshow to include, but I don't find it an overlong show like les miz or Hamilton that a needless number makes even longer. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: its a cheap number for the tonys. | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 04:19 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: its a cheap number for the tonys. - dramedy 04:15 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| I wonder if an excuse might be found this June for Peters and company to do "Hello, Dolly!" at the Tonys. It was a truly spectacular moment and might goose ticket sales now that Midler is gone and tickets can be had. Not sure if it's wise to give away the big moment on television, but who knows? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Peters will be near the end of her run. | |
| Posted by: dramedy 04:23 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: its a cheap number for the tonys. - JereNYC 04:19 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| And it cost lots of money and he would have to beg to get a spot for last season show. I don't see it happening. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 04:00 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Chazwaza 03:53 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| I look at it as a fun curtain raiser that also gives our leading man something more to sing. It still has no place in the context of the book and I think it would feel very different if some attempt had been made to integrate it back into the show. I do think it gives insight into the character though...we find out that Vandergelder's half-a-million dollar fortune isn't entirely through his own hard work...we find out that he lucked into a job and then married the boss' daughter, who then died. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: garyd 04:32 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - JereNYC 04:00 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| Doesn't Horace give Dolly the "penny from his pocket" in the final scene? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 04:39 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - garyd 04:32 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| He does. Dolly returns his purse in the final scene...I guess, at some point in the interim, she retrieved it from Barnaby...and he takes out the penny, puts it in the purse, and tells her to keep it. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 04:31 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - JereNYC 04:00 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| "I look at it as a fun curtain raiser that also gives our leading man something more to sing. It still has no place in the context of the book and I think it would feel very different if some attempt had been made to integrate it back into the show. I do think it gives insight into the character though...we find out that Vandergelder's half-a-million dollar fortune isn't entirely through his own hard work...we find out that he lucked into a job and then married the boss' daughter, who then died." I agree on all counts. I think the number works perfectly in its current slot in the show, and even though it's a very funny and charming song with a catchy tune, I can't even imagine it as the Act I closer. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? | |
| Posted by: CCentero 10:11 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
| In reply to: re: What's the case for Penny in My Pocket? - Michael_Portantiere 04:31 pm EST 02/08/18 | |
|
|
|
| The song produces that very sweet payoff in the end that helps make us feel that Dolly and Horace will be very happy together. Very smart addition. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.094383 seconds.