Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: RufusRed 09:55 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| I'm of course happy that the legendary Harold Prince is getting a television piece dedicated to him, but I wished it was less like a cooking "how to" show and more of an engaging documentary that reflects the times it is referring to. The best parts are the films, photographs and recollections from his friends/colleagues, a reminder to me of how for some reason Broadway doesn't re stage original productions but instead keep churning out the reinvention of the wheel? I'll never understand it? Frank Rich spoke about Cabaret and how it, paraphrasing, "was the best production" he's ever seen. Then there's Chicago, currently running, which I was so infuriated when I first saw soon after it opened. This minimalist one set/one costume rehash/reworked Fosse choreography in which people took credit for and are making lots of $$ currently off of. I'm sure all of you on here can remember the debut stagings that were revised to way less of a result? | |
| reply to this message |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 08:20 am EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - RufusRed 09:55 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| Which few seem to have seen (?). This doc about PHANTOM features a remarkable sequence. Apparantly, during development, ALW and Cameron M felt that Mr Prince was just not getting it - he had 'lost it'. So they flew to NYC and fired Prince. THey hired Trevor Nunn. Then in December of 1985, the re-worked Les Miz opened in the West End. The reviews were even worse than when the RSC opened the show at the Barbican months before. "Oh no, Trevor has lost it!" So they fired Nunn, and had to ask Harold Prince to come back. I would love to compare Mr Prince's original PHANTOM deal, and the one he got when he was needed to come back. In the documentary, the filmmaker asks Prince about this firing. There is a pause that follows which seems endless, and one can see smoke coming out of Prince's ears almost literally. Obviously this was never supposed to have gotten out. He finally discusses it briefly, saying that after he was fired (in a restaurant in a NY hotel), he went back to the office and told Ruth Mitchell to pack up all of the PHANTOM materials - 'but don't put them in storage' As another insight - ALW and Cameron M flew to NYC together to fire Prince. On the morning of the meeting, ALW called out, unable to attend, leaving CamMack alone to do the deed. And another thought. In 1978 Harold Prince directed Puccini's THE GIRL OF THE GOLDEN WEST for Chicago Lyric Opera. The tenor's aria 'quello che tacete' contains the main theme of 'Music of The Night'. Did Prince never mention this? Legend has it that the Puccini estate quietly got a financial settlement from ALW in this regard. |
|
| Link | Puccini vs ALW |
| reply to this message | |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: ryhog 09:28 am EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' - NewtonUK 08:20 am EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| "Legend has it that the Puccini estate quietly got a financial settlement from ALW in this regard." More like a myth than a legend: the opera was in the public domain at the time. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: sirpupnyc 11:05 am EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' - ryhog 09:28 am EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| That's the one they sued over and ALW settled, isn't it? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: ryhog 12:57 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' - sirpupnyc 11:05 am EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| I don't know. I have spent most of my adult life ignoring Phantom. What I DO know is that the opera is dated 1910, that the musical is dated 1986, and that in 1986 the duration of a copyright was 70 years. So either he settled for no reason, or their was new material added to the opera at a later date. I was just going on the math so if there is more here I plead ignorant. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 05:49 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' - ryhog 12:57 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| Trying to get definitive answers is tough, or at least I'm finding it tough, but Italian copyright law is different from that of other countries, as showtunetrivia notes below. This may have changed since POTO but that doesn't matter. I'm pretty sure that at the time POTO came along, much of Puccini was still under copyright in Italy and perhaps in other countries. It may be that the Puccini estate and Ricordi (if Ricordi was also involved) would have lost if it it had come to trial, but it's said that ALW settled out of court, perhaps just wanting to avoid adverse publicity. I don't really know what happened, but the info I'm finding suggests that the Puccini estate and Ricordi might well have had at least enough of a case that ALW and his lawyers felt compelled to settle. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: fosse76 02:09 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' - ryhog 12:57 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| All work created before 1924 were in the public domain by in the 1970s. The 1976 Copyright Law overhauled copyright protections. Even if new material had been added, the "original" would be in the public domain. There is nothing in Title 17 (that I could find) that extends the length of protection due to changes in the protected work. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: ryhog 03:02 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' - fosse76 02:09 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| yes. I was just laying out every possible scenario that came to mind. In order for the copyright date to have been different than 1910, the song would have to have been written later and added to the opera (or not). Regarding UK vs US mentioned in the next post, the former has shorter duration (70 years) because Disney was not able to buy a piece of legislation in parliament the way it was in the US Congress. In any case, a song published in 1910 would be in the public domain in both countries. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 02:46 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince:I refer you all to the documentary 'Behind the Mask' - fosse76 02:09 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| But British and American coptright laws are different, as Maury Yeston found out with his PHANTOM. Laura |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Chicago/Cabaret | |
| Posted by: reed23 06:00 am EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - RufusRed 09:55 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| I was excited to see the Encores' "Chicago," which had enough elements of the original to convey a vague sense of it. I was flabbergasted when the Weisslers opened that version on Broadway with almost no changes, no additional scenic or costume elements – a black box concert. There are still people who could have restaged the original Fosse choreography, which was vastly superior in every regard to the unintellectual, random hash of moves offered by the revival. And I never understood why bare-bones-black-box with primitive minimalist lighting (compared to the blaze of glory in the original) was considered in any way a service to a piece about blinding flash and razzle-dazzle. Just for the record, the Hal Prince 1987 "Cabaret" got four Tony nominations and two Drama Desk nominations. I call it "the forgotten 'Cabaret'" – it's almost as if it never happened, with the wild sensation inspired by the Mendes production which followed not that many years later. I was always annoyed that large quantities of the Mendes direction was an intact lift from what Prince had done – which few seem to recognize. Meanwhile, the Mendes production completely contradicted the theme of the original piece, saturated in easy gas-chamber imagery and what-not, and a repulsive M.C. from the git-go, as opposed to the be-tuxed oddball gentleman tantalizing the audience to come into his world (based on a real-life individual whom Prince had seen during his service in Berlin.) The British revival cut-downs of "La Cage" and "A Little Night Music" were two of my agonizing evenings in the theatre, having seen the originals. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Chicago/Cabaret | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 08:01 am EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: Chicago/Cabaret - reed23 06:00 am EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| Re the Mendes CABARET. I was fortunate to see the original version at the Donmar Warehouse, and it was quite brilliant. Alan Cumming wasn't 'Alan Cumming' yet, so the performance was more in line with what we think of. No mistake - a lot of Mendes 'emendations' were already in place. but it was much more satisfying as a piece of theatre than the version that played for 72 years on Broadway. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: EvFoDr 06:49 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - RufusRed 09:55 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| Although we have all had the experience of longing to see the original staging of something we did not see, the consensus (although it's a very small sample) seems to be "meh". This includes Prince's recreation of his own production of Cabaret with one of the original stars in his iconic role. A Chorus Line is mentioned often as a stiff, dead, or unsuccessful mirror of its original. Personally, I really liked the revival of ACL and did not find it a museum piece. But then I didn't see the original. So another angle is how a person reacts seeing a show for the first time when it is the original re-staged (me), or how a person reacts seeing the original re-staged when they actually saw the original (I presume many who found the ACL revival lacking). I am having a hard time thinking of other revivals that were recreations of the original. In the same breath I will contradict my feeling that recreations don't work as it pertains to another Prince show, Evita. I have seen productions of Evita for the past 30 years, although I did not see the original, and most of them use the Prince staging. This includes regional, community, professional tours, and even high school productions. To me, the productions that don't use his staging just aren't as good or don't work. I include the Broadway revival, which I thought was terrible. I think, more than most shows, Prince's work is an authorship in Evita. With only a few changes, he had to take an existing work which was created for the page/record, and make it work for the stage. This challenge caused him to find ways, via the staging, to communicate information that is not in the lyrics. It's not the usual collaboration where songs and scenes are being written and re-written while the show is in rehearsals, previews, etc. What I realized by seeing other stagings is that without all the blanks filled in by the Prince staging...well, those things are just missing and the show is weaker for it. I would love nothing more than to see a recreation of the original staging. BUT it has to be done in a way to somehow make it alive. Raul Esparza tells the story that in rehearsing the tour he did they got out this big book with all the stage manager's notes and told him when to move and where. When he asked why someone said "because that's what Mandy did". Frankly I find it hard to believe someone would say something so ridiculous. But giving Esparza the benefit of the doubt, that does not work! It has to be explored more deeply than that. In a way it may be no different than when a long running show gets "tired". It still IS the original staging, but disconnected from the process of creation it becomes a machine and suffers. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 11:04 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - EvFoDr 06:49 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| "A Chorus Line is mentioned often as a stiff, dead, or unsuccessful mirror of its original. " Agreed. And yet the very recent City Center production -- with the same powers that be again recreating the original production -- was thrilling. So....go figure! |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: Snowysdad 07:16 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - EvFoDr 06:49 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| I'm coming from a very different perspective in that Evita is not one of my favorite musicals. I saw a production last year at Asolo Rep, Sarasota Florida, directed by Josh Rhodes. This production catapulted him to his getting the director assignment for Encores Grand Hotel, which from reports was brilliant. So was Evita. I always had my issues with Prince's original, the material with the chorus commenting on Eva's social position as she rose seemed not part of a unified whole. I felt it when listening to the Broadway Cast Album as well. Rhodes wove these moments into an entire tapestry, Eva's rise and fall a unified dramatic arc. I also felt that after seeing this production that Prince's was just driven from start to after Don't Cry for Me, Argentina when it finally took a moment for the audience to collect itself. If that is what you mean my energy, then yes that production had it. I rather liked a slightly less frenetic take on the work, and while I can't say that Rhodes made me fall in deep love with this musical, he certainly made me like it ways I never had before. I vote for talented directors taking their own crack at musical masterpieces. This year Asolo is doing The Music Man with someone primarily known for his dancing as Harold Hill. For the first time I didn't think the leading man was trying to channel Robert Preston (not to knock his for the ages performance), but Jeff Calhoun allows his leading man to bring his own unique talents to one of the greatest male leads in musical theater. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: EvFoDr 04:07 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - Snowysdad 07:16 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks for the post. I am certainly willing to concede that there have been effective non-Prince stagings that I haven't seen, such as Asolo. Based on what Rhodes did with Grand Hotel--which I loved--I imagine I would have liked his Evita. Both shows are high concept and highly stylized. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Last Edit: LynnB 02:19 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| Posted by: LynnB 02:13 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - RufusRed 09:55 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| For what it's worth, I agree with Rich about Cabaret. Many of the revivals of that show have been good, but none I've seen has equaled the original. On the other hand, I always expect a revival to be a new take on a show. It's impossible to recreate the original. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Last Edit: Ludlow29 11:51 am EST 12/02/18 | |
| Posted by: Ludlow29 (Ludlow29@aol.com) 11:46 am EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - RufusRed 09:55 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| The original production of CABARET remains my favorite show and production ever. I saw it many times and it never failed to dazzle me (even if some performances were better than others as it settled into its long run). The show demonstrated how musicals can entertain and illuminate at the same time. It was the motivating force that inspired me to become a musical theatre writer. I'll never forget the opening mirror image (implying this could happen to you) and a production that began glamorously and gradually became more sinister and frightening—mirroring the Weimar Republic (not the in-your-face decadence from the word-go of recent productions). And Anita Gillette remains my favorite Sally Bowles. - Michael Colby | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Last Edit: bmc 10:53 am EST 12/02/18 | |
| Posted by: bmc 10:50 am EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - RufusRed 09:55 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| Saw CABARET in '68 with an all replacement cast, and I must admit I enjoyed the Studio 54 production more(except for Sally-Anita Gillette)........ For CHICAGO, I caught the Bway production in its last month, with Reinking, Orbach, and standby Elaine Cancilla, and the following winter, saw the 3 original stars in the City of Chicago... I greatly enjoyed both performances. One thing I have liked about the Encores version, is that it TOURS. I have seen it 4 different times in Detroit and once last year at the Ambassador, where(I'm Guessing) extra dance moves were added for Tony Yazback in the "Razzle Dazzle" number. That (Except for Mr Yazbeck's performance) number(R.Dazzle) is the one that I feel falls short of the original, which I remember as being more colorfully costumed and more varied in its movement.......But for People who werent teens in the 60's or 20 somethings in the 70s , the new productions give them a chance to see these shows. The Encore Spring season gives,what, 5 or 6 perfomances of a show?........But tho the Encore CHICAGO production might not be as great as the original, it is close and better than nothing (and as I mentioned, it TOURS--providing work in NYC as well as cross country) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 12:52 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - bmc 10:50 am EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| I don't think any of us in the theatre-loving community would want a requirement that all revivals exactly re-create what was done in the original. That puts the material in a straitjacket, reducing the medium to the status of museum pieces, and stifles creativity. That said, the stronger an original work is, the more readily it can adapt to new interpretations. CABARET is the classic here, with significant differences in the original, the movie, and the Mendes versions--even Prince's 1987 revival differed from the first. I felt very odd watching the touring company of the last revival of A CHORUS LINE. Part of me was glad my kids got to see so much of what made the original show so great. But part of me was longing for a different take on the material. And another part of me was proud when my youngest, raised on cast albums, old video clips of shows, and about to go to college to major in theatre studies, made the exact same observation I had been thinking. Laura |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 01:28 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - showtunetrivia 12:52 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| I too have been longing for a new take on A CHORUS LINE for, at least, 20 years. But I'm not convinced it's ever going to happen in any of our lifetimes. I would think that a new staging of ACL, in particular, would be the calling card of any exciting new director/choreographer who wanted to make a splash and show off what he/she can do. There are just too many people with direct connections back to Bennett who make a living recreating the original staging over and over again. It's not difficult for any theatre at any level to find someone with access to the ACL bible to come in and stage your production. And, I imagine those same choreographers who might otherwise chomp at the bit to do their own ACL might be intimidated by the brilliance of the original and the fact that that staging has never gone away and is so fresh in the minds of so many. Even the most dazzling work might be seen to be inferior. So, I think we're stuck with A CHORUS LINE as a museum piece...there just doesn't seem to be the will in any quarter to do anything new with it. You know what I'd also be interested in? A new take on the idea. A CHORUS LINE is largely about the life of chorus gypsies in the late 60's and early-mid 70's when the dancers who participated in the original recording sessions were active. I'd love to see a new team investigate what life is like for chorus gypsies in the 21st Century and build a show around those ideas and compare and contrast with the original show. Some it is probably very similar, but some is also likely very different. For example, where a couple of the dancers bring up THE RED SHOES as a particular inspiration in A CHORUS LINE, I imagine that more than one dancer in a new show would bring up A CHORUS LINE itself as an inspiration. It would also be interesting to see a more diverse cast of characters...ACL was probably at the forefront of diversity in musicals at the time, but a show with this many characters that features one black character, one Asian character, and only 2 gay characters seems...well...diversity-lite, I guess. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 02:51 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - JereNYC 01:28 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| In talking about the somewhat lack of diversity in A CHORUS LINE, I forgot to mention the two Latinx characters. My apologies. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 02:44 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - JereNYC 01:28 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
|
|
|
| I'd buy a ticket. Great idea. Laura, grumpy about dentistry and ready to listen to LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: BigM 03:12 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - showtunetrivia 12:52 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| As a former director, I have to chime in on this. Theater is an art, and art depends on spontaneous creation. Every new production of a show depends on the talents and impulses of a new group of artists. If you try to duplicate the original production over and over, what you end up with will be stale and regimented. When Bertolt Brecht was alive, his productions at his German theater, the Berliner Ensemble, were praised as breathtaking and innovative. After he died, while the theater was still run by members of his family, they duplicated his productions and the theater was widely scorned as a lifeless museum. You can see this with Hal Prince himself; his 1987 revival of Cabaret, featuring one of the original actors, was widely panned, and thought to lack the excitement of the original - even though it featured not only that actor but the same director and the same designs. In general, I've found that musicals are especially dependent on the chemistry of the original artists, and are often customized to those artists' particular skills. New productions must be tailored to a whole new team of people. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 10:03 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - BigM 03:12 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| Variety summarized the New York critical to Prince's 1987 revival thus: five enthusiastic, seven favorable, two mixed, and five unfavorable. And the original won awards and had a long run but it got very mixed reviews. Variety did not summarize nearly as reviews of the original, but it ranked those as four favorable and two unfavorable. I've just re-read a bunch of the original reviews, and it was certainly not universally hailed, not even close. The original West Side Story is often remembered as having gotten somewhat mixed notices, but I'd say that it got a much more favorable critical response than the original Cabaret. I do think that the 1987 production was problematic in various ways, including rewrites that didn't work all that, but then I don't think the Mendes-Marshall version works all that well. I'm not sure that I would have felt the original worked all that well, even as I'm sure I would have admired many aspects of it. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Let's try that again | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 12:22 am EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - AlanScott 10:03 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| I hope that I don't leave out words that should be there this time. :( Variety summarized the New York critical response to Prince's 1987 revival thus: five enthusiastic, seven favorable, two mixed, and five unfavorable. And the original won awards and had a long run but it got very mixed reviews. Variety did not classify nearly as many reviews of the original, but it ranked those it did cover as four favorable and two unfavorable. I've just re-read a bunch of the original reviews, and it was certainly not universally hailed, not even close. The original West Side Story is often remembered as having gotten somewhat mixed notices, but I'd say that it got a much more favorable critical response than the original Cabaret. I do think that the 1987 production was problematic in various ways, including rewrites that didn't work all that well, but then I don't think the Mendes-Marshall version works all that well. I'm not sure that I would have felt the original worked all that well, even as I'm sure I would have admired many aspects of it. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: peter3053 03:38 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - BigM 03:12 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| While it's absolutely true that the text of a show should be open to re-invention, it is also true that it's been hard to find better productions of Hal Prince shows than his original direction. Not that anyone can re-invent the spark that made those productions work simply by reproducing staging, but sometimes the re-imaginings seem to miss the way he blended the theatricality with the idea in a very tightly focused way, a way that brought an engaging tension to the evening. Has there ever been a better version of Follies than his? A Little Night Music? Sweeney Todd? Evita? Phantom of the Opera? Could there ever be? On a related point, remember the splendid recreation of the original Oklahoma by the North Carolina (I think) students and staff, broadcast on TV? We saw not a museum piece but a timeless one, still alive with the joy of fresh collaboration circa 1943. Everything is possible! |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions | |
| Posted by: fosse76 02:18 pm EST 12/03/18 | |
| In reply to: re: Harold Prince: The Director's Life and the case for original productions - peter3053 03:38 pm EST 12/02/18 | |
|
|
|
| "In a related point, remember the splendid recreation of the original Oklahoma by the North Carolina (I think) students and staff, broadcast on TV? We saw not a museum piece but a timeless one, still alive with the joy of fresh collaboration circa 1943." Actually, I thought it looked very much like the college production that it was. But since not even my parents were alive at the time of the original, I wouldn't know how the original looked anyway. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.069892 seconds.