Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: Let's say Mrs. Paroo was 16 when Marian was born | |
| Posted by: Ann 04:26 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: Let's say Mrs. Paroo was 16 when Marian was born - aleck 04:12 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| We all know who Winthrop's mother really is. | |
| reply to this message |
| The real scandals are Mrs. Paroo and that the Shinns hired a surrogate | |
| Last Edit: AlanScott 04:53 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 04:52 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: re: Let's say Mrs. Paroo was 16 when Marian was born - Ann 04:26 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| Decades ago I used to joke about that, but it really makes no sense (and I know you're just joking, or at least I think you are). Harold implies that Marian is around 26. The published script gives her no age, but it does say that Mrs. Paroo is 40, and that Winthrop is 10. If Marian is around 26, then Mrs. Paroo was around 14 when Marian was born. Pert Kelton was 50 when the original production opened, and of course several years older when the movie was shot, and she certainly reads her age. Eddie Hodges was 10 when the original production opened, but Ronnie Howard was probably 7 when the movie was being shot. But we were supposed to suspend disbelief, and it's clear from the ages in the script that Willson surely never intended to suggest that Marian was really Winthrop's mother. Besides, if that was the case, everyone in town would know it, and the gossipy ladies would find a way to let Harold know it. And no one ever talks about the Shinns. Eulalie Mackecknie Shinn is 50 (or so the script says) and she has one daughter of 16 and another who is younger. Helen Raymond was 79 (!) when the original production opened, if I can trust the date of birth for her that's online, and yet audiences were supposed to believe she had a daughter of 16 and another who was younger. And Hermione Gingold was 62 or so when the movie was being made, but people don't question how Eulalie could have such young daughters. Maybe she and the Mayor hired a surrogate. :) |
|
| reply to this message |
| And, of course, Barbara Cook was 30 | |
| Posted by: aleck 05:32 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: The real scandals are Mrs. Paroo and that the Shinns hired a surrogate - AlanScott 04:52 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| Old. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: The real scandals are Mrs. Paroo and that the Shinns hired a surrogate | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 05:22 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: The real scandals are Mrs. Paroo and that the Shinns hired a surrogate - AlanScott 04:52 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| I find this a really interesting discussion. Leaving aside for the moment whatever ages of the characters are or aren't specified in the script, I think it would all work out fine and be fully credible if Marian was around 26, Winthrop was around 10, and their mother was around 46. I suppose Marian could even be a couple of years younger than 25 and still be considered something of an "old maid," as people tended to get married very young in those days, but let's make her 26 just to be safe :-) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Let's say Mrs. Paroo was 16 when Marian was born | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 04:42 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: re: Let's say Mrs. Paroo was 16 when Marian was born - Ann 04:26 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| We all know who Winthrop's mother really is. Eulalie, yes? ;-) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Will Daniel Fish be directing? | |
| Posted by: aleck 04:37 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: re: Let's say Mrs. Paroo was 16 when Marian was born - Ann 04:26 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| Yeah! Let's get an idea of what was REALLY going on in River City. Do you think that Marian had been a girl who had been "in trouble." Is that what Professor Hill was REALLY implying when he claimed that there was trouble right there in River City? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Will Daniel Fish be directing? | |
| Last Edit: jo 12:17 am EDT 09/06/19 | |
| Posted by: jo 12:15 am EDT 09/06/19 | |
| In reply to: Will Daniel Fish be directing? - aleck 04:37 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| Revisiting the original announcement of the revival of TheMusicMan, via HollywoodReporter, provides some interesting insights on how this production is going -- "These are great American works of art that deserve to be put on stage with as much love as you can give them," Rudin told The Hollywood Reporter. "What I learned on Dolly was that there is an enormous hunger for them from the theatergoing audience. But the hunger I think is to see these Golden Age musicals done in a Golden Age way." "When you take on one of the 10 or so great, beloved titles, you're trying to do the urtext version of it," he continued. "That's what I think we did with Dolly and what we're going to do here. We're going to do it in a way that no one has ever seen it before. It's going to be big and beautiful and super-luxe and gorgeous and incredibly romantic, and very much in the world of why the show has lasted for 60 years." "When we did Dolly, my desire was to put 1964 onstage," said Rudin. "That's what we want to do here. We want basically to put onstage an experience that is our version of what we believe people felt when they walked in to the Majestic to see The Music Man in 1957, which is that blow-the-roof-off-the-theater, blow-the-doors-off-their-hinges musical-theater hysteria that only a handful of shows have ever generated. That's the job." The production plans for the revival did revolve around Scott Rudin's passion project objectives and Hugh Jackman's total interest in it. They were discussing the project for a number of years ( see above) before the final agreement ( especially on Hugh doing a full year's run). |
|
| Link | https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hugh-jackman-lead-broadway-revival-music-man-1194075 |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Will Daniel Fish be directing? | |
| Posted by: mikem 11:52 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: Will Daniel Fish be directing? - aleck 04:37 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| The idea of Daniel Fish directing this production made me actually laugh out loud, so thank you, aleck, for that! I wonder what Fish's version of Hello, Dolly! with Bette Midler would have been like... |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Last Edit: stevemr 11:11 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| Posted by: stevemr 11:10 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: Will Daniel Fish be directing? - aleck 04:37 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Will Daniel Fish be directing? | |
| Posted by: garyd 05:14 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
| In reply to: Will Daniel Fish be directing? - aleck 04:37 pm EDT 09/05/19 | |
|
|
|
| "Is that what Professor Hill was REALLY implying when he claimed that there was trouble right there in River City?" No, but it may be what he meant about "sadder but wiser". |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.025160 seconds.