Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: My take on INTO THE WOODS | |
| Posted by: portenopete 09:19 am EST 11/18/22 | |
| In reply to: re: My take on INTO THE WOODS - Revned 01:11 am EST 11/18/22 | |
|
|
|
| I also really enjoyed reading your thoughts, probably because I feel a kinship with the sentiment you expressed about the coarsening of a show that is chock-a-block with Sondheim's trademark insight and wit and that I think is best served by a subtler approach. One of the best things about Robert Westenberg's original Cinderella Prince was his extreme humourlessness. I suppose Chuck Wagner took more or less the same approach, but he was possessed of genial, California surfer looks, whereas there was something about Westenberg's physiognomy- those broad, bony planes on his face and his deep-set eyes- that gave him a seriousness that seemed effortless. I saw him as George Seurat, as well as in both the live and PBS versions of Into the Woods- and I suspect that was his general style in most things he did. Gavin Creel- lovely though his voice may be- has always had a lightness about him that is about as far from Westenberg's stolid presence as I can imagine. As his fame and the audience adoration of him have grown over the years, it seems whenever I see him he is spending at least half of his performance slyly glancing out at the audience and grinning, the way a child in a school play would search out his parents and give them a little wave. (Andy Karl is a spectacular buffoon and in the right role- particularly Bruce Granit in On the Twentieth Century- he has been absolutely perfect.) |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: My take on INTO THE WOODS | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 02:34 pm EST 11/21/22 | |
| In reply to: re: My take on INTO THE WOODS - portenopete 09:19 am EST 11/18/22 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks for remembering Andy Karl in ''On the 20th Century.'' He should've won the Tony for that (and ''Groundhog Day,'' as far as I'm concerned). | |
| reply to this message |
| Sophistication? What's that? | |
| Posted by: peter3053 04:00 pm EST 11/19/22 | |
| In reply to: re: My take on INTO THE WOODS - portenopete 09:19 am EST 11/18/22 | |
|
|
|
| We live in an age of extremes, it seems, and that tips over into performance, often. The original production was elegant, and with sophisticated theater magic; and exquisite costume design. It was up against Phantom, which was elegant, and with sophisticated theater magic, and exquisite costume design. In a time when people dressed to go to the theater, and went, prepared to listen, and absorb thoughtfully. HELL, NOW, I LOVE IT - I'VE GOT TO STAND UP, EVEN MID-SONG, AND SCREAM MY LOOOOOOVVVVVE!!!! WHOOO!!!! SHE HELD A LONG NOTE - WOW! HE PULLED A FACE!!!!!!!! Ah well, every day a little death. (I shudder to think what may be on stage in the Sweeney Todd revival - blood? You want blood????!!!!) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Sophistication? What's that? | |
| Posted by: portenopete 07:18 pm EST 11/19/22 | |
| In reply to: Sophistication? What's that? - peter3053 04:00 pm EST 11/19/22 | |
|
|
|
| Well, there's London. That's better. Showing signs of allcapsitis, too, but generally there's a grown-up vibe at the theatre. And the odd show- The Band's Visit comes to mind- elicited a hushed and reverential reaction when I saw it, enough that I didn't imagine Ethel Barrymore spinning in her grave. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.021688 seconds.