Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: toros 12:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| A few words about Merrily at NYTW. I saw the show on Wednesday, November 23. It's a very good production, but not quite great, at this point. The leads are strong, and have genuine camaraderie as actors. They don't look quite right as friends, though. Groff is a standout, and has never been better, which is high praise. The secondary leads are also very good. The orchestrations are excellent. The production is a bit of an eye-sore, and the lighting has a long way to go. More concerned about the set. And while the entire ensemble is strong (with one notable exception), the staging of the transitions is consistently awkward. The first scene, at the movie premiere party, is over-the-top and not entirely convincing. Everyone behaves appallingly to an almost absurd extreme. That said, it certainly sets up a contrast with the later scenes, each of which gets better and stronger and richer and clearer as the show goes on. I saw the original production 14 times in previews, and am happy to answer any specific questions, but I'm sure there will be ample, and more detailed reactions posted here soon. The show runs 2:45 including intermission. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW--thinking about that opening scene | |
| Posted by: Showtunegal 07:05 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 12:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I saw the Menier production (i.e. this production, but in London) and the reviews were the best ever for a Sondheim production. Yet during the first number I thought, "Oh my god, this is so over the top, I'm going to hate it. Is this a British thing where they have to telegraph everything so loudly?" But then, as the poster above points out, it got stronger and stronger. I decided that a decision was made to make the opening number very "big" so that everything could get across to the audience--then they could follow the rest of the show. As an aside, when I saw Hamilton in London, the actors were pronouncing the opening number so carefully I, again, thought "oh no, have they dumbed this down for the UK?" But the show really picked up. I also thought then they were just being careful for it to be understood--and of course, the actors were British so while their accents were good, they didn't really have the casual street sound of the New York cast. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW--thinking about that opening scene | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 10:03 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 10:00 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW--thinking about that opening scene - Showtunegal 07:05 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Except Hamilton is written to slowly bring the audience in with a slower, more old-school pace and type of hip-hop/rap... and then it picks up the pace after letting the audience get accustomed to the kind of music, kind of storytelling, and speed... Merrily was not written to start over the top and broad and grating. This revised script has become enough of a tricky soap opera as it is... it doesn't need this, and I'd say it can't bear the weight of this kind of amateur directorial decision. It also doesn't help that the show now starts with a neutered version of the once dynamic, exciting and engrossing title number, and then goes into a lame and unexciting talky song of annoying people being shallow but also musically and lyrically meh. Say what you will about the strength or dramatic worth of "Rich & Happy", at least I was having a good time watching the show that that song was in when it was happening. To couple that new aspect of the first 10 minutes of the show with performing the scene over the top and led by an aggresively grating version of Mary is not help anything, despite what Maria Friedman seems to think. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Last Edit: Chromolume 05:58 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 05:57 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 12:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| That unfortunate set has been around since the Menier original. They dragged it to the Huntington in Boston in 2017 also, where it just stood there like the big negative-space white wall that it is. (A terrific mostly local cast in Boston, though - even though I was not a fan of Umbers, who flew overseas with the terrific Humbley.) The continued disfiguring of the Overture (I assume it's the same cut as in London and Boston) is horrific. I'm not a great fan of the compromised version redone for the 1994 revised edition (but they had to get "Rich And Happy" out of there, and there was no tuba for "Good Thing Going" anymore - it's a piano lead now - so I get it), but the further cut made in this production (before they even get to "Good Thing Going") is simply cruel punishment. Makes me wish they would have just cut the whole thing and call it a day. That said - how is the actress playing Meg (Talia Robinson)? She's one of my former students (and was just with the company of Dear Evan Hansen as well). Wishing I could get to see her in this. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: toros 06:02 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - Chromolume 05:57 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I miss the Overture! Especially since the new one one starts out so strong at NYTW, and then virtually stops. I realize, with the score revisions, it needed to be rewritten so as not to include "Rich and Happy," but did it have to be mercilessly truncated? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 11:33 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 11:21 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 06:02 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Merrily, the original, had one of the best overtures ever created for a musical... and probably the best one since overtures largely went out of style a decade or so prior... To mess with it is insane, and it's never been worth it. And it didn't *need* to cut the Rich & Happy part... Follies didn't cut the "all things bright and beautiful" or "old piano roll" sections. An overture need not be exclusively a preview of tunes to come. Also, pointless to say, but I also wish they'd put back Rich & Happy... That Frank is a meh song and terrible replacement for R&H. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 08:14 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - Chazwaza 11:21 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| But the Follies overture that includes "That Old Piano Roll" and "Can That Boy Fox Trot!" (which you didn't mention) isn't really an overture in the traditional sense, even though it is sometimes called one. It accompanies stage action. It's really incidental music. There is often applause during it. People don’t listen to it in the way that they (at least sometimes) listen to overtures. And the prologue that uses "All Things Bright and Beautiful" similarly accompanies stage action. It’s a mix of dance music and incidental music. "That Old Piano Roll" and "All Things Bright and Beautiful" never made rehearsals, never came close to making rehearsals. They weren't kept in after they were cut. The melodies were used in sequences for which the music was devised long after they were cut. Using cut songs in dance music and underscoring is not all that uncommon. Composers have given cut songs to the dance and incidental music arrangers so that there is something new sometimes in such sequences. Sondheim (he also did it in Forum and Night Music) and Cy Coleman are among the composers who have done this. It’s not unheard of although rare for true overtures to retain songs that were during a tryout. Show Boat and The Unsinkable Molly Brown are two examples, but although I think “Rich and Happy” should not have been cut from Merrily (certainly not if the replacement is the lame “That Frank”), once it was cut, it would have been very odd for it to stay in the overture given the prominence it had there. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Last Edit: Chromolume 06:14 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 06:13 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 06:02 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Yup. And I find that, even in the 1994 version, Tunick's awesomely big voicing of the brass and saxes on the "and if I wanted too much / was it such a mistake at the time" passage (in the overture) is a huge huge thrill. But no one hears that marvelous writing in this version. (One detail in that line - on the 2nd syllable of what would be the word "mistake," Tunick takes a dissonance Sondheim only briefly hints at in the piano part for the sung version of "Good Thing Going," and makes it much more prominent - creating this aching altered jazz chord in the brass/saxes. Gives me wonderful chills every time I hear it.) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: Circlevet 05:16 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 12:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I saw this production when the video played in theaters and found it wanting on almost every level---and having seen many productions of it including the original---I love Merrily. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: lowwriter 08:59 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - Circlevet 05:16 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| The video of the London Merrily was terrible. I hope this version is miles better. I know Sondheim liked Friedman’s version but I frankly would have preferred seeing Doyle’s version which he did in Ohio. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 05:09 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - lowwriter 08:59 am EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Even I, who can't stand Doyle generally, would have preferred to see that as his casting concept seems to me a better idea than the standard one seen in the revision of people in the middle of the age range. Having said that, I didn't hate the London version as seen onscreen. I didn't love it, but I didn't hate it. And I liked the Charley a good deal. Perhaps more than anyone since Lonny Price, who still remains the standard as far as I'm concerned. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 06:42 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - AlanScott 05:09 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I agree the Charly in that production was very good. Also agree that Price remains the standard and the best that there's been in bringing that role to life. But I am genuinely surprised to find that you didn't hate that production. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 11:22 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - Circlevet 05:16 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| "wanting" is a very generous way to put it. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| A question about Act II | |
| Posted by: dbg 04:35 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 12:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| When I saw Merrily at the Menier, Act II opened with a big and very enjoyable production number from Musical Husbands. It was set on a ship and reminded me of something from Anything Goes and seemed to include the entire cast. I later saw the video of the show as it was when it moved to the Harold Pinter theatre. The production number from Musical Husbands was gone and replaced by a rather dark scene with, as I recall, three dancers/singers in it. What opens Act II in the current version? A production I saw in Beverly Hills in 2016 starring Aaron Lazar and Wayne Brady and directed by Michael Arden was outstanding but opened Act II with nothing much related to Musical Husbands. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: A question about Act II (spoilers) | |
| Posted by: toros 05:53 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: A question about Act II - dbg 04:35 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Act II opens with Gussie's big, brash version of "Good Thing Going" from "Musical Husbands." Cleverly, it starts with her coming down the stairs from Frank's bedroom ) and the lyrics to the verse suggest she's talking about Frank) before it turns into the spashy number, which is very well performed. This was how it was done at the Huntington a few years back | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: A question about Act II (spoilers) | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 06:05 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: A question about Act II (spoilers) - toros 05:53 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| But yes, there have been a few different versions of that number - Encores used a longer ending, for instance, instead of the crossfade after "it's not that nothing went wrong" as it is in the score. I seem to think that they went by the score version in Boston, but I could be misremembering. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: A question about Act II | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 04:39 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: A question about Act II - dbg 04:35 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I think cutting that number for the West End was a smart move. The song and dance made a rather poor case for Musical Hisbands being anything other than a thoroughly generic B musical. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: portenopete 03:54 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 12:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Interesting. I saw it at the Menier and also found the opening scene grating (one performance particularly so). The three leads- Mark Umbers, Damian Humbly and Jenna Rodgers- were sublime and I found it deeply moving. The Menier designs can often be ghastly and especially when they transfer to a traditionally-sized and -shaped house. (Funny Girl is the worst I've seen; the Daniel Evans SITPWG the best). I imagine seeing iconic people like Radcliffe and Groff will give it an energy that the London cast didn't have (mercifully IMO). | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 11:18 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - portenopete 03:54 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I generally love Jenna Russell (not Rodgers), who played Mary in that production... she was amazing in Sunday In the Park... but I'm not sure I've seen anything more grating in a top tier musical production than the opening scene of that production with her performance as Mary. It got less horrifically grating and broad... but my god... |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: portenopete 11:54 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - Chazwaza 11:18 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I KNEW as I was writing it that I had her name wrong but it was apparently too much trouble to Google. It was actually Jenna Russell that bugged me but I certainly find Mary a lot at the beginning of the play. Wish I'd seen her in SITPWG. I saw Anna-Jane Casey as Dot, who I think only did the Menier run. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 04:25 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - portenopete 11:54 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Mary is made much more grating in that scene in the revision than she was originally. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 03:55 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 03:54 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - portenopete 11:54 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I had a feeling you were. ;) As originally written, and as playing by Ann Morrison, she wasn't at all that kind of grating or broad, and not even what I'd call "a lot"... in fact not only did I like Mary in the scene, but I related to her and found her an acerbic, funny, maybe bitchy in a way but right, voice of reason in the scene... which grounded the "buying your own hype" feel of the others in the original scene/song. She was bitter and over-it, but not in a grating way, not in a way that made us hate the only reasonable person with perspective in the beginning of the show. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: toros 08:58 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - Chazwaza 03:54 am EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Agreed. Mary was bitter and frustrated in the original production, but like you, I felt for her. Now, apparently, the point is that Frank has completely destroyed Mary's life, and she is a horror-show. And Gussie is also behaving in a way that goes beyond jealousy into something almost psychopathic. Almost the entire scene at NYTW is heightened melodrama, and it takes the production a few scenes to fully recover from it. But it does. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: Gator 12:35 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 12:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks for the update. Trying to make tight travel connections after the Sunday matinee. Given the usual 2;10 start times for 2:00 matinees (!!), do you think I’ll be on the street at 4:45-4:50, or closer to 5? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW | |
| Posted by: toros 12:43 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - Gator 12:35 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I checked my watch after the (extended) curtain calls, and it was exactly 9:47. Have fun! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: peter3053 02:24 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Merrily We Roll Along November 23 NYTW - toros 12:43 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| ... in 14 previews, would you say it got better and stronger and deeper and clearer, or did you find yourself thinking and sweating and waking and crying? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: toros 02:52 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: When you saw the original... - peter3053 02:24 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Ha! Assuming you're serious, it definiately got better. It was crazy sloppy for over a week, and then started to shape up, and by opening night, it was potent. I still prefer almost everything about the original production. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: jjhbb340 06:10 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - toros 02:52 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I'm with you-NO other production has ever touched it. The cast may have been only kids,but they were so sincere and true-every minute was heartfelt and ultimately heart breaking. Thank God for the cast album! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: bobjohnny 03:48 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - toros 02:52 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I saw the original Broadway production of Merrily the week it opened. It was dreadful. Like a high school production of "Company." Go back and read the Sunday NYT profile of the show that featured a long interview with Hal Prince. It was published the week the show opened on Broadway. You can tell from that interview Prince knew he had a major major dud on his hands. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 11:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - bobjohnny 03:48 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I am one who is vocal about how much better the original version, cast and production were than what's come since. And whether one thinks it was good, great or a mess, it was nowhere near as bad or as messy as you're describing. Perhaps you can at least accept that the original still stands, for some of us, as untouched by future productions simply because none of the rewrites have improved it (I'd say confidently they've almost all made it worse, as a script, a score and a musical as a while) and that for all its many many issues, no staging or cast since has been better. That doesn't mean the original production was flawless or that others haven't had good things... but I can say I've seen many productions (of the revised version), and i would pick the Prince staging/production, the bad and the good, over the ones I've seen since (the good and the bad). |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Last Edit: toros 09:13 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| Posted by: toros 09:06 am EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - Chazwaza 11:00 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I agree completely about the original production being the best. I've enjoyed many productions since, but none as much. I'm always reminded, and was again at NYTW, that the show wasn't just cast with kids, it was written for kids. That was the conception. So many of the lyrics, and all of the transitions sound like kids - Frank's high school classmates, who, as originally conceived, follow him from the graduation ceremony, watching and commenting on his life. It worked beautifully. Since the graduation has been eliminated, but the transitions remain, I always wonder who these people are, and why they are following Frank around, admonishing him. Of late, they appear before the movie premiere party, so they're not his recent, Hollywood friends Some productions find a way of integrating them better than others, but they never make much sense to me. And at NYTW, especially in the first act, they seem completely out of place. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 12:20 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - toros 09:06 am EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| There's also a very strange gaffe in the revised version, with Frank Jr appearing in the final transition, which means it's happening before he was even conceived(in fact, before Frank and Beth even met) if the timeline means anything at all. I've never understood that. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 03:41 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - Chromolume 12:20 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Hey, I’m the one mashing up Broadway and science fiction here! Laura in LA |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 10:34 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - bobjohnny 03:48 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Do you think that those of us who loved the production — as toros did, as I did, as jjhbb340 did — haven't read that piece? And do you think if we read it again that we would change our minds? I don't get the point of that suggestion. I know what was said in the piece. I've read it a number of times over the years, starting on the Saturday night when that edition of the Sunday Times appeared on the newsstands. I read it when I came back from second-acting Merrily. I had seen it four times complete and I was to see it two more times complete, plus one more second act. I don't think any production since then has even come close to that production. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it as some of us did. I promise you it's more than just us three who loved it. Not that it matters how many people loved it. Even if it were just one person, that person has the right to have that opinion. I don't mind you stating your opinion, but even if Hal Prince feared it was a dud, should that change someone else's higher opinion of his work? It feels like you're trying to make us change our opinion. I don't want to try to make you change yours. You can be wrong as much as you want. :) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: toros 05:57 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - bobjohnny 03:48 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I'm sure you can imagine how many times over the years I have heard from those who share your opinion. Hal also thought he had a hit on his hands with "A Doll's Life." I remain unswerved in my appraisal. Happy holidays! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Last Edit: Dale 05:51 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| Posted by: Dale 05:50 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - bobjohnny 03:48 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| I saw it early on when a different actor was Franklin Shepard. Wild how that fall into the "swimming pool" stopped the show DEAD! I know someone in that cast and as a budding teenager she wasn't fond of wearing all white on stage. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: toros 05:59 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - Dale 05:50 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Wait till you see what happens at NYTW! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: When you saw the original... | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 05:57 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - Dale 05:50 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| (imagining horrible mashup of MERRILY and SUNSET BLVD…) Laura, too tired to conjure parody lyrics today |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: "Imagining horrible mashup of MERRILY and SUNSET BLVD" | |
| Posted by: Dale 06:37 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
| In reply to: re: When you saw the original... - showtunetrivia 05:57 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| Both have a swimming pool... maybe a revival of "Wish You Were Here"??? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Unaware of the caliber of disaster... | |
| Posted by: peter3053 02:34 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: "Imagining horrible mashup of MERRILY and SUNSET BLVD" - Dale 06:37 pm EST 11/25/22 | |
|
|
|
| As Harold Hill once (almost) said, "You are unaware of the caliber of disaster indicated by the presence of a POOL in your MUSICAL.... Well, ya got trouble, My friend..." |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 05:12 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... - peter3053 02:34 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Seems like all this pool talk provides a good excuse for me to link this interview with me about Merrily. | |
| Link | Merrily history interview with yours truly |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 10:03 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... - AlanScott 05:12 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks, Alan, for reposting that. I never saw it before. What a wonderful interview. ''Isn't it nice to know a lot?'' And you certainly do! ;) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... | |
| Posted by: Ann 06:01 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... - AlanScott 05:12 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| That was amazing, Alan. I don't remember reading it before, though it's possible I did. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Alan’s wonderful article, two above from here | |
| Posted by: lordofspeech 09:09 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... - Ann 06:01 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| So many times, things get lost in the shuffle. This one is so worth reading. Thanks thanks thanks! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 06:16 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... - Ann 06:01 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Thank you so much, Ann. I definitely posted that link here when the transcript was posted, but it's hard to believe how long ago that was already, isn't it? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... | |
| Posted by: Ann 07:01 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Unaware of the caliber of disaster... - AlanScott 06:16 pm EST 11/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Yes, after ten years of COVID :) Which i finally got this week, after all this time. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.447458 seconds.