They are being very careful to promote it in London as a different take on the material. In terms of audience expectations, I doubt there was ever much of an issue at the Young Vic, but the audience there is self-selecting. The Young Vic itself is a strong brand, and they specialise in work that is a bit more challenging than the sort of thing you expect to find in the West End. I saw this production there three times over the course of the run, and don't remember seeing anyone have a strong negative reaction to it at any of those performances.
When I saw it in the West End a few weeks ago, on the other hand, there were a few walkouts at the interval, and a few people who stayed until the end but clearly *really* did not enjoy it. I think the producers are doing a reasonable job of advertising it without being deceptive here - the posters etc have a look that strongly points towards something other than the usual R&H candy-wrapping - but of course there'll still be people who pick shows by title, who haven't read the reviews.
And there are things in the production, like the very confrontational, blood-stained reprise of the title song at the end, that probably carry a lot less baggage here than they would in some midwestern cities. The production doesn't explicitly make the point that when they sing "we know we belong to the land", they're singing about *land they stole*, but the subtext is clear, and I suspect there are places in the US where some members of the audience will find that difficult to swallow; here, we get the point, but it isn't *our* history, so it isn't as personal. |
