Threaded Order Chronological Order
| CAMELOT This Afternoon | |
| Posted by: den 09:22 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
|
|
|
| On the whole, I liked the production very much. I found I didn’t mind the modern dialogue so much as the abundance of dialogue, and I don’t know if that’s Sorkin’s fault or Lerner’s. It seems to be a very talky show with sometimes significant gaps between songs. I was disappointed that this production truncated some of the songs, most notably How To Handle a Woman and What Do The Simple Folk Do, both of which, I’ve read, had been on the chopping block. I’m glad they survived at all, but I would have preferred to hear them all the way through. The scene between Arthur and Morgan Le Fey in act 2 goes on forever and causes the show to hit a wall at a critical point. That really could have been edited. Aside from the beautiful music that remains, the best reason to see the show is Andrew Burnap, who is a terrific Arthur. His youth effectively conveys the character’s idealism, and with every change Arthur undergoes during the course of the show, Burnap is completely believable. Phillipa Soo is very good as well; her performance isn’t as deep as Burnap’s but that could be a function of the character, and her voice is beautiful. The understudy for Lancelot, Matias de La Flor, gives a creditable performance. He doesn’t seem to have quite the voice to put over Lancelot’s songs as I had hoped, but I’m not sure Jordan Danica (based on his work in MFL) does either; I guess I was expecting the more robust sound that Robert Goulet provides on the OBC recording. Several folks in a previous thread mentioned sound issues, but I thought the sound was fine, perhaps slightly under amplified (a good thing) but always audible. (I was sitting towards the back of the orchestra, center.) The production design is simple and elegant. I don’t know if Sorkin’s book adds anything essential to Camelot, but Sorkin doesn’t destroy it either. I can see that to some purists, the new book may be a source of irritation, but I don’t think it’s an outrage. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS | |
| Last Edit: toros 11:16 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
| Posted by: toros 11:11 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: CAMELOT This Afternoon - den 09:22 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
|
|
|
| I enjoyed this revival of Camelot very much. Despite the size of the stage (and I admired the design), it's an intimate show. The two opening songs are small and charming, not big and bombastic. They set the tone for the entire production. The sound design is excellent, and I appreciated that the music wasn't blasted. This show doesn't need that. The relationship between the three leads has been altered, with some success. The challenges of an arranged marriage are foregrounded, and since Arthur sees Guinevere as a "business partner," she looks elsewhere for "satisfaction," although she's in love with the King (this could have been clearer, rather than just revealed at the end). Giving her song, "I Loved You Once In Silence," to Lancelot assists this shift - she never says she loves Lancelot it this revival. The T. H. White book, on which the original production is based, is filled with playful anachronisms, so Sorkin's updates seemed appropriate, although his need to underline every political parallel felt patronizing. And I did not miss the magic. The second act of "Camelot" always went off in various directions without a clear dramatic build, and while a lot has been changed, the problems persist, and I agree that the Morgan Le Fay sequence disappoints. After its powerful opening image, the show starts subtly, moves at a deliberate pace, and ends quietly. This flies in the face of the size and grandeur that many audiences expect in a show about a legendary kingdom, but Camelot is a unique musical, and has its own distinct charms, most of which are on display in this production. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS | |
| Posted by: Delvino 01:28 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS - toros 11:11 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| If Guinevere's love for Arthur isn't at least subtexturally apparent -- an evolving emotional dynamic -- there is no triangle. If this isn't a story about a woman who loves two men, albeit differently and inappropriately, it loses its structural cohesiveness in human terms. The libretto isn't solely about the round table's origin story, it's this knowable trio and how they grapple with unbidden attraction. So many friends have shared that the Arthur-Guinevere relationship here feels entirely cerebral, which -- hate to be so bluntly shallow -- seems odd with the casting of Arthur, who at the very least commands as a strong traditional leading man. No, erotic attraction isn't determined by externals (alone). Yet the nuance here was always loving two people simultaneously. Even the bloated film nailed that. To those who have seen the production: is this playing as a cleaner piece of storytelling? That an arranged marriage hits a sociopolitical snag because one half falls for a third party? And the resulting dalliance undercuts the credibility of the kingdom's moral integrity? Is that as satisfying as the same result from a more complex romantic entanglement? I guess I've always appreciated the way the story -- unwieldy as it has been -- can manage to fold in both angles. Especially in a nearly 3 hour running time. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS | |
| Posted by: Revned 10:45 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS - Delvino 01:28 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| I agree that in order for the story to work, the audience has to feel Guenevere’s love for both men, and that’s what’s lacking in this version. Sorkin’s script and the acting choices Soo is making (or has been directed to make by Sher) have Guenevere most often expressing brittle irritation and frustration in her scenes with both of them—beginning with the jokey, catty comments she keeps inserting between lines of the title song, undercutting its charm and magic. The beauty of that scene is that she and Arthur are falling in love by the end of it, and we don’t feel that here. I also think the seeds of her love for Lancelot need to be growing even before she sees him revive his fallen opponent (Arthur in this version); the mutual antagonism of Guenevere and Lance’s earlier scenes together should have a Beatrice and Benedick kind of spark; they’re baiting each other to avoid expressing the dangerous feelings they’re both already starting to experience. Here it just feels like they despise each other. Perhaps there’s more chemistry when Donica is on (I saw De la Flor) but the problem seems to be rooted in Sorkin’s dialogue and the way the scenes have been blocked and the choices Soo is playing. There are only a few brief moments when the two speak to each other alone, and even when Lance is expressing love Guenevere seems always to be resisting or pushing him away. Are we meant to believe that he was forcing her to continue an affair she wanted out of? Wouldn’t that make her a victim and him a reprehensible villain? But somehow that doesn’t quite appear to be Sorkin and Sher’s intent either… In the laborious final scene between Arthur and Guenevere, this Arthur takes responsibility for failing her by not expressing his true feelings; he says he was keeping a respectful distance because it was an arranged marriage and, having been forced to become a Queen, he didn’t want her to feel that she was being forced to be a wife. But this is nonsense, both psychologically and historically. History 101: What’s the primary reason for an arranged marriage between royals? To produce an heir! The fact that these two didn’t accomplish that doesn’t mean they weren’t trying; they would have been intimate starting on the marriage night; whatever feelings they developed for each other would have found expression, and the idea that he was keeping an overly respectful distance from his “business partner” is mind-bogglingly naïve on Sorkin’s part. And Sher went along with it? LCT is a major institutional theatre: Was there a dramaturg in the house? The error here seems to come from a notion of Sorkin’s that the affair with Lancelot had to be motivated, or at least justified, by some emotional failure on Arthur’s part; he makes an overly earnest and strained attempt to explicate the problems in their relationship in modern terms. But the grand theme of the tragic story, as told by both White and Lerner, is that lofty Utopian ideals—of a society guided by selflessness and decency—will inevitably be defeated by basic urges endemic to human nature. These include the knights’ unquenchable impulse to violence (“Fie on goodness”) and even Arthur’s own youthful sin with Mordred’s mother, but it comes to a head with Guenevere and Lancelot: Both of them love Arthur and revere his dream, but tragically bring about its undoing by being unable to resist their sensual passion for one another. Sorkin began by deliberately robbing the legend of all its literal magic, then went downhill from there: by undercutting and qualifying Guenevere’s love for both men, he neuters the story of most of its romance and passion. Given the beautiful work that Sher did on his revivals of SOUTH PACIFIC, THE KING AND I, and MY FAIR LADY, I’d be interested to know how the conversations went between him and Sorkin as this adaptation developed. It seems like they weren’t always on the same page, and thus the production wobbles beneath an uncertainty of tone. The dark austerity of the designs (even to having all the characters costumed in black in some scenes) is striking but jars with the overly jokey tone of the dialogue, and neither approach fully connects with the lush romanticism of the score. It’s as if everyone was getting in everyone else’s way, and Lerner was the chief casualty. For me, this exacerbates a growing worry about the way producers and directors have of late been getting more and more free in changing and rewriting the work of deceased playwrights, especially in musicals. It’s a very disturbing trend. There’s nothing to do about it when the work is in public domain, but most of these properties are still protected by copyright. Of course the changes get approved by the licensing agents and/or the estates of the writers, but it seems that often those entities are more concerned with making money off a major revival than protecting the integrity of the work with which they were entrusted. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS | |
| Posted by: manchurch03104 06:45 am EDT 04/10/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS - Revned 10:45 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| excellent analysis and spot on. and on Thursday night, Burnap could not stop touching and fixing his hair. throughout the entire show. Is that part of his new interpretation of Arthur, too? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS | |
| Posted by: lowwriter 12:04 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS - toros 11:11 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| The Morgan Le Fay scene is a huge mistake which I guess they don’t plan to fix. And Gueniviere’s love for Arthur should be an undercurrent throughout the show. It shouldn’t be relegated to dialog at the end. Poor direction on Sher’s part. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS | |
| Posted by: lowwriter 12:00 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS - toros 11:11 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| I didn’t want the sound blasted but you should at least be able to hear Soo and De Flor (the understudy) singing beyond a murmur. I was in the first row and the sound was bad. Even the orchestra sounded muffled. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS | |
| Posted by: toros 10:36 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS - lowwriter 12:00 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| I was able to hear every word perfectly, from Row H. Maybe it has something to do with the front row? Whatever the cause, it should be addressed. It's awful that you didn't get to hear Soo and De Flor, or the orchestra, all of whom sound sublime. But more often, at least in my experience lately, the sound is too loud, so Camelot was a welcome relief. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| "I was able to hear every word perfectly" | |
| Posted by: Dale 12:28 am EDT 04/10/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - SPOILERS - toros 10:36 pm EDT 04/09/23 | |
|
|
|
| We could as well Thursday night in row G! Only issue I have with the production is the magic being cut! |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon | |
| Posted by: KingSpeed 10:15 am EDT 04/09/23 | |
| In reply to: CAMELOT This Afternoon - den 09:22 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
|
|
|
| Donica’s voice is very robust in this production | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon | |
| Last Edit: kieran 09:34 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
| Posted by: kieran 09:31 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
| In reply to: CAMELOT This Afternoon - den 09:22 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
|
|
|
| Has a reason been given for Donica’s absences? (By the way, he can be seen singing “If Ever I Would Leave You” on YouTube.) | |
| Link | Jordan Donica |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon | |
| Posted by: melvotaw 10:39 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - kieran 09:31 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
|
|
|
| I assume that since they're saying he'll be back next Tuesday and also dropped out of Miscast that he must have Covid. Otherwise, how could they say for sure when he'd be returning? I doubt he would have planned an absence during previews so close to opening night. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: CAMELOT This Afternoon | |
| Posted by: toros 09:09 am EDT 04/10/23 | |
| In reply to: re: CAMELOT This Afternoon - melvotaw 10:39 pm EDT 04/08/23 | |
|
|
|
| First, he was out because of food poisoning. Then he got Covid. There's a chance that if he doesn't test negative, he won't be back on the 11th, which would cause problems with the press. Also, Lancelot's first understudy hurt his ribs during the sword scene, so the second understudy has been going on. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.063158 seconds.