|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 9:30:40 GMT
More excited by Mel than I was by Patti. There. I said it.  OK. I kind of love Mel too. But even still . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 9:30:48 GMT
The general public might not know Company or Patti but they know Mel. I am so so troubled by this, but you're right. I never trusted the general public. (I actually don't know who Mel is and have no opinion on this casting choice but it does seem to be pretty sound). Why would the general public know Patti? she's never done much tv or film, and if you aren't into musical theatre she is (I'm sorry to tell all of you) nobody to you... Likewise Sondheim musicals aren't as popular/populist as say ALW who had major crossover into the charts etc in the 70s 80s and 90s. Company was never a big hit for Sondheim- it's critically acclaimed but not commercially successful. So why would Joe public know? Joe public knows Mel, because she's been on TV since the 90s first as an actress/comedian later as part of Bake Off team. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 9:34:59 GMT
More excited by Mel than I was by Patti. There. I said it. OK. I kind of love Mel too. But even still . . . Honest truth? while I'm digging a hole. The one time I saw Patti live I really, really didn't get it. I found Gypsy with her incredibly dull.... |
|
3,541 posts
|
Company
Feb 2, 2018 9:35:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by Rory on Feb 2, 2018 9:35:48 GMT
She can sing and was in a musical a few years ago called Eurobeat and had a song all about turnips. I like Mel but Eurobeat was an absolute load of old cobblers! She was the best thing in it by a mile. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 9:37:56 GMT
She can sing and was in a musical a few years ago called Eurobeat and had a song all about turnips. I like Mel but Eurobeat was an absolute load of old cobblers! She was the best thing in it by a mile. Ooh I'd forgotten that was a thing (it was indeed awful) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 9:42:57 GMT
Honest truth? while I'm digging a hole. The one time I saw Patti live I really, really didn't get it. I found Gypsy with her incredibly dull....  |
|
19,677 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 2, 2018 11:37:06 GMT
I like Mel very much. I find her very funny. But jeez I’m sick of seeing her on tv. It seems that since refusing to follow the money to CH4 the BBC find it necessary to constantly reward them with tv projects, some of them of questionable quality. That word quiz Mel presented was absolutely inane. Or maybe there was just a very hard negotiation where demands were made and the Beeb rolled over. Either way I’m fed up of seeing the three of them.
|
|
185 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Feb 2, 2018 12:09:16 GMT
At least this may also help it be a bit more mainstream as now Mel is a name the British public know so will put a few bums on seats. It's not terrible stunt casting as she's is an actress at least. Sure, I can see why her name may be appealing to a wider portion of the British public. Not quite that sure that they've convinced me yet to get my bum in there for those most unreasonable £ 79.50... I love 'Company', and I love seeing Rosalie Craig on a stage, and I'd be thrilled to see Ms Lupone do her thing, but I still think the pricing policy for this one is a bit cuckoo. This isn't 'Hamilton' that had been building a massive hype for years and was therefore able to sell out the first months in a matter of hours... so it seems to me to be a rather risky tactic, for the time being. |
|
1,089 posts
|
Post by tonyloco on Feb 2, 2018 12:22:04 GMT
Oh, this discussion is getting to be quite overheated, both as regards the show itself and the casting.
Personally, I am just looking forward to seeing a new production of 'Company', a show that I have enjoyed in the (I think) two West End productions that I have seen including the 1972 original (Larry Kert, Elaine Stritch, Donna McKechnie, etc) and the 1995 revival with Maria Friedman and Adrian Lester as the first black Bobby although, to be honest, I have no particular memory of his performance but I know that overall the show worked for me on both occasions.
This time we will have a female central character now named Bobbi, but 'Company', as its name implies, is an ensemble piece and does not stand or fall by one central character like 'Sunset Boulevard' or 'Evita'. In fact, if I have any misgivings, it is to wonder why we need this change of gender for the central role?
I am in agreement that the show is unlikely to capture the interest of the wide public and casting Mel, who is widely known from popular TV shows is a good move.
Let's all just wait and see and we might all be pleasantly surprised. After all, it's not a great big monster of a show like 'Follies' or 'Sweeny Todd' and I hope that devotees don't go along expecting it to be just a big showcase for Patti because it ain't, or I certainly hope it won't be!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 12:31:05 GMT
I'd say Patti's public profile has never been higher since her verdict on Trump and the Grammy's. I've seen this retweeted endless times in the past week
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 12:43:27 GMT
if I have any misgivings, it is to wonder why we need this change of gender for the central role?
Because it's theatre and part of the artform to play around with form and content. Also it's 2018, and we can thankfully entertain the notion that women go through the same experience as men (if not more so) regarding relationships. |
|
8,109 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Feb 2, 2018 13:03:36 GMT
I like Mel but Eurobeat was an absolute load of old cobblers! She was the best thing in it by a mile. Ooh I'd forgotten that was a thing (it was indeed awful) How very dare you. I saw it 5 times. European campness. Can't beat it. |
|
1,089 posts
|
Post by tonyloco on Feb 2, 2018 13:04:19 GMT
Because it's theatre and part of the artform to play around with form and content. Also it's 2018, and we can thankfully entertain the notion that women go through the same experience as men (if not more so) regarding relationships. Ah, emicardiff, I seriously disagree with both of those statements. Who says it's part of theatre to play around with form and content? "If it ain't broken, don't fix it" is my motto. As regards the second statement, if somebody wants to express those sentiments in a musical then I suggest they should write a new one and leave 'Company' alone! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:15:40 GMT
Let's not start an argument but I think that I feel they revived company in the west end and it was the traditional set in 1970's about a man who needs a wife ,than the audiences would find it dated and it would not reflect the modern society we know where relationships can be between anyone and you don't have to be married to be in a good relationship.
From what I gather with this new version it is more about Bobbi wanting children and someone to start a family with and maybe fearing she is getting too old for children. This new version will be much more relivent and make the musical more accessible for modern day audiences . I'm very much looking forward to it all and if you can't understand why they have changed it then don't see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:24:52 GMT
If theatre *isn't* for playing with form and content, why don't we all just stay at home and watch soap operas and kitchen-sink dramas? Or why should we bother reviving a show if it's already been done once unless we're going to do it exactly the same way, ideally with exactly the same cast or at least creatives? Why do Caryl Churchill or Katie Mitchell or Ivo Van Hove even bother? What a very very peculiar stance to take with regards to the most open-to-interpretation and least-dependent-on-realism story-telling art form we have!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:33:30 GMT
Because it's theatre and part of the artform to play around with form and content. Also it's 2018, and we can thankfully entertain the notion that women go through the same experience as men (if not more so) regarding relationships. Ah, emicardiff, I seriously disagree with both of those statements. Who says it's part of theatre to play around with form and content? "If it ain't broken, don't fix it" is my motto. As regards the second statement, if somebody wants to express those sentiments in a musical then I suggest they should write a new one and leave 'Company' alone! I seriously disagree with the notion we should revive carbon copies of every play and musical ever written because...well frankly that sounds like an incredibly boring and pointless approach to things. I also seriously disagree with the notion that we can't explore the different meanings of a piece when looked at from a different angle. Particularly when the man who wrote it is behind the idea? Sondheim himself clearly agrees that there is reason enough to 'express those sentiments' is that not good enough reason for you? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:37:52 GMT
I hope that devotees don't go along expecting it to be just a big showcase for Patti because it ain't, or I certainly hope it won't be! Well it will be the night I go to see it. Rise! Rise! RISE! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:42:30 GMT
I hope that devotees don't go along expecting it to be just a big showcase for Patti because it ain't, or I certainly hope it won't be! Well it will be the night I go to see it. Rise! Rise! RISE! I'm sorry is Miss Patti on stage? then she will MAKE it a showcase for her. Dahling. Also Ryan will help. |
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Feb 2, 2018 13:45:03 GMT
I remember the 1995 revival with Adrian Lester well - he was (is) gorgeous. Plus of course the incomparable Sheila Gish giving her Ladies Who Lunch!
A shame, in my view, this piece cannot be left alone but we are living in a time where it has become fashionable to recast male roles as female in virtually everything. Of course this colour/gender blind casting only works one way - imagine the furore if a white girl was cast as Effie White in Dreamgirls or a man was cast as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady!
I always think that an all male panel of Loose Men at lunchtime on ITV bitching about women and making lewd jokes about young female guests would rightly be taken off the air after one episode. With genders reversed however........
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:53:16 GMT
I remember the 1995 revival with Adrian Lester well - he was (is) gorgeous. Plus of course the incomparable Sheila Gish giving her Ladies Who Lunch! A shame, in my view, this piece cannot be left alone but we are living in a time where it has become fashionable to recast male roles as female in virtually everything. Of course this colour/gender blind casting only works one way - imagine the furore if a white girl was cast as Effie White in Dreamgirls or a man was cast as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady! I always think that an all male panel of Loose Men at lunchtime on ITV bitching about women and making lewd jokes about young female guests would rightly be taken off the air after one episode. With genders reversed however........ And here it is the response we were all waiting for.... It's TERRIBLY fashionable nowadays to allow stories about women and include diverse casting, as if we had both non-white people and women as an integral part of society, not just middle aged white men? When will this madness stop? On a serious note I'd watch a gender reversed production of My Fair Lady- it sounds like a brilliant idea frankly. As for the Dreamgirls comment...I'm not touching that one... And the All Male Panel on Loose Women equivalent I think you'll find is called: Every Other Panel Show on TV. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:54:58 GMT
Yes, it does only work one way, you're not revealing any great hypocrisy by pointing that out. It's a way of redressing the balance. The white man (for example) is not the majority or the default, but you'd be forgiven for assuming he was by observing the breakdowns of shows/films/TV/panels/whatever. People who don't fit that "default" also exist and can be a part of the stories we see on stage too. We've had lovely Adrian Lester's take on the role, now let's have lovely Rosalie Craig's. If you see this production and it doesn't work for you, then by all means write it off as a failed experiment and wait for the next inevitable (probably more traditionally-cast) production to come along. But for heaven's sake, let theatre never ever EVER stagnate by refusing to experiment and grow and shine new light, and if we could consider what alternate takes might bring to a piece rather than shutting them down immediately with tedious whataboutery, that'd be cool too. It might also behove people to remember that if they are TRULY opposed to a concept then they are perfectly welcome to make their views known by the more effective method of simply not buying a ticket, rather than howling into a weary void.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:59:32 GMT
imagine the furore if a white girl was cast as Effie White in Dreamgirls or a man was cast as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady! Oh, I've seen 'My Fair Man' too. Although there wasn't much singing in it. In fact there weren't any women in it either come to think of it. I liked it though. Although it didn't quite raise a furore . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 14:00:24 GMT
Yes, it does only work one way, you're not revealing any great hypocrisy by pointing that out. It's a way of redressing the balance. The white man (for example) is not the majority or the default, but you'd be forgiven for assuming he was by observing the breakdowns of shows/films/TV/panels/whatever. People who don't fit that "default" also exist and can be a part of the stries we see on stage too. We've had lovely Adrian Lester's take on the role, now let's have lovely Rosalie Craig's. If you see this production and it doesn't work for you, then by all means write it off as a failed experiment and wait for the next inevitable (probably more traditionally-cast) production to come along. But for heaven's sake, let theatre never ever EVER stagnate by refusing to experiment and grow and shine new light, and if we could consider what alternate takes might bring to a piece rather than shutting them down immediately with tedious whataboutery, that'd be cool too. It might also behove people to remember that if they are TRULY opposed to a concept then they are perfectly welcome to make their views known by the more effective method of simply not buying a ticket, rather than howling into a weary void. Exactly. Also the whole history of the muscial (this specific one and in general terms) is not going to be over-written just because Rosalie Craig sings Being Alive for a few months. Just as it wasn't when (shock horror) a non-white man sang it. Nobody is forced to buy a ticket, I'd encourage people to in order to perhaps open their minds. But it's your money your time so frankly do what you like. But don't tell us (or the company) that they aren't "allowed" to do it because it's somehow threatening to your fragile masculinity. Meanwhile those who utterly must see a good looking white man sing Being Alive and only a good looking White Man. I suggest you trot to Aberdeen where you can see just that (and marvelous I'm sure it/he is) www.aberdeenperformingarts.com/events/company |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 14:02:58 GMT
If you are a fan of theatre but don't like colour blind/gender blind casting than that is just vey hypercritical. In theatre we are taken on stories and use our imagination through out. If you can sit and watch a show about for example a flying green witch but don't want to see a Shakespeare character played by another gender than just don't go. Yes some shows can't have different casting where it is a story based on race like hairspray but where a story is able to be altereged , why not let it be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Snow on Feb 2, 2018 14:06:05 GMT
I hope that devotees don't go along expecting it to be just a big showcase for Patti because it ain't, or I certainly hope it won't be! Well it will be the night I go to see it. Rise! Rise! RISE! Any news on what night Ryan is on? Is it sold out yet? |
|
