2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 2, 2018 20:18:18 GMT
Mercy buckets indeed @ryan - you can do good sometimes  Well quite. As half of the GB Olympic track and field team will testify, I'm a giver. I can't help it. Generous to a fault. It's what the other half of the team will testify to is what I'd like to know! |
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Jul 3, 2018 1:49:08 GMT
I was fortunate (thanks to dynamic pricing on the Really Useful website) to get a single central seat in Row B of the Dress Circle for 59.00 for this and the view was fabulous! But do people really pay 150.00? This is a fabulous show, and received a full standing ovation from a packed house on Monday evening - classed as press night although reviews are embargoed until after the gala opening tomorrow (Tuesday). The show has a great score and you hum the tunes on the way in! However, I am notoriously hard to please and although there are plenty of positives I do have a few nit picks with this particular production. Staging wise it starts of spectacularly with a gold front curtain beautifully lit and an amazing opening sequence with the boat, but once we get to the palace I felt Siam looked a little short of funds set against an ugly stone wall and constantly sliding and flying pillars. The previous revival was burnished red and gold, opulent and bejewelled! I have to agree with sf regarding the orchestra - especially after recently listening to Chess and Kiss Me Kate at the Coliseum. A few more strings would have made all the difference to the sound. Not good enough for the Palladium and the prices being charged. Performance wise Kelli O'Hara is wonderful and gives a masterclass in musical performance. Her voice is glorious, her acting sublime and every gesture freshly minted, natural and spontaneous. Her connection with the children (delightful of course - especially the tiny ones) seemed warm and genuine. When she said she loved the children and would miss them, you really believed her. An exquisite performance and worth the price of admission alone. I also liked Naoko Mori's Lady Thaing - a wonderful voice and dignified stage presence. Na-Young Jeon as Tuptim also had a beautiful voice and made her stage moments count. Less successful performance wise were the men. Ken Wantanbe as the King was certainly an audience pleaser, playing the comedy very well but the King is more than that and I felt he needed more gravitas at times and his diction and singing left a lot to be desired. Dean John Wilson has great pecs, but his stage presence is very bland. His performance in this was as lacklustre as his Aladdin. It is well directed with all the set pieces in place - the march of the Siamese children, the "Shall we Dance" sequence etc. etc. etc. (see what I did there?) Although I did feel there was too much aimless wandering around by the principles sometimes - I felt like shouting - "oh just stand still!" I love the Palladium though - such a lovely theatre and the show is such an occasion! 4 stars from me - my nit picks preventing a 5 and most of the stars for Kelli O'Hara! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2018 12:47:53 GMT
Re the design, in constructing this production, Bart Sher was deliberately reacting against both the movie and the 1996 US/2000 London revival which were both saturated in jewels, gold and colour... They definitely wanted a more spare feeling and sparse design for this production. So it's definitely not some people's grandfather's King and I, but it works given the darker treatment of the book scenes and Kelli O'Hara's performance in particular.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jul 4, 2018 10:24:43 GMT
So...
5* in The Times (I was not expecting that from Ann Treneman)
4* in The Independent, What's On Stage, The Stage, The Telegraph, The Arts Desk, Evening Standard
3* in The Guardian
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jul 4, 2018 11:29:43 GMT
We were at the gala performance last night. Overall, we both thought that while it was all nicely staged, nothing really grabbed us with the show. It was nice. It was nice to have seen it. But not wow. Hugely enthusiastic audience, however, which is what you expect on these occasions.
|
|
3,057 posts
|
Post by ali973 on Jul 4, 2018 13:26:33 GMT
Guys,
I'm just back from a long (very theatre intense) holiday and I've been a bit out of the loop and still in a bit of a haze. I just wanted to check if there has been a confirmed announcement on Ruthie Ann's involvement in the production? I'm seeing this in about two weeks and I'm looking forward to it, one way or another.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Jul 4, 2018 13:39:31 GMT
Ruthie Ann has an open invitation to join the show at whatever point she wishes but at the moment she is still in the US.
I saw Ann Treneman leaving the performance on Monday and she was moist-eyed -- which is rare for her indeed!
|
|
108 posts
|
Post by bob2010 on Jul 4, 2018 14:11:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2018 15:08:59 GMT
Elaine Paige's tweet and some of the reviews have been hailing this alleged 29 piece orchestra that the production boasts - is this true or not? I thought someone had said it was reduced to 13-15 pieces? And yes some of the reviews have been saying Ruthie Ann Miles was terrific. How is that professionals can't get facts straight for half a second?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2018 15:09:05 GMT
I remember the night I went Elaine had a coughing fit through Lady Thiang's solo.Rumour had it is wasn't the only night that happened. HHHHUUUUMMMMMMMMM!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2018 15:12:10 GMT
I remember the night I went Elaine had a coughing fit through Lady Thiang's solo.Rumour had it is wasn't the only night that happened. HHHHUUUUMMMMMMMMM! Fabulous! I so hope that is true. |
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Jul 4, 2018 15:29:44 GMT
Bizarre re the orchestra error since all you have to do is count 'em in the programme, which takes half a minute
|
|
4,779 posts
|
Post by Mark on Jul 4, 2018 15:33:11 GMT
They are obviously adding extra rush seats as I just managed to get two for tonight!
|
|
4,779 posts
|
Post by Mark on Jul 5, 2018 7:26:27 GMT
This production just oozes class. Three years since I saw it in New York, and whilst the staging is slightly different to how it was at Lincoln centre (where I thought it worked better), it works and makes good use of the Palladium stage.
Loved Ken Watanabe who had already left the production when I saw it last time, and of course Kelli O’Hara might just have one of the most glorious voices to ever grace a West End stage - I could just feel the audience falling in love with her.
It’s certainly not the most perfect musical, the second act is very drawn out, and The House of Uncle Thomas a bit of a challenge, but it’s full of such wonderful music that you forgive its shortcomings.
4/5 stars from me. I may return again just because of how wonderful Kelli is and how well she sings this score.
My seats,F49/50 in the dress circle were wonderful - plenty legroom!
|
|
1,995 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Jul 5, 2018 7:37:03 GMT
I remember the night I went Elaine had a coughing fit through Lady Thiang's solo.Rumour had it is wasn't the only night that happened. HHHHUUUUMMMMMMMMM! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Love it!
|
|
3,325 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Jul 5, 2018 7:50:19 GMT
Third visit last night (to the UK production) and easily the best of the three, now that this has bedded in. Wasn't completely planned for last night, but there was such an excellent seat available, I couldn't turn it down.
Great front row seat, thanks to TodayTix Rush. An excellent view (the tiny bit of the stage you miss didn't bother me). A well-behaved audience (there was an occasional singer somewhere nearby, but luckily she didn't know many of the songs).
Think I got a repeat cast of children. Archie Durrant was on as Louis and did a great job. I hadn't picked up before that two of the children are played by adults, but it isn't obvious unless you're sat at the front. Makes sense with the multiple crews.
Na-Young Jeon has really improved as Tuptim as well. The first time I saw her, she missed a few notes, but this time she was faultless. And Dean-John Wilson looks good from up close.
The reviews are mixed, but generally good. I know some people find this dated, but so many of the themes are still relevant today. Looking forward to going back again in a couple of weeks.
|
|
1,132 posts
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 5, 2018 23:59:49 GMT
@burlybear we now have magnets and they're lovely! Selling out a lot so if you do come and can't get one let me know
|
|
4,172 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Jul 6, 2018 16:18:26 GMT
Kelli O’Hara must be dying of heat every night in that dress under those lights!
|
|
19,661 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 6, 2018 16:22:23 GMT
@burlybear we now have magnets and they're lovely! Selling out a lot so if you do come and can't get one let me know Too late. Ive already been 😧 |
|
376 posts
|
Post by hitmewithurbethshot on Jul 6, 2018 16:24:54 GMT
Kelli O’Hara must be dying of heat every night in that dress under those lights! That's a point, how did the real Anna cope wearing Victorian dress in Bangkok temperatures? |
|
19,661 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 6, 2018 17:29:12 GMT
Did anyone think that Kelli’s frocks were just a couple of inches too short? You could see her shoes throughout. I was questioning whether they’d recycled EP’s cossies from the previous revival but then realised that they’d have been more than two inches short 😬 So it must have been deliberate. Historically accurate maybe? But I’ve googled 1860s fash and they all seem to be skimming the floor.
|
|
2,677 posts
|
Post by viserys on Jul 6, 2018 19:22:38 GMT
Those real crinoline dresses were incredibly restrictive - women DIED because they couldn't exit burning rooms because they couldn't get through doors. I assume that if they were properly long, they would be too restrictive to dance in/the risk of tripping would be too big.
As for surviving in the heat - I've travelled to South East Asia many times and I ALWAYS wonder how people got by - must have been even worse for men in their stiff military buttoned-up uniforms.
However, there were many ways of adapting - houses used to be built to allow maximum air to move through, the midday heat was avoided completely and of course the colonial damsels had an army of servants to do everything for them. And of course they often fled the hot humid plains for cooler climates during the worst heat, ie. from Delhi to Simla in the Himalayan hills, from Mandalay and Rangoon to Maymyo and the French left Saigon behind for Dalat in the summer. It's also what you're used to, I suppose, they just couldn't fathom to wear anything different. I remember the story of the St.Geran shipwreck at Mauritius, that inspired the legend of Paul and Virginie - in which women rather drowned with the ship, than abandon their "modesty" by shedding their crazy clothes to be rescued.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2018 19:58:51 GMT
When dressing for hot weather, ladies are generally advised to wear loose-fitting lightweight garments. The hoops can be pretty hefty, but if the dresses are made of the right fabric, then it's certainly going to be more comfortable than, say, tight-fitting jeans. |
|
239 posts
|
Post by dizzieblonde on Jul 6, 2018 20:34:05 GMT
When dressing for hot weather, ladies are generally advised to wear loose-fitting lightweight garments. The hoops can be pretty hefty, but if the dresses are made of the right fabric, then it's certainly going to be more comfortable than, say, tight-fitting jeans. For all that the hoops would have been a certain weight to carry, the fact that they held the fabric away from the legs, as well as the loose fitting linen undergarments (with a rather large strategic split!) would have ensured maximum air flow to keep their bodies cool. As you say, wearing natural fabrics would also have helped. It sounds counter-intuitive, but very lightweight wool garments would have wicked sweat from the body, and kept someone a lot cooler, than the synthetic mix fibres we are used to today. As for Kelli's slightly short skirts, I imagine that's been done for assistance with her dancing. For all that historical accuracy is great, these women would have had to hook their dress trains up in order to dance (either through their wrist with hooks or by bustling them).That's not feasible for this show, so they've made them a little shorter so that the skirts don't risk tripping her in the fairly energetic dance numbers. |
|
209 posts
|
Post by Flim Flam on Jul 6, 2018 21:52:07 GMT
The cage crinoline is actually quite lightweight and airy. After visiting the Theatre galleries at the V & A, you can all pop into the British galleries and try on a crinoline for yourselves (on Level 4, next to the Great Exhibition display). The American dress reformer, Amelia Bloomer, had been wearing her pantaloon suits as a protest against the restrictive, and very heavy, multiple layers of petticoats that women were required to wear to fill out their skirts in the mid 19th C to the desired volume. When the cage crinoline (at first reinforced with willow, and then sprung steel)came into fashion, it was no longer necessary to have so many petticoats, and so Amelia gave up her trousers (in 1859), in favour of wearing crinolines, as she stated that this new style of clothing was comfortable enough to allow her to go back to wearing mainstream fashions. But crinolines were indeed death traps, with many, many women dying due to catching fire after brushing against naked flames (candles, fireplaces etc) or being swept into the path of carriages by strong winds, or getting caught in their wheels. Even Oscar Wilde lost relatives to this. www.irishidentity.com/extras/gaels/stories/wilde.htm And Longfellow's wife also died due to this cause. And there was also a fire in a church in Chile, with huge loss of life, where women were blamed for blocking the exits with their hoop skirts. However, on a brighter note, they do have their advantages, if you are thinking of throwing yourself off a suspension bridge- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Ann_Henley |
|
