Cruel Intentions: The 90s Musical - The Other Palace / Tour

[capybara]

Does anyone know if there will be an in house rush ticket offer?

I know TodayTix will be doing one but with Heathers, that was very hard to get tickets in such a small theatre and the Friday rush on TOP website was much better.

[Dr Tom]

Let me add the first set of comments on the London production.

I got a Rush ticket yesterday (second preview), row K of the Stalls, a good clear view of both the stage and the people dancing in their seats, taking video, shouting random objections at the on-stage activity etc. This is more jukebox musical crowd that Heathers crowd.

This was sold out, and I arrived at 7:25pm to join a packed front of house area. They started letting people in around 7:40pm and the show started around 7:50pm. Finished around 9:10pm (with an interval).

There's a lot to this show thematically that matches Heathers. Partial nudity, themes of sexuality, a setting before most of the audience were born, tragedy, alumni in the cast etc. There's even a diary/journal (and you can scramble around to complete your collection of souvenir promotional pages at the end). If you ever thought that Heathers set took up too much of the stage, this is solved here, as everything is minimalistic, allowing the revolve to be used. The style does suit the production. You can see the band at the side of the upper level (smaller than Heathers, I think).

Where this doesn't match is Heathers is that show has its witty moments and aspects of black comedy. Here, the laughs come when the audience recognise a song that has been slotted into a rather odd position in the show.

I have no recollection of ever having seen the film, so I got rather confused by the cast and hadn't realised they were all playing teenagers until near the end. There was one point where I assumed there was a mature music teacher taking advantage of an underage girl, when the music teacher casually announced he was 19. I also struggled a bit about when this was meant to be set. This was an age where some people were apparently just getting used to AOL, but others were on email all the time, and mobile phones were much more portable than I remember. Dramatic licence, perhaps?

I was a teenager in the 1990s, but I can't say I took to a lot of the music. I did expect to recognise more than half of it. That's probably my failing though, as I say the same thing about other jukebox musicals.

The highlight is easily Rhianne-Louise McCaulsky. She has a powerful voice and it's a joy to listen to her sing.
Josh Barnett lights up the stage and looks fabulous with his new blond hair as well.

Otherwise, I would be quite keen to see this again now I've figured out what's going on, but I didn't feel an emotional connection with any of the characters. Everything is serviceable, but the limitations are with the material. Hopefully the sound team will have had a bit more chance to practice the microphone cues as well.

I'd go with 3 stars. This has a chance of getting an audience and becoming another long-runner, but my bet would be slightly against that happening.

I did feel a bit sorry for the crew member who was poised at the front with a camera at the end ready to capture the instant standing ovation for the publicity videos. He had to stick with filming the stage instead.

[FrontroverPaul]

I'm surprised there's an interval with such a short running time. 7.50 start, 9.10 finish, assuming 20 minute interval that makes just an hour performance time.

I'm at the matinee next Thursday and was planning to add an evening show (via Rush with a couple of back ups if unlucky)  but three and a half hours to fill between the shows this time of year isn't appealing !

[Dr Tom]

Sorry, I think it was a 9:50pm finish. From memory, the information outside said 45 minute first half, 40 minute second half, but I think this ran slightly longer. Or maybe it took more time to get seated than I wrote.

It could easily be presented without an interval.

[c4ndyc4ne]

got to get that bar £!

[theatregoer22]

Had a quick look at the soundtrack and there are a lot of songs I love on there, so I could well be tempted to see this if I have some spare time and it's easy enough to get discounted tickets.

[Steve]

Jan 13, 2024 15:56:47 GMT FrontroverPaul said:

I'm surprised there's an interval with such a short running time. 7.50 start, 9.10 finish, assuming 20 minute interval that makes just an hour performance time.

Yes, I just saw the matinee and it ran from 2:35pm to 4:35pm, including a 15 minute interval at about the 55 minute mark (3:30pm to 3:45pm).

I really enjoyed this!

The main plot isn't particularly well-structured, only really kicking into overdrive in the last half hour.

But various subplots, particularly those involving an absolutely hilarious Rose Galbraith, are very enjoyable along the way.

The 90s songs are great fun, and when the main plot does kick into gear, I felt the show really worked.

Some spoilers follow. . .

This is a version of "Les Liaisons Dangereuses," which I am mostly familiar with from Christopher Hampton's versions, the play and the film, though I did see the "Cruel Intentions" movie back in the day.

This version is the least dramatic in the motivations and attitudes of the principals. The utter world weariness of John Malkovich's film Valmont, desperate for a last chance at genuine feelings, and the aging desperation of Glenn Close's Merteuil were powerful drivers of drama in the "Dangerous Liaisons" movie, which was lost in its transfer to teen characters in "Cruel Intentions," where the characters come over as mere sociopaths.

But at least in the "Cruel Intentions" movie, Ryan Phillipe's Valmont was cloaked with an air of redemptive vulnerability beneath the sociopathic behaviour, from early on, which created a growing dramatic tension between himself and Sarah Michelle Gellar's ice cold possessiveness.

Here, however, the two sharklike, manipulative, predatory principals are almost devoid of any dramatic heat, for the first half of the show, an Ice King and Ice Queen it's almost impossible to care about.

Luckily, we care about all the other characters, most of all, Rose Galbraith's Cecile, who both principals plan to use and exploit, and who proves to be MUCH funnier, and more endearing, than her counterparts in any of the aforementioned plays and movies.

Galbraith taps into that conjunction of genuine relatable feelings (she's learning about her sexuality for the first time) together with a camp irrepressible OTT exuberant expression of those feelings (from eye-averting shyness to bug-eyed curiosity to crazed zany horniness to curt clipped worldly wisdom) such that she is hilariously impossible to victimise (she's having too much fun to be a victim, even if the principals want to make her one), which makes her a perfect comedy character counterpoint in a stage entertainment.

After Galbraith, Josh Barnett is almost as much fun as Blaine, a gay friend of Valmont, who, like Cecile, is just having so much fun being alive that he's perpetually entertaining.

After the interval, the magnificent frosty hauteur of Daniel Bravo's absolute Ice King of a Valmont pays off at last, and pays off big in his rendition of Counting Crows' masterpiece, "Colorblind," where his cold ice cracks and colours of genuine feelings finally flood in, for Abbie Budden's Annette Hargrove, playing off him wonderfully, his countenance flooding with emotions. Sometimes something that seems not to work early on can pay off wonderfully later, and this moment is like that, as I felt tears come on in appreciation that an uncrackable veneer had been cracked, the poetic lyrics "Pull me out from inside, I am ready," perfectly expressed.

Although her character is thin, Rhianne Louise-McCaulsky's voice is not, easily the most powerful singer on stage, so rousing to listen to, especially when she is playing villain to more likeable characters, like Galbraith's Cecile, who she seduces in a delightfully playful, corrupt and amusing version of Christian band, Sixpence None The Richer's "Kiss Me."

Anyhow, the drama works especially well in the last half hour, the 90s songs were nostalgic and pleasing for me throughout (I saw half those bands live lol), the ensemble are generally terrific, and Rose Galbraith's comic antics are very funny, as is the performance of TLC's "No Scrubs" by Jess Buckby, which merited at least one more refrain lol.

I'd give this 3 and a half stars.

[lotster]

I saw this today with a rush ticket. Happy to have seen it (for that price) but wouldn't want to pay much more. I'd give it 3 stars. It's not awful, but it's not amazing. Rhianne-Louise McCaulsky is great in the lead. Her vocals are really impressive and she gives a performance which is sassy, sexy and powerful. I liked the male lead too and imagine he'll have a decent career. The rest of the cast and ensemble were fine, but very "drama grad". I like juke box musicals, so I enjoyed hearing the 90's songs, but it's very much about teenage sex, so not the most sophisticated of storylines.

[kyvai]

Well, I really enjoyed this and I’m a bit surprised as I went in with minimal expectations!

Full disclosure the film definitely falls into “cult classic” territory for me - I was 16/17 when it came out and we had the VHS on repeat for months at teen sleepovers - and when I rewatched it recently turns out I could quote along almost all of the memorable lines…. “How are things down under?” “You can put it anywhere….” etc. Also, there’s at least 5 of my all-time favourite songs in this, whilst it was discombobulating at first to hear 90s “alternative” tracks musical-ified (Placebo, Garbage, GooGoo Dolls), in the end it works. It’s like Heathers and &Juliet got together and adopted a trashy, camp, 90s “I’m not like the other kids” teen.

Yes there are some laughs drawn from dropping the songs as punchlines…..but they worked. Kinda á la &Juliet in that respect, although it’s more like the slutty bitchy cousin to &Juliets more wholesome message!

No it isn’t deep and meaningful, the movie wasn’t either. It’s superficial, fun and trashy but it is very good at what it is. The vocal performances were all on form, and apart from a few minor sound glitches (mics not being on in time for lines) everything seemed technically pretty slick. I think there are perhaps a more comedy beats to be drawn from the script if some lines were directed a bit differently, and that they may as well steer fully into it, but really those moments were few.

I might go back if I’m able to whilst it’s on, I’d recommend it if you like other movie adaptations & jukeboxes and take it for what it is, although maybe watch the movie first if you don’t know it, it’ll probably make more sense to you.

I’m somewhere between 3 and 4 stars. I’ve left the theatre feeling upbeat and entertained so that’s a positive!

[jackstage]

What do people reckon about the show's future? Might it extend at The Other Palace?

[kyvai]

I just listened to the Standard theatre podcast and they really rated this :-)

[eatbigsea]

I completely understand that this is objectively terrible and yet I am enjoying the hell out of it. If you remember either the film or 90s pop fondly, definitely go. The cast are doing as well as they possibly could with the material and there is some outstanding singing. Daniel Bravo, Rhianne-Louise McCaulsky and Rose Galbraith are all great.

[musicbox]

I’m currently at the other palace to see this show, however everyone is being kept in the foyer with an announcement from the manager saying they can’t start the show at 3pm due to a “cast change” with “no definitive start time”.

Anyone here in the know as to what’s going on? We may have to abandon if it’s seriously delayed as we have plans later, which is a shame!

[Always@thetheatre]

Feb 4, 2024 15:01:31 GMT musicbox said:

I’m currently at the other palace to see this show, however everyone is being kept in the foyer with an announcement from the manager saying they can’t start the show at 3pm due to a “cast change” with “no definitive start time”.

Anyone here in the know as to what’s going on? We may have to abandon if it’s seriously delayed as we have plans later, which is a shame!

That venue seems to be cursed with this. When I saw Heathers there it started an hour late due to cast changes last minute. Hopefully it can start soon for you 🤞

[musicbox]

The show eventually started at around 3:40 - just before starting the director Jonathan O’Boyle came to the stage to announce that the delay was caused by Rhianne taking ill and that Verity Thompson was taking over the role of Kathryn, but didn’t know the book or track having never done it. This in person announcement was needed as communication had been dire up until then to be honest.

He then said that the cast had been rehearsing since 10am right up until they opened the auditorium, and that Verity would be performing with the book on an iPad.

Honestly I was very pleasantly surprised by the show overall! The book is a bit messy and the jukebox style makes the storyline quite clunky and hard to follow if you haven’t seen the film, but it’s fun and will give you a laugh if nothing else.

The audience really loved it and if it had original songs I could easily see this becoming a Heathers sized success, but I don’t really see it as a jukebox to be honest.

The reason we went was because my friend loves Abbie Budden’s Tik Toks - I didn’t know her, but thought she did great and can see her being really successful.

I can’t deny that Verity reading from an iPad and not really looking up as she was speaking was a bit distracting, but she did incredibly well under that kind of pressure and I have massive respect for her (A fan in the front row also gave her flowers at the bows).

[Being Alive]

How are they nearly a month into this and understudies aren't ready?

[Afriley]

I was there.

Verity did brilliantly all things considered. She was reading heavily in some sections but knew the songs and really grew into in act two to deliver a phenomenal vocal finale.

Overall a fun romp indeed. Some excellent young talent.

[musicbox]

Feb 4, 2024 18:45:55 GMT Being Alive said:

How are they nearly a month into this and understudies aren't ready?

Jonathan apologised for this and said they hadn’t been expecting it to be so successful and that since opening things have been a “whirlwind” - there’s probably more to it but we may never know.

[danb]

Sheesh! Theres no more to it than cheapskate producers not wanting to pay to rehearse their covers before it opens. Hardly a duty of care is it?

[ThereWillBeSun]

No excuse not to have understudies or covers.

I really feel for Verity and the pressure they were under. Most have been so stressful! What about a duty of care towards your cast?

Giving me Paul Taylor Mills / Heathers vibes.

Not here for it. Well done to that cast though.

[danb]

I always got the feeling that PTM’s casts would go above & beyond for him though, as a payback to him rather than snything else.

[toomasj]

As I always ask in these situations - were refunds offered?

[Being Alive]

Feb 4, 2024 18:51:05 GMT musicbox said:

Feb 4, 2024 18:45:55 GMT Being Alive said:

How are they nearly a month into this and understudies aren't ready?

Jonathan apologised for this and said they hadn’t been expecting it to be so successful and that since opening things have been a “whirlwind” - there’s probably more to it but we may never know.

Jonathan's been around long enough to know that doesn't wash as an answer - you're a month in, covers for your leads should be rehearsed. Sorry but i genuinely don't understand why people keep supporting Paul Taylor Mills when he does this sort of stuff all the time - it's beyond unprofessional.

[musicbox]

Feb 4, 2024 21:24:27 GMT toomasj said:

As I always ask in these situations - were refunds offered?

Yes, the manager at TOP offered refunds as soon as the delay was announced in the foyer. The advice was go to the box office desk.

[danb]

Feb 4, 2024 22:19:58 GMT Being Alive said:

Feb 4, 2024 18:51:05 GMT musicbox said:

Jonathan apologised for this and said they hadn’t been expecting it to be so successful and that since opening things have been a “whirlwind” - there’s probably more to it but we may never know.

Jonathan's been around long enough to know that doesn't wash as an answer - you're a month in, covers for your leads should be rehearsed. Sorry but i genuinely don't understand why people keep supporting Paul Taylor Mills when he does this sort of stuff all the time - it's beyond unprofessional.

I don’t think he has anything to do with Cruel Intentions does he?