|
|
Post by scarpia on Jun 26, 2021 18:07:05 GMT
Like when ALW “modernises” a show by sticking an awful rap in it. I generally find that nothing makes a show feel more dated than an obvious attempt to make it feel contemporary. I've thought both ALW's and CM's attempts to 'update' their older shows have inadvertently dated them, be it by way of new songs, new marketing, or new orchestrations. To take the last example, a reviewer of the Adelphi Evita complained that some of the 'electric guitar passages now sound dated' in 2006. Yet those were newly introduced to the revival by ALW himself, and weren't in the original production because Hal Prince didn't want anything in it that would date the score. Ditto with the electric guitar in the title song of Phantom...the howling guitar at the end was only introduced into the stage version for the Vegas production of 2006, and then made its way around the world. It's a shame to read on these posts that the show is as confused as its marketing. I've tickets for a performance much later in the year (delayed it deliberately by several months as I want infection rates down first), but of all the things I have booked, this is the one that fills with with the least excitement... |
|
19,705 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jun 26, 2021 18:07:15 GMT
Costume from CHF’s insta  |
|
|
|
Post by jaqs on Jun 26, 2021 18:10:52 GMT
I thoroughly enjoyed the matinee today.
The costumes, wigs (apart from poor Carrie who has two duds) and hats are glorious, the hats are real stunners.
It was a lot of fun. Great cast.
Rebecca Trehern is obviously fantastic and worth the ticket alone to see her do her thing in those towering wigs. And Victoria HB was wonderfully wicked. The pair were the best pairing in the show.
Prince Sebastian was rather wet but that’s the point.
Carrie was great when singing.
I loved the moving of the seats, it meant I was suddenly front row with a low stage. Even got a ball gown in my face during one exit.
There is work to do, tightening it up, chopping some verses from the over long songs. Frustratingly the gorgeous marry for love was far too short.
It’s loud loud or really shouty.
Overall I had a lot of fun and will happily go back later in the run.
|
|
|
|
Post by maskoftragedy on Jun 26, 2021 19:02:19 GMT
Love all these reports coming in.
Hoping by the time I get to go the show will be considerably tightened up. Does sound like they've got a bit of work to do on that front.
|
|
|
|
Post by stagebyte on Jun 26, 2021 20:00:54 GMT
I’m genuinely a bit mystified as to why it’s ‘not ready’ or ‘needs tightening up’
I know it’s a new show and in previews but they’ve had the longest rehearsal period known to man. Usual is 2 weeks. Feel like I’ve been seeing them go on about Cinderella for ages.
If the script is in place and the score is in place... it’s costumes and sets next to get used to. It should be in a decent place with only minor changes needed not huge music and script re drafts.
From some of the posts above it appears Cinderella needs a big chunk cutting and a dramaturg. There seems to be gaping plot holes and plot that trails away to nothing. Surely the dramatic end to Act 1 should have a wrapped up conclusion? And what’s with the sea witch and necklaces and Sebastian - all seems a little bit Little Mermaid. Did this possibly start off as a pastiche?
Maybe cuts to songs (vanquishing of the sea witch) and vastly reduced character of the key role of Godmother has altered the story to the extent where they have to regig a chunk of it to ‘make sense’. Messy.
Plus it very much sounds like Prince Charming needs to be written into a proper character rather than a lazy ‘musical’ gay stereotype.
*SPOILER*
Did some one say PC comes back from the dead? Romeo &Juliet vibes anyone?
It’s surprising as Emerald Fennell usually has her her finger on the pulse writing darkly comic stuff with ‘something to say’ maybe it started off as edgy and modern and the musical form diluted this? Musicals are a very different animal to TV and film.
|
|
5,798 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jun 26, 2021 20:07:29 GMT
I am not surprised that people are reporting issues with the book.
Ms Fennell for all her awards has never written for the stage before. She has not written the book for a musical before. Inevitably she is going to take time to find her feet in this genre.
The delay to opening has meant that it has coincide with her pregnancy which is not going to make things any easier.
Fingers crossed they can resolve matters so that the book works
|
|
614 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by chernjam on Jun 26, 2021 20:27:33 GMT
Though I’ve been moved from the spinning seats - I can’t wait for Wednesday. I’ve always said that the title should be BAD Cinderella. I think as per ALW they will open it but will close it in 8 month time and make changes. Either that or future productions will be hacked at with things added/cut. It's all about the fine tuning/endless tinkering with ALW shows! The raw material is usually fine, but it's the ongoing process that makes all the difference (and can even transform an almost-dud like Woman In White into a prestige show). Unfortunately his obsession with 'concept albums' means we rarely get a record of the finished piece, just a work in progress...for instance seeing Aspects of Love a year or so after it opened, I was surprised to find There Is More To Love was a (sublime) duet between Rose and Giulietta, rather than the rather stodgy ballad on the record. And that duet has never been recorded! The climax of Anything But Lonely falls flat on disc but ends with a huge high note on stage. The end of the London Sunset album just....ends, missing that final, shattering reprise of With One Look. And don't get me started on Love Never Dies - the Oz version, which is vastly improved (and has a lot more call backs to the original show) never got a CD release at all... I think you've nailed everyone of my pet peeves, especially about Aspects which is one of my all-time favorites One correction, the OZ CD was somewhat quietly released during the US Tour of Love Never Dies, with the very rare step of ALW actually re-recording and inserting changes from the DVD and what the tour version sounds like: www.amazon.com/Never-Andrew-Lloyd-Webber-Studio/dp/B07D9V49Q3/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=love+never+dies+cd&qid=1624739234&sr=8-2 |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2021 20:33:32 GMT
I didnt think Prince Charming was a gay sterotype. All through the show we hear how he's a 'mans man' how brave and daring he is etc and i think the joke is meant to be that this butch man that everyone admires and looks up to, is gay. Which i'm sure, some people might find offensive. He wasn't a limp wristed, mincing queen by any stretch, but the choreography he is given, doesn't help, nor does the fur on his outfit.
|
|
3,452 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jun 26, 2021 20:54:11 GMT
I didnt think Prince Charming was a gay sterotype. All through the show we hear how he's a 'mans man' how brave and daring he is etc and i think the joke is meant to be that this butch man that everyone admires and looks up to, is gay. Which i'm sure, some people might find offensive. He wasn't a limp wristed, mincing queen by any stretch, but the choreography he is given, doesn't help, nor does the fur on his outfit. I liked his flamboyance initially but it soon wore off and I was distracted by his drippy partner who wafted about doing very little. It's a mark perhaps of how far we have come that I think many people might have thought: "right-oh, he's gay, so where's the story?" (i.e. a character or person's sexuality is an irrelevance to most people). There felt an almost intangible air of disappointment, despite his entrance, where you could almost hear the audience brains ticking over thinking "where is this going now". I agree with many of the posts that others have written since yesterday evening. I still believe this show can be (and will be) successful, but there are some very obvious adjustments that need to be made, specifically regarding the importance of midnight, the striking of midnight, the turgid wedding scene. 24 hours later, I still really enjoyed it but in hindsight with some helpful reminders from others who have seen the show too, I feel the production team have a little work to do through the remaining preview period. |
|
|
|
Post by stagebyte on Jun 26, 2021 20:54:43 GMT
I didnt think Prince Charming was a gay sterotype. All through the show we hear how he's a 'mans man' how brave and daring he is etc and i think the joke is meant to be that this butch man that everyone admires and looks up to, is gay. Which i'm sure, some people might find offensive. He wasn't a limp wristed, mincing queen by any stretch, but the choreography he is given, doesn't help, nor does the fur on his outfit. Hmm. I guess it depends how it’s portrayed If he’s brave and daring and also happens to be gay (running away from Cinderella because he doesn’t want to be forced into an expected marriage) seems more ‘realistic’ than ‘overcompensating’ by hiding behind a fake OTT Gaston gym bunny type persona but ready to break out the sequins at a moments notice for the ‘reveal’ I mean there’s pages written by fans of Beauty and The Beast shipping Gaston and LeFou I heard talk of a ‘mardi gras’ scene ... |
|
287 posts
|
Post by singingbird on Jun 26, 2021 21:22:11 GMT
I didnt think Prince Charming was a gay sterotype. All through the show we hear how he's a 'mans man' how brave and daring he is etc and i think the joke is meant to be that this butch man that everyone admires and looks up to, is gay. Which i'm sure, some people might find offensive. He wasn't a limp wristed, mincing queen by any stretch, but the choreography he is given, doesn't help, nor does the fur on his outfit. I liked his flamboyance initially but it soon wore off and I was distracted by his drippy partner who wafted about doing very little. It's a mark perhaps of how far we have come that I think many people might have thought: "right-oh, he's gay, so where's the story?" (i.e. a character or person's sexuality is an irrelevance to most people). There felt an almost intangible air of disappointment, despite his entrance, where you could almost hear the audience brains ticking over thinking "where is this going now". I agree with many of the posts that others have written since yesterday evening. I still believe this show can be (and will be) successful, but there are some very obvious adjustments that need to be made, specifically regarding the importance of midnight, the striking of midnight, the turgid wedding scene. 24 hours later, I still really enjoyed it but in hindsight with some helpful reminders from others who have seen the show too, I feel the production team have a little work to do through the remaining preview period. Conversely, 24 hours later I'm realising how much there was to enjoy in it. My comments were pretty harsh, and I stand by them, but individual moments were great. It just felt like they'd come from 6 or 7 different versions of Cinderella, all of which had been cut into pieces, thrown into the air, and a selection from all the versions had been back stitched together. The bizarre Act 1 finale is a perfect case in point. I'm really curious to hear the recording now. There must have been some serious editing since it was made, as the recording lists 38 musical numbers (mostly still untitled) and the show programme lists 29 songs, I think. Can't wait to hear what other changes might be made over the coming weeks/months/years! |
|
4,793 posts
|
Post by Mark on Jun 26, 2021 22:28:43 GMT
Was at the evening performance tonight and whilst at the end of act one I was feeling a bit unsure, it kinda all came together in act two.
Firstly, I really liked the score as a whole, with Only You, Lonely You and I Know I Have a Heart being the two stand out moments for me.
There’s a song between Cinderella and Sebastian towards the start of act one which I really liked, and the motif plays through the show. I also loved the Entracte and the ball music at the top of act two.
The show looks amazing. Costumes, settings, lighting all top notch and looks like a lot of money has been put into it. The stage moving at the top of act two, whilst some may call it gimmicky, is quite magical and makes total sense.
Casting wise everyone is great. Carrie holds the show and sings effortlessly. Ivano sounds great and has an excellent moment to show off his dancing. I was waiting for a big vocal moment from VHB but it never arrived, although she certainly has the comedic chops, as does Rebecca Trehearn.
The Godmother/Necklace/Midnight plot point as others have mentioned really needs to have more to it. Gloria Onitiri is a fantastic performer but is so underused here. It seems the necklace is forgotten until the last few minutes when it all needs to be wrapped up, and we get the Godmother back for all of a minute or so.
All in all, very enjoyable and I will definitely look forward to another visit. I don’t expect there to be many changes but if they can provide clarity to the plot points mentioned above it will certainly make the show more solid. I wouldn’t say the show was too long and actually, another 5 minutes to solidify the book would go a long way. Bows at the end were all just a long line of the cast - I’m sure they will stage them fully later (seems to be quite common not to have at early previews)
|
|
344 posts
|
Post by properjob on Jun 26, 2021 22:36:04 GMT
Overall I liked it. It feels very British as you can feel the influence of the pantomime tradition in the design. The opening number feels like and no doubt will feature in the future as a panto village opening number.
I was at the matinee and someone had brought some very young children which was an odd choice. Fortunately the innuendo will have gone straight over their head.
I'm not sure how well it will translate to other countries.
Once you see it, the logo makes much more sense.
The songs work better in context but I think we have heard the best tunes as the "singles"
Some of the characters choices seem a bit sudden I agree with others have posted that the transition into the songs can be a bit abrupt but I assume both these areas can and will be worked on during previews.
The director stated in the preshow introduction that the first preview was also the first time they had gone through non stop. The second preview didn't have any show stops or any obvious mistakes. There were a couple of very minor wobbles of cast members on the revolves so they are obviously still getting used to it.
It feels like an ensemble piece in that the stage time isn't dominated by any of the lead characters.
It feels like a proper ALW with a sweeping score as the melodies get picked up by the string section. Lots of people stayed for the full orchestra play out.
Overall I liked it and will be interested to see it again at some point. I doubt it will have a 25 year anniversary but I think it will have a life but I'm not sure how much it will work internationally. It would definitely fall fowl of the Russian "promoting homosexuality" laws espically as it is treated as absolute non issue.
I enthustastically joined in the standing ovation but it was an ovation regonising the effort of getting a new full sized musical on in current circumstances rather than for the piece itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by FairyGodmother on Jun 26, 2021 22:38:11 GMT
I think something funny has happened with the Godmother character — if you look at the workshop cast they didn't mention a godmother at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by newyorkcityboy on Jun 26, 2021 23:01:41 GMT
It's all about the fine tuning/endless tinkering with ALW shows! The raw material is usually fine, but it's the ongoing process that makes all the difference (and can even transform an almost-dud like Woman In White into a prestige show). Unfortunately his obsession with 'concept albums' means we rarely get a record of the finished piece, just a work in progress...for instance seeing Aspects of Love a year or so after it opened, I was surprised to find There Is More To Love was a (sublime) duet between Rose and Giulietta, rather than the rather stodgy ballad on the record. And that duet has never been recorded! The climax of Anything But Lonely falls flat on disc but ends with a huge high note on stage. The end of the London Sunset album just....ends, missing that final, shattering reprise of With One Look. And don't get me started on Love Never Dies - the Oz version, which is vastly improved (and has a lot more call backs to the original show) never got a CD release at all... I think you've nailed everyone of my pet peeves, especially about Aspects which is one of my all-time favorites One correction, the OZ CD was somewhat quietly released during the US Tour of Love Never Dies, with the very rare step of ALW actually re-recording and inserting changes from the DVD and what the tour version sounds like: www.amazon.com/Never-Andrew-Lloyd-Webber-Studio/dp/B07D9V49Q3/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=love+never+dies+cd&qid=1624739234&sr=8-2OMG I never knew this was a thing. Thanks so much! It's such an undervalued score IMO. |
|
36 posts
|
Post by etceteranz on Jun 26, 2021 23:02:38 GMT
Bad cinderella is well..Bad
Not going to repeat a lot of what others have said but its a confused book who doesn't know what it wants to be. They've tried to make ALW's music style "relevant" for today and it falls flat. Would've been better to stick to what ALW is good at or actually find some other person.
The whole thing came across as that actually - like a baby boomer woke up one day and decided to write a "cool" musical....
CHF has some ways to go. Prince sebastian was o.k. The cast gave their all with the material they got given so can't blame them.
I loved the revolve though, that was fun.
I can't see them making enough improvements to make it a hit. SHould go back to workshop mode.
In sayign all this, even if its a dud, i still support anyone buying a ticket (cheap/discounted reccommended) to support the industry at the moment.
|
|
3,452 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jun 26, 2021 23:15:14 GMT
The use of the term "baby boomer" shows a level of maturity yet to be reached in the writer and undermines the attempted critique.
|
|
36 posts
|
Post by etceteranz on Jun 26, 2021 23:24:05 GMT
The use of the term "baby boomer" shows a level of maturity yet to be reached in the writer and undermines the attempted critique.
Your response doesn't clarify what the purpose of your response is?
|
|
|
|
Post by jaqs on Jun 27, 2021 6:35:43 GMT
Overall I liked it. It feels very British as you can feel the influence of the pantomime tradition in the design. The opening number feels like and no doubt will feature in the future as a panto village opening number. I thought the opening was a nod to ‘Who will buy’ from Oliver! |
|
|
|
Post by happytobehere on Jun 27, 2021 6:49:34 GMT
The use of the term "baby boomer" shows a level of maturity yet to be reached in the writer and undermines the attempted critique. Baby boomer is an official, well-known term, there’s nothing wrong with it. I don’t see how it undermines the critique in anyway, it just sounds like the poster was trying to say how the show feels like an older person’s (wrong) idea of what young people might want to see. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Jun 27, 2021 7:00:27 GMT
My concern about this has always been that it would be an older person trying to write something ‘hip’ and ‘woke’, and end up being cringeworthy. I’m not convinced that pairing ALW with a younger book writer would be enough to counter his legendary interference.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2021 7:01:41 GMT
I guess if its Baby Boomer that's used its OK, but if it's the 'Boomer' term that's a bit more problematic. It's overused now and usually in completely the wrong context and at anyone that is disagreed with and that's not even of that generation. A bit like Karen. Can also crop up on hate/Inflammatory speech at times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2021 7:05:51 GMT
I didnt think Prince Charming was a gay sterotype. All through the show we hear how he's a 'mans man' how brave and daring he is etc and i think the joke is meant to be that this butch man that everyone admires and looks up to, is gay. Which i'm sure, some people might find offensive. He wasn't a limp wristed, mincing queen by any stretch, but the choreography he is given, doesn't help, nor does the fur on his outfit. But why does he need to be flamboyant to be gay? Why can't he be daring and masculine or whatever and still be gay. Everytime musical theatre puts gay character in it has to be flamboyant and stereotypical. Why does he need to stand out. It just seems for a musical claiming to be modern and forward thinking its using old fashioned ideas that doesn't move things forward. |
|
5,838 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Jun 27, 2021 7:45:21 GMT
If it’s like any of ALW’s previous new musicals, he will insist on tinkering with everything EXCEPT the very things that need the work- like the script and the score. If it doesn’t work- the set and costumes will be blamed. And the choreography.
It’s very depressing to hear that despite endless workshops and development, the storyline is not great. I don’t hold out much hope for any big changes during rehearsals, you need a proper director with clout taking charge of things, this hasn’t got one of those.
|
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 27, 2021 7:57:43 GMT
If it’s like any of ALW’s previous new musicals, he will insist on tinkering with everything EXCEPT the very things that need the work- like the script and the score. If it doesn’t work- the set and costumes will be blamed. And the choreography. It’s very depressing to hear that despite endless workshops and development, the storyline is not great. I don’t hold out much hope for any big changes during rehearsals, you need a proper director with clout taking charge of things, this hasn’t got one of those. Exactly! If Cinderella isn’t successful I’ve been wondering what he’ll blame it on. There’s always some reason, other than the piece itself, that is to blame. |
|
