3,465 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jun 27, 2021 12:34:41 GMT
But how can somebody be disappointed having yet to see the show? My point is that some people seem to want to see this show fail. In fairness they've been doing it for weeks and the discussion has continued regardless. I struggle a little with negative mindsets - no doubt the same will happen on the Phantom thread as we get closer to opening night and the naysayers and doom-mongers kick off the old vs new debate. Again. Disagreeing with your opinion/criticising something = doom-mongers Sorry but this view that criticism is bad and those voices should be silenced or are just 'haters' is petty and to be honest a bit dangerous. They are no less valid than anyone else. Promotional material is put out to attract people to a product, reviews are put out to sell a product. Its designed for people to form an opinion, having an opinion isn't a bad thing. We all make them on a daily basis about one product or service or another. People then form an opinion based on that information, not everyone is in the privileged position to see every single show. From the promotional information put out by the show itself, and the reviews from people on here (all telling similar stories in their own words) there are areas of concern and contradictions to what was promoted by the show. I don't want to see another show where being gay is used for a 'twist' or shock value, or another flamboyant gay character used for laughs or because that's the only way people seem to be able to portray gay people in musicals. We were promised better than that and so far nothing seems very progressive about it. -------------------- I agree with your points, though I do think it would be nice to reduce some of the negativity on this board (without suppressing or silencing views). Your point about the gay twist is something that bothers me about this production as it is neither revelatory nor authentic (authentic in that there is no back story to justify hingeing the pivot off the character's sexuality). Plenty of people might argue that there is little that is authentic in this production, as it does have some Burtonesque elements to it, but as a straight guy, I always feel uncomfortable when gay = flamboyant, extravagant, provocative. All the gay people I know are just regular, normal, grounded and occasionally boring! I'd just prefer something closer to what feels normal, or even for it not to feature at all. We've come such a long way in the UK in the last two decades. When I was at secondary school, being gay was off the agenda. Nobody talked about it, it wasn't up for debate, those who were hid it until well into their adult lives. It was stigmatised, the subject of hateful barbed insults, and something that led me to reject my Catholicism. It makes me so happy now that society accepts and embraces - there will always be the haters, but I'm not sure that a sexuality twist to an old fairy tale lends the new take much credibility, and I know when I take my two daughters in a couple of weeks that they will be confused by the plot twist. As somebody suggested earlier in the thread, it might have been better just to let Cinderella be confident and empowered enough to reject being in a relationship rather than opt for Sebastian. To me, this would have been more contemporary; it would give a little feminist edge (which somebody mentioned earlier too), but also strike out against the need for codependence, just because society seems to dictate that everybody needs somebody whether male or female. As you say, it isn't progressive. But I don't think it is an age/generation issue. I think it is clumsy writing - there are gaps in the plot, assumptions made that the audience will fill the gaps based on story familiarity. Anybody who is unfamiliar with Cinderella will struggle to keep up with this version. It would be a brave decision to tone down or drop the Prince Charming twist, or even rewrite it so that the character can simply say: "I wasn't ready for commitment, male or female, and I have returned to the place I love to be with the people I love," rather than being the first/only gay in the village. |
|
3,465 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jun 27, 2021 12:35:28 GMT
|
|
1,740 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Jun 27, 2021 13:22:12 GMT
I was at yesterday’s matinee. After the date changes and a seat switch when restrictions weren’t lifted I was mainly thrilled to be going! I have been to first previews of transfers but this is by far the earliest I have seen a new show.
I loved the refurbishment. I was side circle row B and still want to work out how they have fitted in so many more seats but seemingly kept great sight lines. We did have a long queue to get in but once we got to the front everything ran smoothly. I bought some official Cinderella socks which may be my most random merch purchase!
Andrew and Laurence did some little speeches but other than a microphone unmuting too late and a couple of lighting things I didn’t see any issues.
I don’t want to review such an early performance but do agree that, especially in act 2, there are bits that either need trimming or expanding as they don’t seem to fully resolve. I loved all the staging, I never saw the revolve in cats but although it is mainly a gimmick here I think it is a good gimmick. If I can get some dynamically prices revolving seats I will. It I wouldn’t pay £100! I loved all the extra lighting that came at certain points, with that and the revolving stage they are really doing a production that would need big changes to tour!
I loved all the cast and I thought it really suited Carrie, I’ve seen her in Les Mis and Addams Family but there she had to play as written rather than being part of the creative process. Ivano blew me away as Sebastian and Victoria was on another level as stepmother. I hope they don’t change her!
I hope to go again and am tempted to try and see the alternate Cinderella (assuming she gets a set schedule) to see if she mimicked Carrie or does her own thing with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by max on Jun 27, 2021 13:59:34 GMT
Andrew and Laurence did some little speeches but other than a microphone unmuting too late and a couple of lighting things I didn’t see any issues. Really good to hear that the physical production is in such good shape already - lots of time then, and no excuses, for sorting the storytelling where it's not yet strong enough (in the view of many here). That's a GOOD place to be in - though (as said by others above) changes do scuff currently smooth tech / automation. One other thought. This title is useless for Twitter - try searching for any 'ordinary audience' reactions on there; so many folk tweet within any hour worldwide using the word 'Cinderella'. If only they had a youngster, maybe within the cast, who knew a bit about social media....... |
|
8,128 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Jun 27, 2021 14:16:57 GMT
OK hands up, who gave it the 1 star rating?
|
|
5,151 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Jun 27, 2021 14:34:45 GMT
OK hands up, who gave it the 1 star rating? Cameron Mackintosh? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2021 14:55:22 GMT
Andrew and Laurence did some little speeches but other than a microphone unmuting too late and a couple of lighting things I didn’t see any issues. Really good to hear that the physical production is in such good shape already - lots of time then, and no excuses, for sorting the storytelling where it's not yet strong enough (in the view of many here). That's a GOOD place to be in - though (as said by others above) changes do scuff currently smooth tech / automation. One other thought. This title is useless for Twitter - try searching for any 'ordinary audience' reactions on there; so many folk tweet within any hour worldwide using the word 'Cinderella'. If only they had a youngster, maybe within the cast, who knew a bit about social media....... You'll need to search for ALW CINDERELLA but I'm not sure they're entirely honest either |
|
|
|
Post by max on Jun 27, 2021 15:11:23 GMT
Really good to hear that the physical production is in such good shape already - lots of time then, and no excuses, for sorting the storytelling where it's not yet strong enough (in the view of many here). That's a GOOD place to be in - though (as said by others above) changes do scuff currently smooth tech / automation. One other thought. This title is useless for Twitter - try searching for any 'ordinary audience' reactions on there; so many folk tweet within any hour worldwide using the word 'Cinderella'. If only they had a youngster, maybe within the cast, who knew a bit about social media....... You'll need to search for ALW CINDERELLA but I'm not sure they're entirely honest either I have, and tried it in combination with 'West End' or 'Musical' or 'Webber'. But it's no good if you need to tell theatregoers to add ALW to their tweets. May have been the same with the word 'wicked' too I guess, but 'Dear Evan Hansen' not so much. |
|
249 posts
|
Post by theinvisiblegirl on Jun 27, 2021 15:13:22 GMT
I'm looking to book this for later in the year. Would those who have seen it recommend the moving seats, do you miss anything? Thanks The moving seat area was fun but not worth the premium price. I'll be seeing it next from the fixed stalls and I think I'll enjoy seeing it more. Being nosey, I was checking out the wings/view out to audience whilst rotated and immediately thought it was possibly more magical for those now at the very front of the stalls as the ballroom effectively elevates the stage level and brings them closer to the action. I was moved from the rotating seats to the centre of Row I which made me front row centre when the stage rotated. The ball scene felt magical because the stage was at the same level as my seat. whereas the rotating seats ended up below stage level due to the rake. |
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Jun 27, 2021 15:41:22 GMT
Interesting to read thoughts on here, completely forgot this was previewing.
The only draw for me would be Victoria Hamilton-Barritt (and Rebecca Trehearn; I'm glad they've received a positive reaction.
(Otherwise; this doesn't interest me at all)
|
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Jun 27, 2021 16:45:16 GMT
I was just making a joke but thanks for the condescending tip! |
|
5,022 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 27, 2021 17:26:00 GMT
So a question for those in the know, the day after a first preview what will be happening? Lots of meetings presumably but would we expect any changes in the first couple of days or will they assimilate lots of notes over several performances before changing things? I haven't seen the schedule, so this is assuming there are two shows today and nothing tomorrow, then back on Monday night. Only from my own experience, last night they'd have gotten a very brief "I'm so proud of you" speech on the stage once the house was empty from the director, ALW et al. This morning the cast will be called around 10-11am and given notes. SM and crew a little earlier to preset scenes which might be briefly marked through if there were problems last night. No changes will be implemented, as there isn't time. The notes will be minor and mostly technical, usually. Then they'll warm up and run the matinee, have a bite to eat, then more notes. Then run the evening. Tomorrow will be a day off, assuming there is no show. Monday will be a full day, early call, where changes will be implemented. This is where work on cuts, additions and major changes will begin, then these will be implemented in Monday's night show. This pattern will continue until the end of previews. On Broadway they do the typical Tuesday to Sunday schedule, except in previews where they do Monday to Saturday this is to allow more rehearsal time, they get Sunday off, as they do here. Obviously the creatives make copious notes in preview performances, then in the afternoon they will make changes to one scene, which they will rehearsal and try out that evening in the next preview. Unfortunately preview is the only time you get to see how something lands with the audience, but conversely you don’t get much time for rehearsals. This is why try outs are so popular. Oklahoma where modern musicals begun, shows the benefits of try outs, it came from devastating reviews on the road to well the rest is history. SPOILERS AHEAD FOR THE END OF ACT 1: The more i think about it, the more confused i am by the Act 1 ending. The Godmothers dress shop is presented as some kind of dark, hi-tech space. For some reason the Godmother is randomly measuring the mannequin's arms. I guess because she's been given no direction. She tell's Cinders that everyone in the town comes to her, and it made me think that maybe the town was like Westworld or Stepford (if only it was that interesting) She asks Cinders what she wants, no, what she REALLY wants. Cinders wants to be beautiful, she wants to be loved, she wants to be happy. Godmother says she can give her all that and more. Cinders offers her money, but says no, she needs something important from her and zooms in on the necklace that Cinders has. The necklace was a big deal earlier in the show, because it was the only thing she had from her mother. Cinders readily hands it over to her. Then there is a terrible 'quick change' because when they drag a huge screen across the stage,its clearly obvious its a double. The white mask has led lights all around it, kinda creepy looking. This is dragged out while Cinders changes off stage. The big screen comes out again for what is not a big reveal, of cinders in her new look for the ball. The Godmother tells her numerous times, you must be home by midnight. Cinders sings a few lines and walks upstage, and then the Godmother, silhouetted in a spotlight,centre stage, holding up the necklace Cinders gave her, cackles 'you must be home by midnight' BLACKOUT. END OF ACT 1. And the none of this is mentioned again in the show, until the Godmother walks across the stage to literally just give Sebastian the necklace. HUH?? The Godmother’s dress shop so reminds me of Everyone Is Talking About Jamie, with the Coco Chanel shop. |
|
5,022 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 27, 2021 17:44:20 GMT
I saw Cinderella yesterday afternoon.
If anyone is going expecting to see a amazing set, then they booked the wrong show. It was more serviceable set, like School of Rock. Didn’t Harold Prince say you have to look at a show to Andrew Lloyd Webber, he certainly didn’t heed his advice. I thought the revolve though would be a gimmick, to sell tickets, well not so, I wasn’t sitting in the revolve, but when it turned round at the start of act 2 for the ballroom scene, it gave it a intimacy that really served the piece well. I also though the show was poorly lit and the colour palette, verged more on the darker anaemic and pallid side.
Carrie Hope Fletcher still baffles me though, however Victoria Hamilton-Barrett and Rebecca Trehearn who won a Olivier Award in this theatre, certainly don’t. Newcomer Ivano Turco was alright, then he did a brilliant Michael Jackson thing near the end, that got a wow from me.
Emerald Fennell put a interesting spin on this, certainly a famous fairytale and also a love story with a twist, however a book needs a bit more than that, the piece needs a few more laughs, this is what Julian Fellowes did very well with School of Rock, there is only one laugh out loud moment in the show. The music is well typical Andrew Lloyd Webber, which can be either good or bad depending on your views of the composer, it is nowhere near his best score, but it does sore in places. However I never really rated David Zippel as a lyricist he is not in the same league of Tim Rice, Don Black or even Glenn Slater (banal lyric like rhyming Cinderella/Salmonella) this should unite the book and music, this doesn’t do that. The stars need to be aligned and this is the job of the director Laurence Connor. However there is a very good reason why shows preview and this is only the second preview to iron out issues and see how these land with the audience. It not a bad show, just problematic in places, I actually quite enjoyed it, but didn’t get that visceral reaction, when I have seen a great show. When they manage to get all the cogs turning it should be a better show, at the moment they’re a bit turgid and laborious.
David Zippel wrote the Tennis Song for City of Angels, Georgina Castle is in the show, who is the daughter of Andrew Castle, who played at Wimbledon as well as presents on LBC.
I would say more confused than bad Cinderella. 3 Stars.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Jun 27, 2021 18:03:33 GMT
I haven't seen the schedule, so this is assuming there are two shows today and nothing tomorrow, then back on Monday night. Only from my own experience, last night they'd have gotten a very brief "I'm so proud of you" speech on the stage once the house was empty from the director, ALW et al. This morning the cast will be called around 10-11am and given notes. SM and crew a little earlier to preset scenes which might be briefly marked through if there were problems last night. No changes will be implemented, as there isn't time. The notes will be minor and mostly technical, usually. Then they'll warm up and run the matinee, have a bite to eat, then more notes. Then run the evening. Tomorrow will be a day off, assuming there is no show. Monday will be a full day, early call, where changes will be implemented. This is where work on cuts, additions and major changes will begin, then these will be implemented in Monday's night show. This pattern will continue until the end of previews. On Broadway they do the typical Tuesday to Sunday schedule, except in previews where they do Monday to Saturday this is to allow more rehearsal time, they get Sunday off, as they do here. Obviously the creatives make copious notes in preview performances, then in the afternoon they will make changes to one scene, which they will rehearsal and try out that evening in the next preview. Unfortunately preview is the only time you get to see how something lands with the audience, but conversely you don’t get much time for rehearsals. This is why try outs are so popular. Oklahoma where modern musicals begun, shows the benefits of try outs, it came from devastating reviews on the road to well the rest is history. SPOILERS AHEAD FOR THE END OF ACT 1: The more i think about it, the more confused i am by the Act 1 ending. The Godmothers dress shop is presented as some kind of dark, hi-tech space. For some reason the Godmother is randomly measuring the mannequin's arms. I guess because she's been given no direction. She tell's Cinders that everyone in the town comes to her, and it made me think that maybe the town was like Westworld or Stepford (if only it was that interesting) She asks Cinders what she wants, no, what she REALLY wants. Cinders wants to be beautiful, she wants to be loved, she wants to be happy. Godmother says she can give her all that and more. Cinders offers her money, but says no, she needs something important from her and zooms in on the necklace that Cinders has. The necklace was a big deal earlier in the show, because it was the only thing she had from her mother. Cinders readily hands it over to her. Then there is a terrible 'quick change' because when they drag a huge screen across the stage,its clearly obvious its a double. The white mask has led lights all around it, kinda creepy looking. This is dragged out while Cinders changes off stage. The big screen comes out again for what is not a big reveal, of cinders in her new look for the ball. The Godmother tells her numerous times, you must be home by midnight. Cinders sings a few lines and walks upstage, and then the Godmother, silhouetted in a spotlight,centre stage, holding up the necklace Cinders gave her, cackles 'you must be home by midnight' BLACKOUT. END OF ACT 1. And the none of this is mentioned again in the show, until the Godmother walks across the stage to literally just give Sebastian the necklace. HUH?? The Godmother’s dress shop so reminds me of Everyone Is Talking About Jamie, with the Coco Chanel shop. Thank you for your below review - the differences in standard Broadway procedure compared to the West End is fascinating to me too. It's very interesting how much more common try-outs are there. Previews here used to be try-outs, essentially. They were a lot cheaper to see, which allowed experimentation, for one thing. £100 for a show which hasn't even been fully run once at show level is astonishing. |
|
19,724 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jun 27, 2021 18:15:31 GMT
OK hands up, who gave it the 1 star rating? Well, it’s not a (sea) witch hunt but I would hope that the person doing that would post in the thread with their reasons. However as they haven’t and we can’t force them it’s up to the rest of us to decide how seriously we take that rating without a justification. |
|
|
|
Post by jaqs on Jun 27, 2021 18:26:36 GMT
The godmother shop gave me Viva forever flashbacks, when there was that whole Botox song and giant needles.
|
|
620 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Jun 27, 2021 20:29:02 GMT
It often feels that there's a bunch of people eagerly waiting to out snark one another at the tiniest inkling of anything with regard to a new production, especially since "Love Never Dies" got that unfortunate moniker "Paint Never Dries" during previews from people online. Criticisms, critiques, whatever are part of the arts - but some are unfair and in some cases unjustified (especially when people simply pile on having never seen the show)
For me, being in the US - I'm looking forward to the release of the album on July 9th. I preordered that the first day it was available (months and months ago) simply because I'm an ALW fan. And I try to be pretty objective. I had preordered the original LND - had purchased a new Bose sound system so I could hear it in it's full glory and while I liked a lot of the music, it nowhere near grabbed me like the first time I listened to the WPR of Sunset where I couldn't walk away from the score and almost immediately listened to the entire thing again. School of Rock CD - thought it was okay and never went to see it because had little interest in the story and the music didn't wow me. Very curious to see how I'll react to Cinderella
I'm a little bit surprised that the preview period is only about 3 weeks. With School of Rock, ALW did those public "workshops" which from the sounds of things really helped them iron out things and shuffle them around. I can't remember if Cinderella did or not, but with all these false starts and stops from COVID, I would've expected they wanted to give themselves some more time. Then again, I can imagine the creatives have been over-working during lockdown and can't wait for the premiere.
For me, it's always exciting to have a new ALW production - especially after the last 15 months
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2021 21:07:49 GMT
Considering the workshops they have previously done for Cinderella at the St.James, along with the delays they have had with this production, i was/am surprised it isnt more cohesive. How can they not see the plot holes in it?
|
|
348 posts
|
Post by properjob on Jun 27, 2021 21:29:16 GMT
I don't think there are plot holes so much that at times the plot and character journeys aren't quite clear enough. I imagine that is a hard thing to judge when you are deeply involved with it because you already know what is happening and what is going to happen.
Only putting it in front of an audience tells you if the audience gets it.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Jun 27, 2021 21:31:57 GMT
Did anyone see it at TOP? Would it not have been picked up in workshop?
|
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 27, 2021 21:32:58 GMT
I don't think there are plot holes so much that at times the plot and character journeys aren't quite clear enough. I imagine that is a hard thing to judge when you are deeply involved with it because you already know what is happening and what is going to happen. Only putting it in front of an audience tells you if the audience gets it. I always wonder why this is the case in theatre, and not TV, or books, or movies (I know sometimes movies do have test audiences). How can something as fundamental a musical’s plot get to reach an audience with so many flaws, and why do people think that’s acceptable? |
|
839 posts
|
Post by stuartmcd on Jun 27, 2021 21:46:45 GMT
I don't think there are plot holes so much that at times the plot and character journeys aren't quite clear enough. I imagine that is a hard thing to judge when you are deeply involved with it because you already know what is happening and what is going to happen. Only putting it in front of an audience tells you if the audience gets it. I always wonder why this is the case in theatre, and not TV, or books, or movies (I know sometimes movies do have test audiences). How can something as fundamental a musical’s plot get to reach an audience with so many flaws, and why do people think that’s acceptable? It does happen with movies all the time. A lot of particularly big budget movies schedule in reshoots for this exact reason. Books go through a number of stages of rewrites during the editing process following notes from their editors. And let's face it there are plenty of movies, tv shows and books that get released as a final product with plot issues. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2021 21:49:57 GMT
I don't think there are plot holes so much that at times the plot and character journeys aren't quite clear enough. I imagine that is a hard thing to judge when you are deeply involved with it because you already know what is happening and what is going to happen. Only putting it in front of an audience tells you if the audience gets it. The Godmother/necklace/midnight is the definition of a gaping plot hole. The whole Cinderella traditional story revolves around her being home by midnight, as gown becomes rags etc, you dont leave your Act 1 cliffhangar unanswered. If the creative team dont see that before it gets an audience, then they're either ignoring it or just stupid.. |
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 27, 2021 21:53:05 GMT
I always wonder why this is the case in theatre, and not TV, or books, or movies (I know sometimes movies do have test audiences). How can something as fundamental a musical’s plot get to reach an audience with so many flaws, and why do people think that’s acceptable? It does happen with movies all the time. A lot of particularly big budget movies schedule in reshoots for this exact reason. Books go through a number of stages of rewrites during the editing process following notes from their editors. And let's face it there are plenty of movies, tv shows and books that get released as a final product with plot issues. Sure, there are plenty of things released with plot issues. But why does theatre get away with charging you £100 to see a preview then get the “it’s only a preview, how could we possibly have know after years of development, workshops and rehearsals that the plot has issues?!” excuse? |
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Jun 27, 2021 21:55:49 GMT
And it would be one thing if those issues actually were ironed out in previews, but I’ve yet to see an ALW show where anything that fundamental has changed.
|
|
