Aspects of Love w/ Michael Ball - Lyric

[max]

Yesterday I saw someone on Twitter slamming this for the 'ick' factor, yet passively referencing 'Pretty Woman' apparently positively. Where was the outrage there? Someone else on YouTube had 'never felt so uncomfortable in a Theatre'. Really?

I accept all views, and understand those can be about 'poor execution of difficult themes'. But it feels that something else is going on out there.

[jay78uk]

Goodness look at availability and prices tomorrow night on tks, I better go again quick

[newyorkcityboy]

The reviews in London the first time around were superlative, absolute raves. ‘Andrew Lloyd Webber’s best,’ (Daily Telegraph). ‘Lloyd Webber dares and comes up with another winner,’ (Daily Mail). ‘The most romantic show in town…and the most triumphant,’ (Daily Mirror). ‘Marks the coming of age of the English stage musical, (International Herald Tribune).

Maybe it’s just a sign of changing times/morals/tastes? ALW was riding high after Phantom. His stock - in the eyes of the public - is a little tarnished, thirty years later.

[max]

Jun 1, 2023 17:48:06 GMT jay78uk said:

Goodness look at availability and prices tomorrow night on tks, I better go again quick

Do you mean Today Tix? If so, I notice that they've got £25 seats for Tues, but not for Monday when Michael Ball isn't on. You'd think Monday needed more help (and it does). Protecting the dignity of the star?
Perhaps Mondays should be dropped from the schedule.

[jay78uk]

Jun 1, 2023 18:00:43 GMT max said:

Jun 1, 2023 17:48:06 GMT jay78uk said:

Goodness look at availability and prices tomorrow night on tks, I better go again quick

Do you mean Today Tix? If so, I notice that they've got £25 seats for Tues, but not for Monday when Michael Ball isn't on. You'd think Monday needed more help (and it does). Protecting the dignity of the star?
Perhaps Mondays should be dropped from the schedule.

I am not clever enough to post an image but half the stallls for stall on todaytix for 25 quid tomorrow (friday) night. Hope to get a ticket monday night to see david willetts.

[max]

Jun 1, 2023 17:49:33 GMT newyorkcityboy said:

The reviews in London the first time around were superlative, absolute raves. ‘Andrew Lloyd Webber’s best,’ (Daily Telegraph). ‘Lloyd Webber dares and comes up with another winner,’ (Daily Mail). ‘The most romantic show in town…and the most triumphant,’ (Daily Mirror). ‘Marks the coming of age of the English stage musical, (International Herald Tribune).

Maybe it’s just a sign of changing times/morals/tastes? ALW was riding high after Phantom. His stock - in the eyes of the public - is a little tarnished, thirty years later.

It was in 1980 that I first saw 'Oklahoma!' - Cameron Mackintosh tour. 37yrs after it debuted. I didn't hate it; it felt old fashioned and not for my time or age; irrelevant entertainment my gran would like.
Dated from 'Evita' We're now a bit more than 37yrs on, so I can hardly blame younger audiences for not only finding work irrelevant and 'out of time', but also having that hint of pleasure (that I probably had in 1980) at disparaging something as dated and not good enough for them.

It does however make me feel old. Plus sad that a lot of my cultural touchstones seem to be in the bin. Finally, typically, like an older person, I look at what they laud as better, and often say... really? Can you not see what foundation that's built on?! Etc.

[max]

P s I don't mean that board members only dislike it because they're young btw.

I'm referring instead to the gleeful social media reaction where people seem to be elbowing eachother out of the way to show who hated it most/was most uncomfortable.

[danb]

Jun 1, 2023 17:46:54 GMT max said:

Yesterday I saw someone on Twitter slamming this for the 'ick' factor, yet passively referencing 'Pretty Woman' apparently positively. Where was the outrage there? Someone else on YouTube had 'never felt so uncomfortable in a Theatre'. Really?

I accept all views, and understand those can be about 'poor execution of difficult themes'. But it feels that something else is going on out there.

Whether conscious/intentional or not, a substantial percentage of the ‘social media active theatregoing public’ have decided to take against this nearly 40 year old musical (based on a much older piece of literature) for one of its plot points that has not aged at all well. It has become a banner on which to hang the whole show. Pointing out the shoddy scenery or that one of the leads can’t act won’t fill half as many column inches. Folks are highly likely to take against a musical about an age inappropriate relationship against a backdrop of Rolf Harris and Schofield. It is the world we live in. Outrage first! People are free to like and dislike whatever they want, for whatever reason. But they need to at least be honest about it.

[actorsinger]

I’m old. I saw the original three times and adored it. My morals haven’t changed but if I remember correctly the themes were handled very differently in the original production. I think, because Jenny was still only 15, there was reall reticence on the part of Alex to get involved and it very much felt like he was hanging around to get back with Rose if anything. The Jenny thing felt like a childhood crush. I definitely don’t remember them SPOILER ALERT kissing at all. If anyone else remembers please correct me if I’m wrong.
The poor direction and the lack of any chemistry or detail in the relationships is what makes this production of the show a dud.

[max]

Jun 1, 2023 20:51:14 GMT actorsinger said:

I’m old. I saw the original three times and adored it. My morals haven’t changed but if I remember correctly the themes were handled very differently in the original production. I think, because Jenny was still only 15, there was reall reticence on the part of Alex to get involved and it very much felt like he was hanging around to get back with Rose if anything. The Jenny thing felt like a childhood crush. I definitely don’t remember them SPOILER ALERT kissing at all. If anyone else remembers please correct me if I’m wrong.
The poor direction and the lack of any chemistry or detail in the relationships is what makes this production of the show a dud.

Interesting point.  I was disappointed that the 'taboo' element was altered for this new productions. 

It sounds like the adjustment - by making sexual possibility legal - has actually been more problematic than the original, where youthful infatuation and a certain preparing-for-life 'role playing' from Jenny was tricky for Alex to kindly let down.  Though I'm not forgetting the danger of things to come in the (almost final) line from Giulietta: "It won't be long before Jenny's a woman. What then?"

I haven't seen this production; not sure if I will now.  Weirdly it's made me look up online reviews of 'Pretty Woman' and contemplate seeing that, to try and understand what's going on.  But there may be lessons held here on either the dangers of trimming to what you think will be public taste. 

[newyorkcityboy]

Jun 1, 2023 20:51:14 GMT actorsinger said:

I’m old. I saw the original three times and adored it. My morals haven’t changed but if I remember correctly the themes were handled very differently in the original production. I think, because Jenny was still only 15, there was reall reticence on the part of Alex to get involved and it very much felt like he was hanging around to get back with Rose if anything. The Jenny thing felt like a childhood crush. I definitely don’t remember them SPOILER ALERT kissing at all. If anyone else remembers please correct me if I’m wrong.
The poor direction and the lack of any chemistry or detail in the relationships is what makes this production of the show a dud.

I certainly remember the original as you do. Jenny did all the running while Alex remained uncomfortable throughout. The lyrics to the Mermaid song (amongst others) make that clear.

Which is why I don’t understand the changes, or people’s reactions to them. It’s not illegal for cousins to get married in this country. Which lessens the drama somewhat. If Jenny is over 18 in this version - and Alex really *is* interested - then there’s nothing to stand in their way. Apart from the fact that it might upset her father.

(It’s worth remembering that the novel was based on real people and events. In real life ‘Jenny’ and ‘Alex’ *did* get married. To the horror of her parents. But ‘Alex’ had slept with her father, not her mother. Who wasn’t his uncle, by the way, before we open another can of worms…)

I hope despite these poor reactions that we get a new cast album. The show is one of my favourite scores yet - apart from Michael Ball - I don’t like many of the voices on the record. I’d love to have a fresher version to listen to.

[karloscar]

Given all the Alex/Jenny controversy it made me laugh watching Who Do Think You Are? that ALW's 12xgreat granny was married off at 14 to her guardian the Duke of Suffolk (?) who was 49 at the time even though she'd been promised to his son. Plus ça change...

[anthony]

Not sure we are remembering the Alex/Jenny relationship accurately. Prior to this production, I'd only seen the Essex tour when I was a teen. However, even in the OLC, Alex sings "She ought to be the last one I should care for" and "I love her but I must not love her. I wish to God we never met" when singing about Jenny. His feelings are quite clear. I do agree that by aging Jenny and having Jenny and Alex kiss muddies the water too much for some audience members - tonight, the girl next to me (a teenager with her parents) literally shouted "She's your cousin. It's disgusting" at the kiss.

In regards to criticising the play: The YouTube reviewer who was referenced a few pages ago purposefully misconstrues sections of the plot to make it sound significantly more "icky" than it arguably is in their video review. I am not bothered if people don't like the show, but I do feel that there is so much anti-ALW sentiment at the moment that it overshadows genuine criticism. Many of the reviews focus on plot points such as Alex shooting Rose, with one reviewer joking they are considering getting a "pitchfork" to "run it out of town". I mean, they clearly haven't seen Heathers, BoM, Hamilton, bloody Lion King! And don't let them see Bonnie and Clyde. The hyperbole is immense.

Anyway, second time tonight. Will probably go at least 1 more time to see Willetts as George. My other half *hated* it. He just didn't really understand what was happening and felt the time jumps weren't explained clearly enough, which is something I can understand as a genuine criticism. They have those screens - perhaps they could have said something like "Venice, 19xx" or whatever to make it more clear. Still, probably the easiest 5 stars I've ever given. Genuinely do think it's just wonderful. Laura Pitt-Pulford's 'Anything But Lonely' is just glorious.

Ticket prices are worrying and it makes me nervous about any potential revivals of other ALW shows. I'd love to see Stephen Ward revived as a chamber piece - Theme is probably one of his most beautiful compositions.

Hoping for a cast album, but not holding my breath after the lack of an album with Woman in White (although we have seen footage of the Aspects cast recording the songs in a studio!)

[max]

Thanks Anthony, you're right and I'd forgotten those lines. For me, that's still what makes it interesting. We only have one word for 'love' in English. As opposed to philos, Eros, patros in Greek (philial love, erotic love, love of country - perhaps there are more). Dividing them in the heat of human feeling can be complex. Isn't there a human condition that can cause people to feel lustful during grief? etc.

As for social media, I enjoy First Time music reaction videos, though it becomes hard to believe how many people haven't heard Bohemian Rhapsody.... Putting it on for effect? Then there's the practice of taking the thumbnail at your most shocked moment. It's standard YouTube practice that MickeyJoe does this for his video, and legitimate clickbait practice on a monetised channel. As with music reactions, it's infectious though. Others follow the most click-worthy trend - putting it on. So despite an online world of largely free speech, without a commissioning editor, such reviewers are still controlled by need for clicks and going with the prevailing trend that sells.

All this, in my view, has a lot to do with 'Cinderella' & ALW's vote in the House of Lords. As such I wouldn't expect any positive reviews of his work in social media, from younger makers/influencers - ever.

His legacy will be the silent one that Les Miserables wouldn't have happened without JCS, and the heavy influence of JCS on Hamilton.

[danb]

Jun 2, 2023 8:32:34 GMT max said:

Thanks Anthony, you're right and I'd forgotten those lines. For me, that's still what makes it interesting. We only have one word for 'love' in English. As opposed to philos, Eros, patros in Greek (philial love, erotic love, love of country - perhaps there are more). Dividing them in the heat of human feeling can be complex. Isn't there a human condition that can cause people to feel lustful during grief? etc.

As for social media, I enjoy First Time music reaction videos, though it becomes hard to believe how many people haven't heard Bohemian Rhapsody.... Putting it on for effect? Then there's the practice of taking the thumbnail at your most shocked moment. It's standard YouTube practice that MickeyJoe does this for his video, and legitimate clickbait practice on a monetised channel. As with music reactions, it's infectious though. Others follow the most click-worthy trend - putting it on. So despite an online world of largely free speech, without a commissioning editor, such reviewers are still controlled by need for clicks and going with the prevailing trend that sells.

All this, in my view, has a lot to do with 'Cinderella' & ALW's vote in the House of Lords. As such I wouldn't expect any positive reviews of his work in social media, from younger makers/influencers - ever.

His legacy will be the silent one that Les Miserables wouldn't have happened without JCS, and the heavy influence of JCS on Hamilton.

But it is akin to saying that ‘Hamilton’ is solely about his affair with Maria Reynolds or that ‘Saturday Night Fever’ is about people throwing themselves off of bridges. If they are so desperate for views how about create something with editorial worth rather than just clickbait headlines?

[bobbievanhusen]

I saw this last night and whilst it's not the best production of the show, I still really enjoyed it and don't get where the 'ick' factor is coming from, especially with the changes they have made for this version. It's a grown up show about adults that fall in love, have affairs and shocker, have sex. Jenny's infatuation with Alex is completely 1 sided and when Alex consideres kissing her, he doesn't do it. He knows it can't happen and it doesn't. I don't get why people are so uptight about it. The original Novella is great at creating real people and situations, but the musical doesn't do the nuances of the story very well.

There is also alot of over exageration going on in people's depiction of the show. Alex doesn't groom Jenny, He doesn't have sex with her, I think there might have been 1 almost kiss and Alex doesn't shoot rose, he only grazes her arm.

This production is missing alot of the 'moments' that previous productions had, and it seems all 1 note, theres no highs or big emotional beats, there no chance to create a moment and i think that is becausre of the direction and the set design. It feels too cinematic, constantly moving instead of savouring certain moments. Hand me the wine and the dice seemed almost thrown away. The set design also feels too bare on the stage. Some great painted backcloths, especially at the main house and they were beautifully lit.

I didn't mind some of the changes to the lyrics, but not convinced about Love Changes Everything new placement , nor giving it to Michael Ball  George to sing. It felt like he should have been saying those things to Alex, as he's the most inexperienced in Love, not to Rose.

I would be interested to see it again, but maybe on a Monday when Jamie Boyega and Michael Ball are off.

[jay78uk]

Mar 10, 2023 13:17:00 GMT jay78uk said:

I'm super excited to see this- its a great score. I couldn't stand the LCE rendition on radio 2- v. schmaltzy- I do hope the score isn't hammed up throughout- liked the original orchestrations. Does anyone know if they are tinkering with the story line given the high level ick factor regarding Jenny and Alex in second act? I can't see it going down well in 2023! ps. I don't have a view whether they should change it or not- but I would have thought if they don't it will be mentioned in reviews and will put some folk off seeing it...

I did predict the ick factor back in March but I’m surprised quite how much its dominated reviews.

[steve10086]

Eva sleeps with Magaldi and moves to the city with him when she’s 15.

Better cancel that upcoming Evita concert. How will people cope with the “ick factor”? 😱

[anthony]

Jun 2, 2023 16:48:16 GMT steve10086 said:

Eva sleeps with Magaldi and moves to the city with him when she’s 15.

Better cancel that upcoming Evita concert. How will people cope with the “ick factor”? 😱

Wait until they discover the plot of Phantom and how old the movie version of POTO makes Christine at the point the story happens...

[bobbievanhusen]

I suspect there are more than a few people who have issues with the 'problematic' or 'icky' Aspects of Love, but the murders, rape, teen suicide, sexual assault and violence in Heathers went completely un-noticed.

[danb]

Jun 3, 2023 4:16:04 GMT bobbievanhusen said:

I suspect there are more than a few people who have issues with the 'problematic' or 'icky' Aspects of Love, but the murders, rape, teen suicide, sexual assault and violence in Heathers went completely un-noticed.

…and yet the main criticism levelled at the movie on release & subsequently the show of ‘Heathers’ was that it didn’t go far enough. That it fumbles the ending with happy-clappy togetherness. It sells itself as a pitch black teen comedy and is only dark grey.

[anita]

I decided to see this as have only seen the touring version with David Essex as George. Not impressed. I've read the book too. The characters are unlikeable. I've managed to get an excellent mid 2nd row stalls ticket for £25 in the sale so going Thursday.

[Mark]

Got a £25 stalls ticket for the matinee about halfway back. What a gorgeous production. The vocals are sublime and the staging is very well done. I had only seen it at Southwark previously and thought a bigger production did it justice as you can really see better the different locations and passage of time.

[sukhavati]

Jun 2, 2023 8:32:34 GMT max said:

We only have one word for 'love' in English. As opposed to philos, Eros, patros in Greek (philial love, erotic love, love of country - perhaps there are more). Dividing them in the heat of human feeling can be complex. Isn't there a human condition that can cause people to feel lustful during grief? etc.

Funny you should mention that. I noticed this yesterday in the Femail section of the Daily Fail:  "Widow's Fire" 

Nothing to add...

[sukhavati]

Jun 2, 2023 17:00:46 GMT anthony said:

Jun 2, 2023 16:48:16 GMT steve10086 said:

Eva sleeps with Magaldi and moves to the city with him when she’s 15.

Better cancel that upcoming Evita concert. How will people cope with the “ick factor”? 😱

Wait until they discover the plot of Phantom and how old the movie version of POTO makes Christine at the point the story happens...

The thing that I hated about the Phantom film was that they made it appear that Erik had been grooming Christine since she was a child. Having a 17-year-old cast as the character didn't help. Well, I hated a LOT about the film, but that grooming implication really unbalanced their relationship. In the novel, Christine has more strength as a character, more agency, even when she's aware she's acting out of pity. Plus she's 21/22 and the "relationship" between vocal teacher/pupil has only been going on for three MONTHS.