The Broadway show thread where we discuss all things Broadway

[L&Lfan]

Yes, please share your impressions with us.

 

[NotUrsula]

I don’t get this Oklahoma! reimagining. I thought the woman playing Ado Annie was a dreadful singer. Maybe she’s better in the non singing scenes.

Absolutely dreadful. She was screaming at many points. Not singing.

My husband was in the other room and hollered "What in the world are you watching !?"

She won the tony, I’m seeing it in 3 weeks so interest to see her and see how she is. People I watched it with said she is fabulous in it.

Any time you get casting of a noticeably disabled person, or an able-bodied person playing disabled if that's a lead role, there is what is known as the "Award bait" phenomenon. (Most commonly referred to in the context of film and the Oscars, but it applies for any type of theatrical endeavor.) In the case of Broadway, Tony nominations have come to have a dominant influence on box office, and most producers will try to time the opening of a new production just before the nomination deadline, so that the media coverage will help drive a nomination, and fresh reviews will drive votes. We all know that when it comes to Equity productions, box-office is EVERYTHING. Without decent receipts, the show will fold faster than a cheap paper fan. It's not unheard of to cast that way in the hope that the nominating committee and voters will be able to feel noble voting for a show or actor that is "being brave." The idea being that failing to praise it makes you look like you kicked a puppy, and no one wants to be that guy.

In this case, the show is a very experimental re-staging (and a bit gimmicky, with crock-pots of chili cooking through the show to be distributed to audience members at the "box social"), and it has been quite controversial, at that; reports say that there are always a fair number of walk-outs every night by patrons who are put off by the much darkened tone that owes more to the original Lynn Riggs' play than the R&H musical. Oddly, they chose not to change the language or the year in which it is set, while nonetheless setting the stage and costumes in present day. It's designed to be rather like a modern-dress staging of Shakespeare, but because it is R&H, there is an earnestness in it that is lacking in Shakespeare (or in Cole Porter, for that matter.) Whether or not she was deliberately cast to manipulate critics and Tony voters, she took the earnestness a step far -- she is doing a truly bizarre high-pitched cornpone accent that gets in the way of her singing voice. "Cain't Say No" is a comic-relief piece about a woman who's somewhat mentally dim and quite promiscuous (mental dimness of course being the only acceptable excuse for cheerful promiscuity in a 1943 play.) By having that character also be physically disabled, the production adds yet another layer of darkness, because your average audience member is going to have a preconceived notion that the only way that a paraplegic is that sexually sought after is if the men she encounters are taking advantage of her desperation, or are indulging a fetish. Either way, it puts the actress in a somewhat awkward position, because whether or not her performance is actually good, it will draw a lot of attention for the wrong reasons.

TO CLARIFY: I am not saying her performance was bad, and I'm not saying it was good. What I'm saying is that the above issues will tend to influence viewer's perceptions of that performance, and it can do so in positive or negative ways. Always best to withhold judgment until you've seen more than just a part of it whenever this sort of issue MIGHT come into play.

 

[NJlauren]

Any time you get casting of a noticeably disabled person, or an able-bodied person playing disabled if that's a lead role, there is what is known as the "Award bait" phenomenon. (Most commonly referred to in the context of film and the Oscars, but it applies for any type of theatrical endeavor.) In the case of Broadway, Tony nominations have come to have a dominant influence on box office, and most producers will try to time the opening of a new production just before the nomination deadline, so that the media coverage will help drive a nomination, and fresh reviews will drive votes. We all know that when it comes to Equity productions, box-office is EVERYTHING. Without decent receipts, the show will fold faster than a cheap paper fan. It's not unheard of to cast that way in the hope that the nominating committee and voters will be able to feel noble voting for a show or actor that is "being brave." The idea being that failing to praise it makes you look like you kicked a puppy, and no one wants to be that guy.

In this case, the show is a very experimental re-staging (and a bit gimmicky, with crock-pots of chili cooking through the show to be distributed to audience members at the "box social"), and it has been quite controversial, at that; reports say that there are always a fair number of walk-outs every night by patrons who are put off by the much darkened tone that owes more to the original Lynn Riggs' play than the R&H musical. Oddly, they chose not to change the language or the year in which it is set, while nonetheless setting the stage and costumes in present day. It's designed to be rather like a modern-dress staging of Shakespeare, but because it is R&H, there is an earnestness in it that is lacking in Shakespeare (or in Cole Porter, for that matter.) Whether or not she was deliberately cast to manipulate critics and Tony voters, she took the earnestness a step far -- she is doing a truly bizarre high-pitched cornpone accent that gets in the way of her singing voice. "Cain't Say No" is a comic-relief piece about a woman who's somewhat mentally dim and quite promiscuous (mental dimness of course being the only acceptable excuse for cheerful promiscuity in a 1943 play.) By having that character also be physically disabled, the production adds yet another layer of darkness, because your average audience member is going to have a preconceived notion that the only way that a paraplegic is that sexually sought after is if the men she encounters are taking advantage of her desperation, or are indulging a fetish. Either way, it puts the actress in a somewhat awkward position, because whether or not her performance is actually good, it will draw a lot of attention for the wrong reasons.

I also heard the number preformed last night is out of context and doesn’t do it justice. If that is true or not I do not know, as I haven’t seen the production yet.

I will say this most new/experimental theater will have walk outs every night. Example Book of Mormon had walk outs in the begning, not sure it still does. Spring awaking (which we should note Ali Stroker was also in) had walk outs.

I love that they are trying things that are new and experimental and if it’s a gimmick to win an award I guess I’m ok with it? I say I’m ok with it because I am so bored of seeing them same thing over and over, it’s nice to see a new interpretation or view.

If I need to see another remake of the same Glads Menagerie production with nothing new or Romeo and Juliet (at least they tried last time). I may cry! And the movies and TV don’t even get me started.

Then again I go to the theater more then the average person so my view may be very jaded.

 

[L&Lfan]

I’m the opposite. I prefer my revivals performed as closely as the originals. I don’t like political correctness or updating language, situations or attitudes. It’s been my experience that the original was a hit for a reason and to be honest, the shows that I’ve seen that have been “ reinterpreted” or tinkered with to reflect today’s standards haven’t been improved one bit. But again, that’s just me. Two examples I can think of ... Flower Drum Song and West Side Story I thought were pretty awful and I adored the originals.

 

[ImprovGal]

In this case, the show is a very experimental re-staging (and a bit gimmicky, with crock-pots of chili cooking through the show to be distributed to audience members at the "box social"), and it has been quite controversial, at that; reports say that there are always a fair number of walk-outs every night by patrons who are put off by the much darkened tone that owes more to the original Lynn Riggs' play than the R&H musical. Oddly, they chose not to change the language or the year in which it is set, while nonetheless setting the stage and costumes in present day. It's designed to be rather like a modern-dress staging of Shakespeare, but because it is R&H, there is an earnestness in it that is lacking in Shakespeare (or in Cole Porter, for that matter.) Whether or not she was deliberately cast to manipulate critics and Tony voters, she took the earnestness a step far -- she is doing a truly bizarre high-pitched cornpone accent that gets in the way of her singing voice. "Cain't Say No" is a comic-relief piece about a woman who's somewhat mentally dim and quite promiscuous (mental dimness of course being the only acceptable excuse for cheerful promiscuity in a 1943 play.) By having that character also be physically disabled, the production adds yet another layer of darkness...

Interesting.
I saw Oklahoma back in April. I really enjoyed Stroker's performance as Ado Annie. (There's a recording of her singing Cain't Say No that XM OnBroadway plays, too, and for some reason the Tony performance sounded a bit screechier than either that I'd heard previously.) Oddly, when I watched the show, it never occurred to me that Ado Annie was disabled; I just noticed how they made her choreography accessible for the actress. It was like seeing Peter Dinklage play Cyrano last summer -- Cyrano wasn't a dwarf, and Dinklage didn't wear a false nose, but he was still a very believable Cyrano.

There are still some very odd creative choices in this Oklahoma. And note that if you go, you may want to bring a spoon in case they run out of those before they run out of intermission chili and cornbread.

 

[RedAngie]

I don’t get this Oklahoma! reimagining. I thought the woman playing Ado Annie was a dreadful singer. Maybe she’s better in the non singing scenes.

I didn't at all like this interpretation of Oklahoma!. Granted, it was only one scene, but it didn't do its job of enticing me to consider buying a ticket. I don't doubt she's a talented singer, but the way she sang the song last night was awful.

 

[TavieP]

Any time you get casting of a noticeably disabled person, or an able-bodied person playing disabled if that's a lead role, there is what is known as the "Award bait" phenomenon. (Most commonly referred to in the context of film and the Oscars, but it applies for any type of theatrical endeavor.) In the case of Broadway, Tony nominations have come to have a dominant influence on box office, and most producers will try to time the opening of a new production just before the nomination deadline, so that the media coverage will help drive a nomination, and fresh reviews will drive votes. We all know that when it comes to Equity productions, box-office is EVERYTHING. Without decent receipts, the show will fold faster than a cheap paper fan. It's not unheard of to cast that way in the hope that the nominating committee and voters will be able to feel noble voting for a show or actor that is "being brave." The idea being that failing to praise it makes you look like you kicked a puppy, and no one wants to be that guy.

Haven't seen this production so I can't speak to her performance in the show - anyone's performance on the Tony Awards is no indication of how they are in the show, I've seen way too many seasoned and talented performers choke on a live tv broadcast to put too much stock in that - but wow, you're saying that by default, if an actor with a visible disability is cast in anything, they're being cast in order to garner sympathy votes and that it's not possible for a disabled actor to be the best person for a role, and to have turned out the best performance? That's... wow, I just strongly disagree with that view.

 

[WDWJDS]

I have seen this version of Oklahoma and I can say that Ali Stroker was outstanding in the production, and her voice was very different in her live performance last night. I said when I left the show “she had better win the Tony”. Same thing I said about Cynthia Erivo.

I knew of Ali before Oklahoma. I didn’t realize she was in this show until I saw her there. Occasionally during the show, I thought about her being in the wheelchair like “I wonder how they work her chair into the dance scenes”. Other than that, the thought never crossed my mind about whether it’s realistic for two men to fight for the love of a woman in a wheelchair. Never ever crossed my mind until I read the above comment. She was just a woman who was playing the field and having a good time with it!

 

[Erzengel]

Watching the Tonys, Stephanie Block's performance stood out because I've never watched the show but obviously familiar with the song but it sounded weird because I'm use to it being done through Autotune.

 

[elgerber]

Watching the Tonys, Stephanie Block's performance stood out because I've never watched the show but obviously familiar with the song but it sounded weird because I'm use to it being done through Autotune.

It sounded to me like they did autotune at least part of it. It sounded weird to me, because they slowed it down so much. I don't know why they did, but it bugged me. Especially since I just heard Cher do it live a few weeks ago, at normal speed. Stephanie is fantastic as Cher though, I was happy she won.

 

[NotUrsula]

Haven't seen this production so I can't speak to her performance in the show - anyone's performance on the Tony Awards is no indication of how they are in the show, I've seen way too many seasoned and talented performers choke on a live tv broadcast to put too much stock in that - but wow, you're saying that by default, if an actor with a visible disability is cast in anything, they're being cast in order to garner sympathy votes and that it's not possible for a disabled actor to be the best person for a role, and to have turned out the best performance? That's... wow, I just strongly disagree with that view.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that it is always POSSIBLE that that choice was made, particularly when the piece in question is unusual enough that critics might really slam the interpretation., and that perception of that possibility often colors judgments about the quality of a performance. for good and for ill. (Usually it's to the good for the show, and a mixed blessing for performers, who may be brilliant and underrated because someone influential thinks they were cast as a gimmick, or mediocre but lauded out of pity.) When that sort of casting is done, it's done as an insurance policy to buy more time for a show to find its feet, and yes, garnering nominations will do that for you. That's why new shows are so often timed right before the deadline; as just getting a nomination will put butts in seats, and getting more eyes on the performance, by definition means that there is more chance that someone influential will see it and like it.

I *never* said that a disabled performer is never the best person for the role, not at all; the tactic of creating Award bait isn't about talent or lack of it -- it's about staging choices. However, two potential cast choices otherwise being equal, the one whose performance might best be perceived as "brave" (for whatever reason, not just disability) is less likely to be truly savaged by a critic. If you are trying to fill seats, particularly if the staging is otherwise risky, it is something that is almost always taken into consideration, just because of the terrific expense required to mount a production today.

 

[tinkerhon]

It sounded to me like they did autotune at least part of it. It sounded weird to me, because they slowed it down so much. I don't know why they did, but it bugged me. Especially since I just heard Cher do it live a few weeks ago, at normal speed. Stephanie is fantastic as Cher though, I was happy she won.

That Cher show performance was terrible, and I love SJB - I'm a bit biased but thought Beetlejuice had the best "ticket sales" performance with "Prom" close second

 

[DeniseJH]

That Cher show performance was terrible, and I love SJB - I'm a bit biased but thought Beetlejuice had the best "ticket sales" performance with "Prom" close second

Yes, I really want to see Beetlejuice now!

 

[tinkerhon]

Yes, I really want to see Beetlejuice now!

it's a lot of fun, and trust me - the "banana boat" sequence is a lot better in the show - was a little odd last night

 

[elgerber]

That Cher show performance was terrible, and I love SJB - I'm a bit biased but thought Beetlejuice had the best "ticket sales" performance with "Prom" close second

Neither dd or I liked the beetlejuice performance (and it’s always been one of her favorite movies). We liked the banana boat portion but there is something about Beetlejuice himself that doesn’t work for us.

 

[TheMickey]

We can't win can we? It does not matter how qualified or over qualified we are we cannot do anything right. We have gotten a job because of sympathy. I worked hard for my job. Neither I or Ali need this nonsense. I got denied of the job I am currently in two times , before getting it. I worked and worked to get it. Stop it. It could not possibly be of hard work. And in any case its false.Playing Nessarose did not get Michelle Federer tony nominated, Spring Awakening did not win best revival. Stop this nonsense. The thing is we try to hide our disability because its not 'acceptable' to show it. The amount of times people loose jobs because of a disability is staggering. The problem is even disability employment services even try to limit us . They say what we can and cannot do. Not based on skill level but based on what they think. Please stop

Any time you get casting of a noticeably disabled person, or an able-bodied person playing disabled if that's a lead role, there is what is known as the "Award bait" phenomenon. (Most commonly referred to in the context of film and the Oscars, but it applies for any type of theatrical endeavor.) In the case of Broadway, Tony nominations have come to have a dominant influence on box office, and most producers will try to time the opening of a new production just before the nomination deadline, so that the media coverage will help drive a nomination, and fresh reviews will drive votes. We all know that when it comes to Equity productions, box-office is EVERYTHING. Without decent receipts, the show will fold faster than a cheap paper fan. It's not unheard of to cast that way in the hope that the nominating committee and voters will be able to feel noble voting for a show or actor that is "being brave." The idea being that failing to praise it makes you look like you kicked a puppy, and no one wants to be that guy.

 

[minnie1012]

Several shows are closing in August : ( If you live local make sure you get tickets before they go! Personally I'm sad to see the Prom close. It was so funny and such a great story. Plus it was original and not based on a movie or anything. The acting was great as well! My daughter and I have tickets to Tootsie next month (her choice early birthday present)

 

[Erzengel]

We might be going with friends to see Cher, which I'm not really excited for but I might also be taking my niece to see Hadestown.

 

[L&Lfan]

What else is closing in August besides The Prom?

Oops, just saw it....The Cher Show and King Kong.

 

[NJlauren]

What else is closing in August besides The Prom?

Cher, be more chill and King Kong.

Other were previously announced (my fair lady)