Showing posts with label performance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label performance. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Young Vic's Streetcar...A Real Gem
Young Vic's Streetcar Named Desire...TRIUMPH. Smart, edgy, some new and bold choices. The standard lines that are normally delivered as oration rather than as contribution to real dialogue were almost underplayed, still important, but unlike many productions this show wasn't just an excuse to deliver the few famous one liners ("I shall die of eating an unwashed grape", "Whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers", "Poor thing, the quinine did her no good", "I don't want realism; I want magic!", "Stella! Stella for star!", "The Tarantula Arms is where I took my victims", "Hydrotherapy they call it", "STELLAAAAAAAA!!!!!!", etc.).
The minimalist, modern staging (without changing dated lines referring to Western Union or a phone number that begins with "Magnolia") was interesting and not usually distracting, and the loud, disturbing scene change music enhanced the experience of Blanche's fragile mental state.
Gillian Anderson (Blanche) and Vanessa Kirby (Stella) gave the traditional, over the top Southern Belle accents, but as old southern aristrocrats from Mississippi, it kind of works. Ben Foster (Stanley) gave no contrived accent and Corey Johnson (a native of New Orleans) didn't over do the all too often cartoonish portrayal of a Southern dialect (without respect for specific regional particularities).
Ben Foster sometimes seemed not menacing enough (almost soft a time or two, despite his threatening rhetoric and physical bulk), but I appreciated that he relied on something other than raw and unrelenting rage to communicate his fearsomeness. His was a much more nuanced Stanley than is often presented.
But the most amazing performance was given by Gillian Anderson. No hint of Scully, no wink to the X-Files, and no repeat of other Blanches. Her Blanche was a real person who had experienced real pain and disappointment and who carried real regret and faint hope. Her descent into madness wasn't cartoonish, her alcoholism was believable, and her particular affectations and mannerisms were unique to this actor's performance of this character for this production. She was, in short, the best Blanche I've ever seen!
Blanche falls desperately in love with and marries a man who she learns is gay (and involved with an older lover), and that pain is exponentially increased when he discovers that she knows his secret and his response is to commit suicide (not an uncommon response to the life ruining experience of being outed in a time when same-sex love and attraction were not only taboo, but criminal). Beyond that, Blanche is the caregiver for a series of relatives who die leaving her no money, and she has to mortgage the family estate to care for her ill relations (and then bury them). When on a teacher's salary she can't pay her debts, she loses her family home and lives in a seedy hotel where she medicates her loneliness and supplements her income as an evening companion for men. Eventually, she seduces a high school student (a cry for help? a self-destructive symptom of depression? desperate loneliness? an attempt to recapture lost youth?) the consequence of which is the end of her teaching career. She then spends the summer with her sister who has married a brute. She stays with her only living realtive (1) to have a play to live and (2) to create a new narrative for her life in an attempt to sanitize her past. Still, her secrets are exposed and while she is crumbling under the weight of shame and fear, her plight is worsened when she is raped by her brother-in-law. Her sister can't let herself believe that her husband is a rapist, so she has her Blanche committed. And the show ends with Blanche, who for all her difficulties is "never deliberately cruel", finally receiving care and kindness, but not from a friend, lover, neighbor, or relative but from a psychiatrist (presumably from a state hospital).
Gillian Anderson played this complex character powerfully. Anderson's Blanche had a soul, an inner light, painful memories beautiful fantasies, a glimmer of hope, and fading resilience. She was, simply, marvelous!
Tennessee Williams' shows tend to deal with homosexuality by means of a tragic heroine (or anti-heroine), Southern families, mental illness, and nobility that has been tarnished or hidden by disappointment and heartbreak. His spirit was very much alive and powerfully present in this production.
When Broadway and London share their gems nationally/internationally on cinema screens, it is a great gift, and tonight's showing of Streetcar was particularly amazing.
Friday, June 08, 2012
Kathy Griffin
Kathy Griffin at
Hard Rock Live
Hollywood, FL
June 2, 2012
Griffin
doesn’t make up characters, nor does she deliver one liners that deserve a rim
shot from a snare drum. Kathy Griffin just tells stories about people she
meets, topical events from the daily news, interactions with people in her
life, confrontations with detractors, ups and downs of her show business
career. She just tells stories, true stories, but with a mischievous grin and a
naughty delight in being provocative or even shocking. Her stories are funny,
mostly because of how she tells them, otherwise, they really are just things that
happened in her life or on reality television shows or in the news. Her ability
to tell every day stories in a way that is entertaining, for two hours, as if she
were having a conversation with a dozen people at a party rather than with 4000
people in a casino performance space is amazing. OK, I guess I do know why I love
Kathy Griffin.
This is how captivating Kathy Griffin is: the Hard Rock Live is a glorified basketball court! People on the floor (it’s all one level) have to look up to see the stage and screens. Then, there are two more levels (bleacher style seating), but, like gymnasium bleachers, the people in the elevated seats are facing each other, with the stage to their left or right (there is a small section of “stands” in the back that do face forward, but they are the most removed from the performance area). So, on advice from a friend (who may have been trying to kill me I now believe), I got seats in the bleachers, which meant I watched a two hour performance looking over my left shoulder! I’m about to have my third chiropractic treatment since the show last week and I’m still barely mobile; and yet!...I enjoyed every minute of her performance and am so glad I didn’t miss it. When a performance provides enough joy to override excruciating pain, it is a triumph!
Kathy
came out and surprised the audience by being briefly joined by Gloria Estefan to
sing with her the theme song from Kathy’s new television late night talk show.
While they were on stage together, Gloria (who had been, apparently, tricked
into performing the song unrehearsed) promised to “get” Kathy for dragging her
out on stage, and Kathy’s response was that there is nothing Gloria could do
that would embarrass her and to prove it, she flashed the audience showing her white
cotton “granny panties” (and Gloria seemed genuinely shocked).[1]
After
that, the rest of the show was just Kathy Griffin’s non-stop stream of
consciousness storytelling. She talked about celebrity gossip, her love life
and cosmetic surgeries, her mother and personal assistant, her new show,
Scientology (she had a lot of fun and spent a lot of time on Scientology), and
the recent news of people using bath salts as recreational drugs and becoming
extremely violent. In common parlance, such a topic would be inappropriate for
jest, but Kathy milked it throughout the show, and being able to laugh about it
seemed to actually relieve some of the horror that people had about it (one of
the cases of someone becoming extremely violent after ingesting or inhaling
bath salts was here in Florida).
Notwithstanding
spinal injuries from seating that should be forbidden by the Geneva Convention,
the evening felt like playful gossip with an old friend, and a few thousand
other acquaintances. Griffin ingeniously featured her status as a “D-List”
celebrity in a way that catapulted her to major stardom, but she remains, I
fear, underappreciated as an artist. She is funny, of course, but she is also
smart and has developed an easy, almost ADD[2]
style of storytelling that is engaging, compelling, and hilarious.
Hollywood, FL
June 2, 2012
I
don’t know why I love Kathy Griffin so much. I think it has something to do
with her courage, or her ability to seem accessible even as she is speaking to
thousands of people, or the very natural way she tells a story. She is credited
as a comedienne, but in truth, she is a story teller.
This is how captivating Kathy Griffin is: the Hard Rock Live is a glorified basketball court! People on the floor (it’s all one level) have to look up to see the stage and screens. Then, there are two more levels (bleacher style seating), but, like gymnasium bleachers, the people in the elevated seats are facing each other, with the stage to their left or right (there is a small section of “stands” in the back that do face forward, but they are the most removed from the performance area). So, on advice from a friend (who may have been trying to kill me I now believe), I got seats in the bleachers, which meant I watched a two hour performance looking over my left shoulder! I’m about to have my third chiropractic treatment since the show last week and I’m still barely mobile; and yet!...I enjoyed every minute of her performance and am so glad I didn’t miss it. When a performance provides enough joy to override excruciating pain, it is a triumph!
Sunday, April 01, 2012
Seth Rudetsky’s Big Fat 70’s Show
Seth Rudetsky’s Big Fat 70’s Show
Amaturo Theatre, Broward Center for the Performing Arts
April 1, 2012
Review by Durrell Watkins
So tonight I went to see another one person performance: Seth Rudetsky’s Big Fat 70’s Show. I didn’t know exactly what to expect; I just knew that for years I have loved Seth’s radio show on Sirius XM radio (Seth Rudetsky’s Big Fat Broadway). He is a musical theatre historian and trivia expert. Well, by training (Oberlin) he’s a classical concert pianist. But prior to college he had been very active in school and summer camp theatre and so he soon returned to his first love, musical theatre.
According to his biographical monologue, he was the pianist in the orchestra of a few Broadway musicals, a comedy writer for the Rosie O’Donnell show, the musical director for various concerts, a composer, a stand-up comic, an author, an Off-off Broadway actor, a cabaret performer, and, of course, a satellite radio host. He was also a vocal coach on the MTV reality series, Legally Blonde the Musical: the Search of Elle Woods.
Seth’s radio program is fascinating because it includes interviews with working Broadway actors, songs from old and new, well known and obscure musicals (and sometimes, all the songs from an entire musical with commentary and synopsis thrown in), story-telling, and his natural, unforced brand of humor. So, I relished the chance to see his show live on stage.
Seth’s stage show is a self-described “deconstruction” of various performances. Apparently, his shows are often a deconstruction of Broadway shows or the careers of Broadway performers. But tonight’s show was very specialized. It was a deconstruction of one failed variety show from the 1970s!
The Brady Bunch Variety Hour, according to Seth, only lasted for 9 episodes and was born from a guest appearance the Brady Bunch cast had made on the Donnie & Marie show.
Seth’ set was super simple (and I always find that most effective). There was a piano (he played 4 measures each of 5 or 6 songs and that was all the piano was for…otherwise it was a prop…he never played a whole song, or more than a line of a song in the whole show). Other than the piano, there was a screen on which were played clips from the Brady Bunch Hour. Seth would set up each clip by giving some background (he apparently had done exhaustive research on this obscure failure from television history), playing the clip, commenting on the clip, and sometimes replaying the clip so that the audience could see more in/from it than they had originally.
Some of what Seth pointed out was the campiness of the show. A closeted gay man, Robert Reed, was in the cast, a flamboyant gay man, Bruce Villanch, was one of the writers, and the show was produced by Saturday morning children’s program producers Sid & Marty Kroft; this all made camp inevitable.
These were television actors (Florence Henderson had enjoyed a Broadway career before television), and most of them were child stars who never did much acting beyond their Brady Bunch series, so to throw them into a variety show format where they were expected to sing and dance throughout every show was obviously beyond their comfort zones if not their skill sets.
Then there was the premise. These actors were not doing the show as themselves, but as the characters from their canceled situation-comedy television series. But the characters (an architect, a house-wife, their children, and a housekeeper) are for some reason singing and dancing and telling bad jokes as part of a variety show! And the children are all adults now, and thrown in with this suburban American family who just happen to be singing disco versions of old songs and dancing badly to them are synchronized swimmers (without explanation as to why they are there).
Camp is the best the show could hope to be! But what made it tragic (well, other than the ridiculous premise, the bad singing, the bad dancing, the really bad jokes, and the gratuitous swimmers) was that it was not recorded in front of a life audience. Laughter and applause were all by pre-recorded tracks; so, what was aired was the final or best take of each scene. After who knows how much rehearsal and how many attempted takes, the best of what they could piece together to air was music where “Greg Brady” was often flat, where “Mike Brady” sounded like he was singing with a lozenge stuck in his throat, scenes were almost none of the male members of the cast showed any real capacity for dancing (and “Mike” was particularly awkward), and even one scene where a wayward background dancer crossed hurriedly behind the set from one side of the stage to the other for her next entrance . That the finished product was so shoddy (and surely much better than the many attempts leading up to the finished product) made a show that had little chance of being good into something that was actually horrifically bad.
However, the tragedy that was The Brady Bunch Variety Hour became comedic genius in the creative hands of Seth Rudetsky. He pointed out the flaws, made fun of them, mimicked some of them, and left us desperate to see the next terrible scene (one, or two, or three times!) just so we could explore with him (or follow his guidance to a predetermined discovery) the delightfully humorous failings of the short-lived variety show.
The final scene of the show was brilliantly interactive. He brought to the stage volunteers from the audience to re-enact a simple dance number from the variety show. He taught the steps (and chose the role of “Mike” for himself), and then led the dancers through a quick rehearsal and then finally the performance of the number (about 24 beats in all). He even had two volunteers shoot arcs of water from water pistols to create a special effect similar to the original variety show. The “dancers” were self-conscious and had a great time stumbling through the moves and playing with Seth on stage. And that frivolity ended the 90 minute performance.
Seth afterward very graciously posed for photos and signed autographs.
With virtually no set, and with no other performers (save a few volunteers from the audience at the very end), and with very little live music (though he is a musician), this Broadway expert spent 90 minutes showing clips from a television variety show that almost no one had seen, made fun of the scenes (without ever being cruel), shared a little bit of history about some of the cast members, and with that simple story-telling performance captivated an audience and made us love something that in 1977 absolutely flopped. It was genius. It was comedy. It was history. It was pop-culture. It was theatre. What could be better than that?
Amaturo Theatre, Broward Center for the Performing Arts
April 1, 2012
Review by Durrell Watkins
So tonight I went to see another one person performance: Seth Rudetsky’s Big Fat 70’s Show. I didn’t know exactly what to expect; I just knew that for years I have loved Seth’s radio show on Sirius XM radio (Seth Rudetsky’s Big Fat Broadway). He is a musical theatre historian and trivia expert. Well, by training (Oberlin) he’s a classical concert pianist. But prior to college he had been very active in school and summer camp theatre and so he soon returned to his first love, musical theatre.
According to his biographical monologue, he was the pianist in the orchestra of a few Broadway musicals, a comedy writer for the Rosie O’Donnell show, the musical director for various concerts, a composer, a stand-up comic, an author, an Off-off Broadway actor, a cabaret performer, and, of course, a satellite radio host. He was also a vocal coach on the MTV reality series, Legally Blonde the Musical: the Search of Elle Woods.
Seth’s radio program is fascinating because it includes interviews with working Broadway actors, songs from old and new, well known and obscure musicals (and sometimes, all the songs from an entire musical with commentary and synopsis thrown in), story-telling, and his natural, unforced brand of humor. So, I relished the chance to see his show live on stage.
Seth’s stage show is a self-described “deconstruction” of various performances. Apparently, his shows are often a deconstruction of Broadway shows or the careers of Broadway performers. But tonight’s show was very specialized. It was a deconstruction of one failed variety show from the 1970s!
The Brady Bunch Variety Hour, according to Seth, only lasted for 9 episodes and was born from a guest appearance the Brady Bunch cast had made on the Donnie & Marie show.
Seth’ set was super simple (and I always find that most effective). There was a piano (he played 4 measures each of 5 or 6 songs and that was all the piano was for…otherwise it was a prop…he never played a whole song, or more than a line of a song in the whole show). Other than the piano, there was a screen on which were played clips from the Brady Bunch Hour. Seth would set up each clip by giving some background (he apparently had done exhaustive research on this obscure failure from television history), playing the clip, commenting on the clip, and sometimes replaying the clip so that the audience could see more in/from it than they had originally.
Some of what Seth pointed out was the campiness of the show. A closeted gay man, Robert Reed, was in the cast, a flamboyant gay man, Bruce Villanch, was one of the writers, and the show was produced by Saturday morning children’s program producers Sid & Marty Kroft; this all made camp inevitable.
These were television actors (Florence Henderson had enjoyed a Broadway career before television), and most of them were child stars who never did much acting beyond their Brady Bunch series, so to throw them into a variety show format where they were expected to sing and dance throughout every show was obviously beyond their comfort zones if not their skill sets.
Then there was the premise. These actors were not doing the show as themselves, but as the characters from their canceled situation-comedy television series. But the characters (an architect, a house-wife, their children, and a housekeeper) are for some reason singing and dancing and telling bad jokes as part of a variety show! And the children are all adults now, and thrown in with this suburban American family who just happen to be singing disco versions of old songs and dancing badly to them are synchronized swimmers (without explanation as to why they are there).
Camp is the best the show could hope to be! But what made it tragic (well, other than the ridiculous premise, the bad singing, the bad dancing, the really bad jokes, and the gratuitous swimmers) was that it was not recorded in front of a life audience. Laughter and applause were all by pre-recorded tracks; so, what was aired was the final or best take of each scene. After who knows how much rehearsal and how many attempted takes, the best of what they could piece together to air was music where “Greg Brady” was often flat, where “Mike Brady” sounded like he was singing with a lozenge stuck in his throat, scenes were almost none of the male members of the cast showed any real capacity for dancing (and “Mike” was particularly awkward), and even one scene where a wayward background dancer crossed hurriedly behind the set from one side of the stage to the other for her next entrance . That the finished product was so shoddy (and surely much better than the many attempts leading up to the finished product) made a show that had little chance of being good into something that was actually horrifically bad.
However, the tragedy that was The Brady Bunch Variety Hour became comedic genius in the creative hands of Seth Rudetsky. He pointed out the flaws, made fun of them, mimicked some of them, and left us desperate to see the next terrible scene (one, or two, or three times!) just so we could explore with him (or follow his guidance to a predetermined discovery) the delightfully humorous failings of the short-lived variety show.
The final scene of the show was brilliantly interactive. He brought to the stage volunteers from the audience to re-enact a simple dance number from the variety show. He taught the steps (and chose the role of “Mike” for himself), and then led the dancers through a quick rehearsal and then finally the performance of the number (about 24 beats in all). He even had two volunteers shoot arcs of water from water pistols to create a special effect similar to the original variety show. The “dancers” were self-conscious and had a great time stumbling through the moves and playing with Seth on stage. And that frivolity ended the 90 minute performance.
Seth afterward very graciously posed for photos and signed autographs.
With virtually no set, and with no other performers (save a few volunteers from the audience at the very end), and with very little live music (though he is a musician), this Broadway expert spent 90 minutes showing clips from a television variety show that almost no one had seen, made fun of the scenes (without ever being cruel), shared a little bit of history about some of the cast members, and with that simple story-telling performance captivated an audience and made us love something that in 1977 absolutely flopped. It was genius. It was comedy. It was history. It was pop-culture. It was theatre. What could be better than that?
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Loved Sandra Bernhard's "I Love Being Me, Don't You?"
I’m in San Diego this week for the MCC Men’s Conference and I’ve managed to work in some play time as well. The day before the conference began we (Robert and I with friends) went to the old Spanish Mission at San Juan Capistrano (our second time in 12 years to visit the historic site) and to Disneyland in Anaheim. We’ve dug up good restaurants and participated in the day to day activities of the conference in addition to taking the trip to the mission and to Anaheim. Souvenirs were purchased as well. So, what could make our little work with stolen moments of play get away any better? A show at the famous La Jolla Playhouse!
Tonight I was delighted by Sandra Bernhard’s one woman show, “I Love Being Me, Don’t You?” I had never seen Bernard live and didn’t have a great passion to see her now, but I did want to see “something” at the La Jolla Playhouse, and she was what they were offering and a few seats were still available. So, bending to the will of the Fates, we got the tickets and went to the show.
I have a special interest in solo performance (standup comedy, performance art, homiletics, one character plays, drag performance, etc.) and so I thought, “Even if the show isn’t that good, I’ll have something to reflect on for my on-going study of solo performance.” I was mistaken to underestimate the genius of Sandra Bernhard.
Her simple set did not distract from her presence and energy. It was tasteful, functional, but not at all garish. In fact, it was mostly the instruments for the musicians, a few microphone stands, and special lighting providing simple elegance that allowed her to shine on her own (which she did).
She came out singing, and her voice was brash and her dancing jerky and I didn’t know if she was a bad singer or if she was being comedic. It was an uncomfortable moment, but that moment was soon followed by almost two hours of a hilarious stream of consciousness that left me wanting more.
The show consisted of storytelling, riffing, improvisation, satire and music. One thing flowed, usually without any transition, into the next. She sang a few more songs throughout the show, and the songs were all performed much better than the first. Was the first just a little off, or was it a gag? I still don’t know.
Some of the songs were done seriously as any singer might perform, and one or two were done playfully as much for comedic effect as for musicality. Within a song her voice could go from soothing and sweet to steamroller powerful without warning.
But there was one song (accompanied by a personal story) that was particularly powerful because she made it seem personal to her. She talked about having always desired to be a musical theatre actor. She recently made a television appearance with a well known musical theatre actor who encouraged her to take a risk and sing songs from musical theatre in her act. She also recalled seeing Carol Channing on tour when she was a child. So, taking the advice to bring musical theatre to her cabaret act, Sandra sang “Before the Parade Passes By” from Hello Dolly! (the show for which Channing is most famous).
Bernhard really sold it! She sang the Jerry Herman number as if she was on the Broadway stage and Carol Channing, Pearl Bailey, and Ethel Merman (each of whom had played Dolly) miraculously entered the space (in my imagination anyway) to join her in singing the song. It was a delightful and powerful moment that seemed to communicate something spiritually true as much as something entertaining.
Speaking of spirituality, Bernard spoke of her Jewish tradition, her daughter’s interest in Wicca, her daughter’s enrollment in a Waldorf School (which promotes the philosophy of Anthroposophy), and the difference, in her view, between “good Christians” and “sneaky Christians.” And she launched an all out comedy assault on the “Rapture” teachings of certain fundamentalist Christians.
She also spoke openly about her lesbian relationship and her support of President Obama. She was confrontational with audience members who wanted to join in the act, and for all her talk of religion, politics, sexuality, and for her rough handling of those who dared to interrupt her monologue (she said, “This isn’t an invitation for a conversation”), she still never alienated the audience and from the laughter and applause (and one person shouting, “I love you”), the audience seemed to be 100% on her side throughout.
The final part of her act, after a quick a costume change, was singing a mash-up (the blending of a rock classic and a vintage R&B “one hit wonder”) with her three person (fabulous) band. The songs were fun, the blending of them brilliant, her voice was adequate, and her dancing enthusiastic, and while the musical aspect of the final number might not be Grammy worthy, the energy and pure joy of the performance was infectious.
The show had moments that challenged the audience to think, and more moments that dared the audience to laugh without being filtered by any notion of political correctness. But mostly, it was just high energy, super fun, originality and a great example of what solo performance can (and maybe should) be.
Tonight I was delighted by Sandra Bernhard’s one woman show, “I Love Being Me, Don’t You?” I had never seen Bernard live and didn’t have a great passion to see her now, but I did want to see “something” at the La Jolla Playhouse, and she was what they were offering and a few seats were still available. So, bending to the will of the Fates, we got the tickets and went to the show.
I have a special interest in solo performance (standup comedy, performance art, homiletics, one character plays, drag performance, etc.) and so I thought, “Even if the show isn’t that good, I’ll have something to reflect on for my on-going study of solo performance.” I was mistaken to underestimate the genius of Sandra Bernhard.
Her simple set did not distract from her presence and energy. It was tasteful, functional, but not at all garish. In fact, it was mostly the instruments for the musicians, a few microphone stands, and special lighting providing simple elegance that allowed her to shine on her own (which she did).
She came out singing, and her voice was brash and her dancing jerky and I didn’t know if she was a bad singer or if she was being comedic. It was an uncomfortable moment, but that moment was soon followed by almost two hours of a hilarious stream of consciousness that left me wanting more.
The show consisted of storytelling, riffing, improvisation, satire and music. One thing flowed, usually without any transition, into the next. She sang a few more songs throughout the show, and the songs were all performed much better than the first. Was the first just a little off, or was it a gag? I still don’t know.
Some of the songs were done seriously as any singer might perform, and one or two were done playfully as much for comedic effect as for musicality. Within a song her voice could go from soothing and sweet to steamroller powerful without warning.
But there was one song (accompanied by a personal story) that was particularly powerful because she made it seem personal to her. She talked about having always desired to be a musical theatre actor. She recently made a television appearance with a well known musical theatre actor who encouraged her to take a risk and sing songs from musical theatre in her act. She also recalled seeing Carol Channing on tour when she was a child. So, taking the advice to bring musical theatre to her cabaret act, Sandra sang “Before the Parade Passes By” from Hello Dolly! (the show for which Channing is most famous).
Bernhard really sold it! She sang the Jerry Herman number as if she was on the Broadway stage and Carol Channing, Pearl Bailey, and Ethel Merman (each of whom had played Dolly) miraculously entered the space (in my imagination anyway) to join her in singing the song. It was a delightful and powerful moment that seemed to communicate something spiritually true as much as something entertaining.
Speaking of spirituality, Bernard spoke of her Jewish tradition, her daughter’s interest in Wicca, her daughter’s enrollment in a Waldorf School (which promotes the philosophy of Anthroposophy), and the difference, in her view, between “good Christians” and “sneaky Christians.” And she launched an all out comedy assault on the “Rapture” teachings of certain fundamentalist Christians.
She also spoke openly about her lesbian relationship and her support of President Obama. She was confrontational with audience members who wanted to join in the act, and for all her talk of religion, politics, sexuality, and for her rough handling of those who dared to interrupt her monologue (she said, “This isn’t an invitation for a conversation”), she still never alienated the audience and from the laughter and applause (and one person shouting, “I love you”), the audience seemed to be 100% on her side throughout.
The final part of her act, after a quick a costume change, was singing a mash-up (the blending of a rock classic and a vintage R&B “one hit wonder”) with her three person (fabulous) band. The songs were fun, the blending of them brilliant, her voice was adequate, and her dancing enthusiastic, and while the musical aspect of the final number might not be Grammy worthy, the energy and pure joy of the performance was infectious.
The show had moments that challenged the audience to think, and more moments that dared the audience to laugh without being filtered by any notion of political correctness. But mostly, it was just high energy, super fun, originality and a great example of what solo performance can (and maybe should) be.
Friday, March 02, 2012
Amuse Me, Delight Me, Shock Me – By God!
What is worship? I mean, the gathering together of people to sing hymns, say prayers, hear the thoughts of a hopefully learned speaker, read texts (sacred or otherwise), and share rituals (whether as simple as the candle lighting ritual of the UUs or the shard silence of the Quakers, or as elaborate as the symbolic love feast that many Christians call the Eucharist or Holy Communion) – what is really the purpose of all that?
Is it to help us be moral or “good”? Not really. We learned some sense of right and wrong from our families and the code of conduct of our schools. There are laws to dissuade us from hurting one another, stealing from one another, damaging property, and so on. And anyway, most of us could figure out that unrestrained selfishness can have negative consequences so some standard of behavior would find its way into our lives. Besides, how many bigots, homophobes, misogynists, tax evaders, perpetrators of violence, slanderers, gossips, child abusers, unfit pet caregivers, and general scoundrels go to church every Sunday?! No, clearly we don’t need to go to church to be good, nor does going to church assure us that we will be well behaved.
Is worship, at the church, synagogue, mosque, sangha, or coven, if not to make us “good” then really to help us find God/dess (Spirit, Higher Power, insert meaningful symbol of ultimate reality here)? Maybe on some level for some of us, but why do we keep going once we find It? Cannot the spirit of life and hope and community be accessed in nature, in relationships, in private times of personal reflection, in 12 Step meetings, and so on? And anyway, if we believe in God, don’t we have some sense that It is a ubiquitous presence? How could we ever be separated from what is divine?
Is worship then an intellectual exercise? I mean, there are texts to reflect on, and a homily/sermon/message/lecture/lesson given in most cases. There are religious education classes and spiritual literature/brochures/booklets distributed. Maybe we just like learning. That would be true of the more curious among us, but libraries, universities, public lectures, public broadcasting, and book stores are also good venues for learning. Even without religion, we would find ways to engage our minds if we desired such stimulation.
Maybe worship leads to service and service leads to significance. In worship we are often encouraged to give charitably, to work for justice, to volunteer our time and talent, do something that might ease someone’s burdens in life. Service is valuable, but again, there are those who aren’t particularly religious but who give to charity, who volunteer time, who try to be a good friend to someone in need or who always seek to be a helpful neighbor.
Perhaps worship, then, is social. Maybe we just like to be around people. Maybe it feels good to sing together, to visit at the coffee hour, to shake hands (or hold hands if the liturgy allows), to make personal connections and to express care and concern when fellow worshipers are ill or otherwise struggling in their lives (and, similarly, it may feel good to be cared about during our difficult times). Celebrations of joy (weddings, baptisms) and cathartic/healing rituals (memorials/funerals) also bring us together to share our joys and concerns. Maybe religion is just a really good way to make friends and build community.
And of all the reasons explored so far, this is the one that may hold the most (holy) water! Religion (along with government, family, economy, and education) is one of the five basic social institutions. Maybe religion is very important for society, or for most of human history for our evolutionary good (religion brings us together, and together we are more likely to help one another, to not be as alone, and therefore to be better able to survive some of life’s hardships).
Yes, religion as a social institution and evolutionary aid (helping protect the species by bringing us together) is pretty important. But in a world of dating services, bowling leagues, book clubs, hospitals, nursing homes, support groups, and even the internet, maybe religion is now just one of several ways that we come together to help one another. For worship to be truly meaningful, it must be more than even socialization (which is, however, a good product of religion).
Remember, theatre came out of religious festivals. And people go to the theatre (and presumably the movies, the opera, concerts, pep rallies, etc.), according to playwright/director/social critic David Mamet, “to be delighted, amused, and shocked. To be brought to life, in short.”
That’s it! People come to worship for the same reason they go to worship’s love child – the theatre! People share the worship experience in hopes of experiencing both joy and scandal. People worship to be more fully alive!
Worship isn’t fire insurance to save us from an after-life booby trap.
Worship isn’t the road map to a God forever playing Hide-n-Seek.
Worship isn’t just an inexpensive way to learn myths, histories, rituals, and ancient opinions.
Worship isn’t something that makes us good.
Worship isn’t even primarily to inspire us to do good work (though it can, and that is wonderful).
Worship, in the end, must even be more than a social enterprise (though it is at least that).
No, worship is a shared attempt to live more abundantly.
Whether the music is from an organ, a guitar, or a capella singers, whether the homilist’s jokes are dry or a little naughty, whether the ritual is simple or complex, whether the story-telling is extemporaneous or read from a book, people come together for worship to share an experience of being delighted and shocked.
It’s shocking to hear about a virgin conceiving, and for those who literalize the story, it can be shocking to hear that it may be a story rather than a historical/biological fact.
On Good Friday, it is shocking to bring to mind the horrors of the torture called crucifixion, and to the humanist, it is shocking to hear that some people believe that God wanted such torture for Jesus; for fundamentalists, it might be shocking to hear Presbyterian theologian Delores Williams declare, “there is nothing of God in the blood of the cross.”
And to those who know that same-gender love and attraction are normal, have always existed in every society in every age, and that homosexuality exists in hundreds of species will be shocked to learn that some people hide behind religion to justify their homophobia; while those who always heard that God shared their prejudice against gays and lesbians will be shocked to hear that divine love does not exclude Queer people but indeed, being gay can be considered a special blessing from God!
Oh yes, we come to be delighted, to be amused, and to be shocked. And the more we get what we came for, the more we’ll return and spread the word to others that they need to try this experience.
At Sunshine Cathedral, we show film clips, we tell stories, we share rituals, we sing, we dance, we entertain (we know that’s one of the reasons people come to church, just as it is why they go to the movies, the cabaret, or a play). And, we don’t shy away from thoughts that might be shocking. We challenge oppressive theologies, and to challenge a theology one has held dear for decades can seem shocking, and liberating, and healing, and thrilling. We may be better, God may be bigger, and life may be open to more investigation than we were ever before led to believe. How thrilling that is to discover!
There may be many reasons to worship, but chiefly among them are the desires to be amused, delighted, and shocked. I honestly hope that at Sunshine Cathedral, we meet those needs in abundance week after week!
Is it to help us be moral or “good”? Not really. We learned some sense of right and wrong from our families and the code of conduct of our schools. There are laws to dissuade us from hurting one another, stealing from one another, damaging property, and so on. And anyway, most of us could figure out that unrestrained selfishness can have negative consequences so some standard of behavior would find its way into our lives. Besides, how many bigots, homophobes, misogynists, tax evaders, perpetrators of violence, slanderers, gossips, child abusers, unfit pet caregivers, and general scoundrels go to church every Sunday?! No, clearly we don’t need to go to church to be good, nor does going to church assure us that we will be well behaved.
Is worship, at the church, synagogue, mosque, sangha, or coven, if not to make us “good” then really to help us find God/dess (Spirit, Higher Power, insert meaningful symbol of ultimate reality here)? Maybe on some level for some of us, but why do we keep going once we find It? Cannot the spirit of life and hope and community be accessed in nature, in relationships, in private times of personal reflection, in 12 Step meetings, and so on? And anyway, if we believe in God, don’t we have some sense that It is a ubiquitous presence? How could we ever be separated from what is divine?
Is worship then an intellectual exercise? I mean, there are texts to reflect on, and a homily/sermon/message/lecture/lesson given in most cases. There are religious education classes and spiritual literature/brochures/booklets distributed. Maybe we just like learning. That would be true of the more curious among us, but libraries, universities, public lectures, public broadcasting, and book stores are also good venues for learning. Even without religion, we would find ways to engage our minds if we desired such stimulation.
Maybe worship leads to service and service leads to significance. In worship we are often encouraged to give charitably, to work for justice, to volunteer our time and talent, do something that might ease someone’s burdens in life. Service is valuable, but again, there are those who aren’t particularly religious but who give to charity, who volunteer time, who try to be a good friend to someone in need or who always seek to be a helpful neighbor.
Perhaps worship, then, is social. Maybe we just like to be around people. Maybe it feels good to sing together, to visit at the coffee hour, to shake hands (or hold hands if the liturgy allows), to make personal connections and to express care and concern when fellow worshipers are ill or otherwise struggling in their lives (and, similarly, it may feel good to be cared about during our difficult times). Celebrations of joy (weddings, baptisms) and cathartic/healing rituals (memorials/funerals) also bring us together to share our joys and concerns. Maybe religion is just a really good way to make friends and build community.
And of all the reasons explored so far, this is the one that may hold the most (holy) water! Religion (along with government, family, economy, and education) is one of the five basic social institutions. Maybe religion is very important for society, or for most of human history for our evolutionary good (religion brings us together, and together we are more likely to help one another, to not be as alone, and therefore to be better able to survive some of life’s hardships).
Yes, religion as a social institution and evolutionary aid (helping protect the species by bringing us together) is pretty important. But in a world of dating services, bowling leagues, book clubs, hospitals, nursing homes, support groups, and even the internet, maybe religion is now just one of several ways that we come together to help one another. For worship to be truly meaningful, it must be more than even socialization (which is, however, a good product of religion).
Remember, theatre came out of religious festivals. And people go to the theatre (and presumably the movies, the opera, concerts, pep rallies, etc.), according to playwright/director/social critic David Mamet, “to be delighted, amused, and shocked. To be brought to life, in short.”
That’s it! People come to worship for the same reason they go to worship’s love child – the theatre! People share the worship experience in hopes of experiencing both joy and scandal. People worship to be more fully alive!
Worship isn’t fire insurance to save us from an after-life booby trap.
Worship isn’t the road map to a God forever playing Hide-n-Seek.
Worship isn’t just an inexpensive way to learn myths, histories, rituals, and ancient opinions.
Worship isn’t something that makes us good.
Worship isn’t even primarily to inspire us to do good work (though it can, and that is wonderful).
Worship, in the end, must even be more than a social enterprise (though it is at least that).
No, worship is a shared attempt to live more abundantly.
Whether the music is from an organ, a guitar, or a capella singers, whether the homilist’s jokes are dry or a little naughty, whether the ritual is simple or complex, whether the story-telling is extemporaneous or read from a book, people come together for worship to share an experience of being delighted and shocked.
It’s shocking to hear about a virgin conceiving, and for those who literalize the story, it can be shocking to hear that it may be a story rather than a historical/biological fact.
On Good Friday, it is shocking to bring to mind the horrors of the torture called crucifixion, and to the humanist, it is shocking to hear that some people believe that God wanted such torture for Jesus; for fundamentalists, it might be shocking to hear Presbyterian theologian Delores Williams declare, “there is nothing of God in the blood of the cross.”
And to those who know that same-gender love and attraction are normal, have always existed in every society in every age, and that homosexuality exists in hundreds of species will be shocked to learn that some people hide behind religion to justify their homophobia; while those who always heard that God shared their prejudice against gays and lesbians will be shocked to hear that divine love does not exclude Queer people but indeed, being gay can be considered a special blessing from God!
Oh yes, we come to be delighted, to be amused, and to be shocked. And the more we get what we came for, the more we’ll return and spread the word to others that they need to try this experience.
At Sunshine Cathedral, we show film clips, we tell stories, we share rituals, we sing, we dance, we entertain (we know that’s one of the reasons people come to church, just as it is why they go to the movies, the cabaret, or a play). And, we don’t shy away from thoughts that might be shocking. We challenge oppressive theologies, and to challenge a theology one has held dear for decades can seem shocking, and liberating, and healing, and thrilling. We may be better, God may be bigger, and life may be open to more investigation than we were ever before led to believe. How thrilling that is to discover!
There may be many reasons to worship, but chiefly among them are the desires to be amused, delighted, and shocked. I honestly hope that at Sunshine Cathedral, we meet those needs in abundance week after week!
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Follies 2011 - FABULOUS
Once a decade a person should see Sondheim’s Follies. Some call the book “dark” and others say it is poorly written; but no one disputes that the music is haunting, beautiful, compelling, and evocative. And, when the show is well directed and well choreographed, the story seems to tighten up a bit too.
I’ve heard multiple cast recordings of Follies and have seen scenes and heard songs performed from it dozens of times, but in 2001 I finally got to see it on Broadway. I was enchanted. First of all, there are some complex (if habitually unhappy) characters and there are amazing songs. And the 2001 cast was star studded: Treat Williams (still gorgeous at the time), Gregory Harrison (also easy on the eyes), Blythe Danner, Judith Ivy, Betty Garrett, and Polly Bergen were all on the same stage for the same show! Sondheim’s music performed by superstars of stage, film and television all on the Broadway stage was a ShoMo’s wet dream! Betty Garrett soft sold (but very effectively) “Broadway Baby”, Polly Bergen gave dramatic gravitas to a song that is often just an excuse to show off a singer’s “pipes” and Treat Williams, much to my surprise, was a really good singer! Judith Ivy and Blythe Danner might have been odd choices for Sally and Phyllis, but even if their singing voices didn’t quite measure up to Broadway musical theatre standards, their acting more than compensated for it (I’ve always said I prefer to hear actors sing than see singers act). So, even though the costumes, lighting, and sets were over all uninspiring, I was all the same thrilled with the production and very happy to have experienced it in person.
But THEN there was the 2011 Broadway production. OMG! I saw it tonight and would gladly (at full price) see it again tomorrow!
Danny Burstein was maybe the most sympathetic, likable “Buddy” in Follies history. He’s no Treat Williams in the looks department, but his physical grace (he must have been a dancer at one point in his life), his musical talent, and the gentleness he brought the character were nothing short of genius!
Ron Raines, for me, was the worst of the best. He was adequate and his acting was believable but he just didn’t sell it like the others did. Honestly, I think Gregory Harrison was better ten years ago in the role.
Jan Maxwell played Phyllis and if she is not nominated for a Tony there is NO justice in the universe. The woman’s power (not aggression, but merely presence) completely overshadowed Bernadette Peters (who received top billing, but it should be given to Maxwell at once). Her singing, her dancing, her acting, her energy, her physical presence, her facial expressions were all flawless. She wasn’t scene stealing; she never broke character or any way dismissed the importance of anyone in the ensemble cast, and yet, her radiance almost hid the lesser beings on stage entirely from view! Surely, SHE is exactly what Sondheim had in mind 40 years ago. Finally, the REAL Phyllis emerges from the shadows!
Bernadette Peters’ squeaky voice was cute and predictable. She played the frail, delusional Sally very traditionally and adequately. The one time that she really lived into her diva image was when she sang “Loosing My Mind.” It was a dramatic masterpiece, and yet she had so underperformed by then, the audience didn’t seem to appreciate (or even notice really) how good that one moment of her performance was. The audience’s judgment was repeated during the curtain call. Maxwell was the penultimate cast member to come out and was greeted with thunderous applause, shouts, cat calls, and riotous enthusiasm. Then finally, Bernadette came out and while she was greeted warmly, the response felt lack-luster in comparison to the ovation Jan Maxwell received.
Mary Beth Peil’s “Solange” was acceptable, but I seem to remember Jane White’s performance of that character in 2001 being much stronger.
Terri White’s performance as Stella was a triumph! I used to go to Rose’s Turn in the Village to hear Terri sing. She released a CD which I had her sign. Her deep, smoky, bluesy alto voice could unseat Zeus himself, rendering his thunderbolts useless. I read a couple of years ago that Terri had fallen on difficult times but had made a comeback and it was thrilling to see her in this show. She looked better than ever, sounded as good as ever, was funny, and commanded the stage with her tap and jazz moves (I don’t remember Carol Woods’ Stella in 2001 moving much at all, or even being able to in her cumbersome costume).
(On a side note – Joane Worley performed the role, I believe, in 2007. I didn’t see her performance, but so wish I had. She undoubtedly brought some comedic skill to the part, but it would be nearly impossible to outshine Terri White as Stella).
Jayne Houdyshell is a long time theatre veteran, though maybe not as well known as the others I’ve mentioned. But her lack of celebrity status is in no way because she is anything less than brilliant on the boards! I never expected to see “Broadway Baby” performed in a way that I liked as well as Betty Garrett’s performance in 2001, but Ms. Houdyshell won me over instantly. She lacked the glamour or grace of the other women, but rather than allowing that to be a hindrance she used it to her full advantage. She was comedic without being clownish, moved with more confidence and purpose than her body shape suggested possible, and sang as powerfully and masterfully as any of the other creative geniuses in the cast.
Elaine Paige as Carlotta was another high point. She played the aging sex kitten perfectly and performed “I’m Still Here” as well as anyone I’ve ever heard. Still, as good as she was, I seem to recall Polly Bergen being at least as good or maybe better. And for me, though not nearly the singer Paige is, the quintessential Carlotta will always be Yvonne De Carlo. When Carlotta sings, “First you’re another doe-eyed vamp, then someone’s mother, then you’re camp”…that line will never sound as powerful as it sounded from an actor who had been a B-movie vixen and then Lillie Munster before accepting the role of a diva whose star was fading in Follies. Yvonne WAS Carlotta! Still, Polly in 2001 was amazing and Elaine in 2011 was a very close runner up. I guess Polly was a better actor and Elaine was a better singer…the actor sang well and the singer actor well, but I’ve already disclosed by personal bias.
Florence Lacy had a small role (“Sandra”), but I was excited because I just saw her 10 months ago in Sunset Blvd (in the leading role) at the Signature Theatre in Arlington, VA. So in my geekiest fashion I was all, “Hey, it’s HER…we just saw her in something else a few months ago.”
Finally, I must praise the 81 year old Rosalind Elias (“Heidi”). Ms. Elias studied at the New England Conservatory of Music and then continued her studies in Italy, and has had an impressive opera career. In her 50+ year career she has received Grammy awards and has performed in every major opera house in the world, but she now proves that there are always new goals to reach as she makes her Broadway debut with Follies! And not for nothing, but her mezzo-soprano voice is still rich and wonderful. She’s still got it.
The 2001 production had bigger “stars”…but the 2011 production had better choreography, sets, lighting, costumes, and direction. And rather than a collection of stars sharing a stage, this production was a true ensemble cast working together to make magic. I loved it 10 years ago, and I loved it 100 times more tonight. I hope I get to see an even better production of Follies in 2021 (though I wonder how that could be possible).
---Durrell Watkins
Oct. 19, 2011
I’ve heard multiple cast recordings of Follies and have seen scenes and heard songs performed from it dozens of times, but in 2001 I finally got to see it on Broadway. I was enchanted. First of all, there are some complex (if habitually unhappy) characters and there are amazing songs. And the 2001 cast was star studded: Treat Williams (still gorgeous at the time), Gregory Harrison (also easy on the eyes), Blythe Danner, Judith Ivy, Betty Garrett, and Polly Bergen were all on the same stage for the same show! Sondheim’s music performed by superstars of stage, film and television all on the Broadway stage was a ShoMo’s wet dream! Betty Garrett soft sold (but very effectively) “Broadway Baby”, Polly Bergen gave dramatic gravitas to a song that is often just an excuse to show off a singer’s “pipes” and Treat Williams, much to my surprise, was a really good singer! Judith Ivy and Blythe Danner might have been odd choices for Sally and Phyllis, but even if their singing voices didn’t quite measure up to Broadway musical theatre standards, their acting more than compensated for it (I’ve always said I prefer to hear actors sing than see singers act). So, even though the costumes, lighting, and sets were over all uninspiring, I was all the same thrilled with the production and very happy to have experienced it in person.
But THEN there was the 2011 Broadway production. OMG! I saw it tonight and would gladly (at full price) see it again tomorrow!
Danny Burstein was maybe the most sympathetic, likable “Buddy” in Follies history. He’s no Treat Williams in the looks department, but his physical grace (he must have been a dancer at one point in his life), his musical talent, and the gentleness he brought the character were nothing short of genius!
Ron Raines, for me, was the worst of the best. He was adequate and his acting was believable but he just didn’t sell it like the others did. Honestly, I think Gregory Harrison was better ten years ago in the role.
Jan Maxwell played Phyllis and if she is not nominated for a Tony there is NO justice in the universe. The woman’s power (not aggression, but merely presence) completely overshadowed Bernadette Peters (who received top billing, but it should be given to Maxwell at once). Her singing, her dancing, her acting, her energy, her physical presence, her facial expressions were all flawless. She wasn’t scene stealing; she never broke character or any way dismissed the importance of anyone in the ensemble cast, and yet, her radiance almost hid the lesser beings on stage entirely from view! Surely, SHE is exactly what Sondheim had in mind 40 years ago. Finally, the REAL Phyllis emerges from the shadows!
Bernadette Peters’ squeaky voice was cute and predictable. She played the frail, delusional Sally very traditionally and adequately. The one time that she really lived into her diva image was when she sang “Loosing My Mind.” It was a dramatic masterpiece, and yet she had so underperformed by then, the audience didn’t seem to appreciate (or even notice really) how good that one moment of her performance was. The audience’s judgment was repeated during the curtain call. Maxwell was the penultimate cast member to come out and was greeted with thunderous applause, shouts, cat calls, and riotous enthusiasm. Then finally, Bernadette came out and while she was greeted warmly, the response felt lack-luster in comparison to the ovation Jan Maxwell received.
Mary Beth Peil’s “Solange” was acceptable, but I seem to remember Jane White’s performance of that character in 2001 being much stronger.
Terri White’s performance as Stella was a triumph! I used to go to Rose’s Turn in the Village to hear Terri sing. She released a CD which I had her sign. Her deep, smoky, bluesy alto voice could unseat Zeus himself, rendering his thunderbolts useless. I read a couple of years ago that Terri had fallen on difficult times but had made a comeback and it was thrilling to see her in this show. She looked better than ever, sounded as good as ever, was funny, and commanded the stage with her tap and jazz moves (I don’t remember Carol Woods’ Stella in 2001 moving much at all, or even being able to in her cumbersome costume).
(On a side note – Joane Worley performed the role, I believe, in 2007. I didn’t see her performance, but so wish I had. She undoubtedly brought some comedic skill to the part, but it would be nearly impossible to outshine Terri White as Stella).
Jayne Houdyshell is a long time theatre veteran, though maybe not as well known as the others I’ve mentioned. But her lack of celebrity status is in no way because she is anything less than brilliant on the boards! I never expected to see “Broadway Baby” performed in a way that I liked as well as Betty Garrett’s performance in 2001, but Ms. Houdyshell won me over instantly. She lacked the glamour or grace of the other women, but rather than allowing that to be a hindrance she used it to her full advantage. She was comedic without being clownish, moved with more confidence and purpose than her body shape suggested possible, and sang as powerfully and masterfully as any of the other creative geniuses in the cast.
Elaine Paige as Carlotta was another high point. She played the aging sex kitten perfectly and performed “I’m Still Here” as well as anyone I’ve ever heard. Still, as good as she was, I seem to recall Polly Bergen being at least as good or maybe better. And for me, though not nearly the singer Paige is, the quintessential Carlotta will always be Yvonne De Carlo. When Carlotta sings, “First you’re another doe-eyed vamp, then someone’s mother, then you’re camp”…that line will never sound as powerful as it sounded from an actor who had been a B-movie vixen and then Lillie Munster before accepting the role of a diva whose star was fading in Follies. Yvonne WAS Carlotta! Still, Polly in 2001 was amazing and Elaine in 2011 was a very close runner up. I guess Polly was a better actor and Elaine was a better singer…the actor sang well and the singer actor well, but I’ve already disclosed by personal bias.
Florence Lacy had a small role (“Sandra”), but I was excited because I just saw her 10 months ago in Sunset Blvd (in the leading role) at the Signature Theatre in Arlington, VA. So in my geekiest fashion I was all, “Hey, it’s HER…we just saw her in something else a few months ago.”
Finally, I must praise the 81 year old Rosalind Elias (“Heidi”). Ms. Elias studied at the New England Conservatory of Music and then continued her studies in Italy, and has had an impressive opera career. In her 50+ year career she has received Grammy awards and has performed in every major opera house in the world, but she now proves that there are always new goals to reach as she makes her Broadway debut with Follies! And not for nothing, but her mezzo-soprano voice is still rich and wonderful. She’s still got it.
The 2001 production had bigger “stars”…but the 2011 production had better choreography, sets, lighting, costumes, and direction. And rather than a collection of stars sharing a stage, this production was a true ensemble cast working together to make magic. I loved it 10 years ago, and I loved it 100 times more tonight. I hope I get to see an even better production of Follies in 2021 (though I wonder how that could be possible).
---Durrell Watkins
Oct. 19, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
