Spring Awakening

This was a preview performance on September 15th at 8:00 pm.
I sat in the front mezz/row B/seat 21.
The ticket was $51 on TDF (that's including fees).

* I'm going on the assumption that people reading this post have an idea of what Deaf West does, and at least a basic knowledge of how this revival of Spring Awakening is performed.

I have a lot of thoughts regarding Deaf West's production of Spring Awakening. Let me first say that until last night I had never seen a production of SA onstage. I knew all the music and I knew the basic plot, but I'd never actually seen the show before. The original cast recording has never been my favorite -- there are a few songs I really love, but I've never really been blown away by what I was listening to when I put the recording on.

In terms of artistic value? This production was unreal. Stunningly gorgeous in the technical and visual sense. But I had serious issues with the book of the musical. And when I say serious I mean a lot of the dialogue is laugh inducing. The stupidity of the dialogue was made more obvious through the voice-overs. Let me just say that the "voice of" part was so much more than just a voice-over, but that's the best way to describe in words what was happening. The "voice of" part was kind of an alter ego, one that could verbally express what the character was signing. They acted as a beautiful kind of support system, which was interesting.

I wanted so badly to be obsessed with this production because it's definitely my kind of musical. Did I get chills? Yes. But overall, the show just doesn't hit me in the solar plexus -- which is my gauge for whether or not I can truly say I love a show.

Honestly? I think SA wants to be deep. It wants to prove a point. It wants to say something about the human condition, about growing up, about navigating young adulthood. But it falls short. I want more. The book is poorly written, and thus the importance of what's happening doesn't come through.

One of my biggest issues was the freaking moving staircase. That set piece is so overused lately. I'm pretty sure Michael Arden climbed a staircase just like that one every single night during his run at Papermill in Hunchback last spring. American Idiot? Moving staircase. The 2012 revival of Jesus Christ Superstar? Moving staircase. Oh and I haven't seen Hamilton yet, but I've been told there's a moving staircase... get the picture? It's used a lot these days. So nothing new happening there.

I am totally obsessed with the idea of seeing newbies onstage. The majority of the cast was making their Broadway debuts. I'd seen 5 of the cast members onstage before. That's it. And that was refreshing. Were some of the actors green? Yeah. Did it matter? No. It's not a show that requires precision and perfection in all things -- pitch, for example. 

I can't stop thinking about the show. It was well worth the money I paid. It didn't make me cry, but it made me think. It made me think about what makes a perfect musical, and how a musical that really didn't need a revival could be transformed to be worth being on Broadway again. So go see it and form your own opinions. I'm not part of the SA fan club, but I am a part of the Michael Arden fan club. Let me tell you, that guy knows how to make meaningful directing decisions. Very impressed with the production as a whole. It's the show itself that I don't connect with.

On The Town

Just realized I never posted this. I saw On The Town for a second time -- same cast except for a new Ivy and an understudy Ozzy. Loved it. Not much to say. Is it my favorite piece of theater? No. Is it a really awesome revival of a classic? Yes. Is Alysha Umphress a goddess? Yes.

Go back to read my thoughts on the last time I saw the show...

Mercury Fur (The New Group)

I wanted to see a show and I wanted it to be exciting and interesting and new. I chose Mercury Fur because I could get a $25 ticket. I knew nothing about the play -- didn't even watch the trailer on the New Group's website. I simply bought the ticket based on price and figured it would be an experience. And boy was it an experience. After I bought the ticket last week I checked around on the Broadway message boards to see what people were saying. The reactions were extremely divisive -- either love or hate, but mostly hate. And, as you've all come to know, that's my taste in theater -- I tend to be into shows that the majority of the population doesn't like. Mercury Fur was no different.

First let me mention that I'd never seen a show at Signature Center. The space is so cool and it's very reminiscent of theaters in London -- the Off-West End spaces that have multiple venues in one building and a large open sitting area. It's neat to walk into a room where there's a lot of people milling about but ultimately going separate ways to see different shows.

There's no easy way to explain what Mercury Fur is about. Basically a group of young adults have survived (or are currently in the process of surviving?) the apocalypse. It's unclear why everything is falling apart, unclear why there are riots and bombings, and unclear whether or not a sandstorm where it rained butterflies set the whole thing in motion. The butterflies are reminiscent of the milk in A Clockwork Orange, and each different color butterfly has a different effect. Nothing tied together nicely. A cool idea would be touched on during one conversation but then the idea wouldn't be followed through. The play itself was very uneven, but for me that left me wondering what was going to happen next. As the "story" unfolds, you learn very little and that kept me on the edge of my seat. Because the less you know, the more shocked you're going to be at the end -- whether or not anything big happens.

The acting wasn't stellar, but surprisingly that didn't sway my opinion of the piece one way or another. The concept behind what was going on drew me in and I could get past the stiffness of some of the acting. One character I really didn't understand or like was "Duchess" and I think her character could've been cut to trim the fat -- the show was over two hours long with no intermission. There were moments that alluded to her being far more important of a character than she seemed, but that story line was vague and not fleshed out enough to be anything more than a passing thought.

The technical elements were on point -- for example, how the light faded as the sun went down, the change dramatic but realistic. The house lights went out and the audience sat in the dark for a couple of minutes. People coughed, people fidgeted, people laughed. Those uncomfortable moments of silence in the dark just heightened the audience's awareness of the space, which allowed the ending to be even more powerful. The play went from quick and dark to loud and bright, but after the explosion (literally and figuratively) we were bathed in darkness. And the kicker was no one knew if the show was over when the lights went out because it was the same darkness that started the play.

Was I head-over-heels in love with this show? No. Did I find it worth my time? Yes. Do I think it could be tightened up and trimmed? Yes. I think this all boils down to Mercury Fur being "just my kind of thing." But it certainly isn't for everyone. My guess is the reviews won't be positive at all. And The New Group will no doubt lose subscribers over this one.

Two interesting things to note: The playbill is handed out at the end as you're walking to the lobby, and Susan Hilferty did the costumes (which is interesting because everything worn could've been picked out of a random twenty-something's closet -- so very different from Wicked, etc).

Wolf Hall Parts 1&2

If you've read any of my reviews of RSC shows, you know they're hit or miss with me. I don't love Gregory Doran's (RSC Artistic Director) style or choices when it comes to directing. But what I've seen from the RSC that Doran hasn't directed personally I have loved. So I'm often unsure of how I'll feel about an RSC production.

Here's a quick little refresher from my London blog. Two different shows at the RSC, two very different reviews...

Shakespeare's "Merry Wives of Windsor"(Royal Shakespeare Company, Stratford-upon-Avon) -- This show was absolutely fabulous. I loved every second of it. The production was updated, set in November 2012, and for the first time ever I found myself relating to characters in Shakespeare.

"The Orphan of Zhao" (Royal Shakespeare Company, Stratford-upon-Avon) -- Not good. Just kind of ridiculous actually. There was no sense of respect for the Chinese culture and the ritual that is Chinese theatre. The set was interesting and some of the effects were good. One actor was great.

The RSC itself has a certain feel to it. It's a feeling that you don't get on Broadway usually. But during the six hours I spent in the Winter Garden Theatre last week, I truly felt that classic RSC feeling. Ringing cell phones, patrons texting, and old men snoring aside, I felt transported to England.

I saw Part I on a Thursday night at 7:00 pm. After a busy day at work I expected to be trying hard to stay awake, but not once did I yawn or start to drift. Part II I saw on closing night - the Sunday after July 4th - at 6:30 pm. The company had done Part I earlier that day, so by the time the cast gave their final bow around 9:15 pm, Ben Miles (Thomas Cromwell) had been onstage for nearly six hours. The energy in the theater was amazing during the final performance and the cast seemed truly grateful looking out on an immediate standing ovation.

Where to begin with the acting. Well, I can tell you that it was some of the best acting I've seen onstage. Ben Miles was exquisite. His performance was full of nuance and passion. He lived and breathed Thomas Cromwell. He barely left the stage (if at all) and he just gave everything to his scene partners. I would be interested to know what his fellow actors have to say about being onstage with him, because he seems like a very giving actor and a great scene partner.

Ben Miles was the standout and absolutely deserving of his Tony nomination. The other two nominated actors, Lydia Leonard (Anne Boleyn) and Nathaniel Parker (King Henry VIII) were outstanding. The supporting cast was fabulous AND there were some extremely attractive men, which never hurts.

Wolf Hall Parts I and II, my good people, is good theater. I would pick a show like Wolf Hall over a classically done production of Shakespeare. I would've loved to see this show at the RSC or on the West End. I'm pretty sure the NY Times reviewer (don't remember if it was Brantley or Isherwood) used the word "boring" in his review. I wasn't bored. I was enthralled.

Something Rotten!

I bought my ticket on TodayTix and used a code, bringing the price to $37. Not bad. The only issue was that I'm not good with heights and the balcony at the St. James Theatre is pretty damn steep. Needless to say I spent the majority of the show trying not to freak out about the location of my seat. Despite the location of my seat, I had a fantastic time at Something Rotten! and I would highly recommend the show to anyone who is looking for a solid night at the theater.

I saw the show a week after Christian Borle won the Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Musical, and the audience was living for his performance. He was fun to watch, as was the rest of the cast. There were a few members of the ensemble that were impossible not to watch during the dances -- Eric Sciotto was a total standout. This was my first time seeing Brian D'Arcy James, Christian Borle, and Heidi Blickenstaff in a show (I missed Borle in Starcatcher by just a few days), and all three are fantastic performers. John Cariani, who I last saw play Dogberry in Much Ado About Nothing at Barrington Stage Company, was adorable and endearing. Really, I don't have anything all that exciting to say about any of the actors because they were all great and there wasn't one casting decision I didn't agree with or would've liked to change.

The show literally stopped a few times because of extended applause. There were two huge numbers that got the audience on their feet for a standing ovation in the middle of the show! It was exciting and crazy and even though it was the final show of a five-show weekend, the cast appeared to be having a great time. 

Was the show perfect? No. Brilliant? Eh, it had it's moments. Offensive? Definitely. A lot of fun? Yes.

Something Rotten! wasn't life changing, but I had a really great time. Also, I am loving listening to the cast recording. A musical that has music enjoyable enough to just listen to without watching the action is a hit with me.

2015 Tony Awards

For the last few (at least three) years I have live-Tweeted the Tony Awards. I'm a Broadway fanatic, so it's only fitting that the Tony Awards are the most exciting day of the year for me. This year, however, there was little fanfare. I attended a family wedding on Sunday evening, so for the first time in many years I had to record the Tonys and watch later. I think the situation caused me to feel very mehhhh about the awards this time around. Usually I'm hooting and hollering at the TV and wouldn't dare change the channel for the entire broadcast. This year I fast-forwarded through a lot of the show. It was late, I had to drive back to Jersey at 7:30 am the next morning, and I hadn't seen enough of the nominated shows to feel emotionally involved.

I haven't even gone back to check if any of my predictions were correct because, let's be honest, they're probably not. I really enjoyed the performances, although I don't think Gigi, Finding Neverland, or It Shoulda Been You should've been highlighted. For a year so full of dance-heavy shows, the award for Best Choreography belonged in the broadcast, not during a commercial break. Instead of showcasing shows that will be closing in a few weeks from lack of ticket sales, how about giving Christopher Wheeldon his time in the spotlight. I don't need to go any further into the debate about what awards should be shown because we all know it's already happening, and my opinions on the subject don't matter. I'll leave that to the bigwigs who actually have clout and might be able to enact change.

As for the hosts, I was indifferent. Like the rest of the night, they were enjoyable and had some cute moments. Nothing was shocking. The opening number was not a showstopper like it has been in the last few years. It just wasn't all that special.

None of the winners were surprising, which just meant the whole show was kind of a snooze-fest. Yeah, history was made with Fun Home's wins and Kelli O'Hara finally has a trophy after all this time. Kelli's win was the most exciting moment of the night and her speech was great. I enjoyed the majority of the speeches and each one had its own little quirks. But nothing made me jump up and want to shout with joy. (By the way, finishing the show with Jersey Boys was great. I'll probably catch some flack for saying that, but honestly, I just adore that show and it was so fun to watch.)

Broadway's biggest night is usually mine too. But this year it all just fell flat for me. Again, it was probably because of the way my evening turned out -- Sunday night wasn't the event it usually is for me, and that influenced how I felt about the actual award show.

WHO IS READY FOR TOMORROW?!