National Theatre: Follies- Page 10
National Theatre: Follies
GeorgeandDot
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/13/16
#225National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/9/17 at 1:40am
David10086 said: "GeorgeandDot said: "David10086 said: "There's always been the question as to why this was never turned into a movie in the past 45 years? A great vehicle (especially now) for Streisand."
Huh? Sally's supposed to be 49. Streisand is 75 and her voice is in rough shape, plus her face is nearly completely immobilized from having so much plastic surgery."
You really think age matters that much? If that were the case, Glenn Close, 70, would never have played 50 year old Norma Desmond again on stage at the Palace, and wouldn't be considered for the movie.
Streisand herself would have never been cast as 'Dolly Levi' in 'Hello Dolly' at 27 years old.
Diana Ross played 17 year old 'Dorothy' in 'The Wiz' at the age of 34 with a few tweaks to the story.
Streisand could play the part no matter how old Sally is 'supposed' to be, As for her voice - it's fine for another musical."
Well it matters when she has the line "I'm 49 years old and that's all I am." Also, her voice is wrecked and Sally requires a gorgeous soprano. Something she does not have. She could have done the show 30 or 40 years ago and even then I don't think she would be right for Sally. She'd be great as Carlotta, but even then her voice is pretty ragged. The examples that you listed (aside from Close) are widely considered to be instances of miscasting.
Also what does the last line of your post even mean? Do you mean that actresses in musicals don't need to actually be able to sing? I don't understand and it's clear to me that you've never seen this show. Streisand will never play Sally.
#226National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/9/17 at 2:08am
Here's a pic of John J. Martin and Dick Latessa as "Margie" and "Sally": http://red-winged-monster.tumblr.com/post/126928650920/in-the-boston-try-out-of-follies-buddys
Updated On: 9/9/17 at 02:08 AM
#228National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/9/17 at 10:04am
Thanks to several posters, I continued checking the NTLive site daily, and found another performance on December 10 in Los Angeles, where I'll be living, still great seats available.
And thanks to all the comments thus far on this new production. Yes, it's killing me that I can't get to London while it's still being performed live, but now I at least know that I'll be seeing it twice.
For the record, when ! went to Boston to see a tryout of FOLLIES in early 1971, Yvonne DeCarlo was still doing "Foxtrot" (cute, but no showstopper like "I'm Still Here"
and Alexis Smith had laryngitis, talked through "Girls Upstairs" and "Lucy and Jessie" and completely cut "Could I Leave You" (I only found this out by reading Ted Chapin's "Everything Was Possible" nearly 35 years later, which literally catalogued performance by performance during the tryout, and I was able to find the Saturday matinee that I attended, the same day I went to the woeful PRETTYBELLE at its final performance; if you haven't read Chapin's book, and you love this show as much as many of us do, it is a must-read).
#229National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 5:25am
Where to begin?
I'll start by reiterating just how phenomenal this score is. One of the greatest ever written, I teared up on multiple occasions hearing the orchestra play that music. The program even pointed out a quirk I hadn't noticed before: "Too Many Mornings" has the accompaniment line of "Pleasant Little Kingdom" (the song written to lead into "Mornings" embedded in Sally's bridge section.
Frank Rich wrote that to be a Sondheim fan is to have your heart broken. This is especially true of a Follies fan, who is eternally waiting for a revival that will rival the iconic and legendary 1971 production. This revival has gotten buzz that it might be the one. With a heavy heart, I have say, in my mind, that is simply not true.
Let's start with the good. The script is pretty much the original, even if subtle line changes are odd and don't really make sense (why is the theatre now being torn down for a shopping mall?). There is no intermission, allowing the show to progress naturally into Loveland. And Janice Dee, our Phyllis, has a naturally cutting wit and acidity that brings her character to the forefront, at least until "Could I Leave You?" rolls around.
But I'm sad to say that there is much more bad to talk about than good. The set is two broken brick walls on a turntable. One wall has a huge light up sign that reads "Weissman's FOLLIES". The turntable supposedly separates be interior party with the exterior of the theatre, where the primary 4 often go to escape. Because the one thing Follies thrives on is literal staging.
With the exception of the Whitmans, Hattie, and Heidi, each of the supporting characters have been given odd direction and allowed to bring their own *unique* interpretations of their songs. Solange naturally has two Parisian men dancing with her during "Ah, Paris!", complete with berets and limp wrists. Both Stella and Carlotta (a desperate Tracie Bennett) have turned their songs into personal breakdowns, arguably a fine choice for "I'm Still Here", but random and wrong for "Who's That Woman?" (Unlike "Still Here", not a character song, but a pastiche not reflecting Stella's interior life). The worst offender has to be the fact that the older women disappear for the Tap section of "Who's That Woman?", leaving their younger selves alone. That song is at the core of the show - young and old together; not showing the older women as pathetic, but a able to keep up with their memories. One of the most thrilling visual metaphors is lost for no good reason.
As for our other 3 leads, they all start the show as... well people about to have mental breakdowns. When Imelda's Sally yells at Buddy during their FIRST exchange, it's like having Martha sob about her dead son in the first scene of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?". These actors are not allowed to build the tensions as the show goes on, instead acting deranged from the outset, and it make the already tough show even more difficult to bear.
None of the main actors have any major revelatory moments with their roles - and Imelda in particular sounds BAD when singing her songs. I know she's no Barbara Cook, but being the musical theatre goddess of London, I expected a little better.
Oh, also, "The Right Girl" is a dance duet between Buddy and Young Buddy, with Young Sally and Young Ben making out during be first verse. Why? I have no clue.
Poor Dee is so uncomfortable singing I had to feel sorry for her. Phyllis is the easiest character to get into, simply because Goldman's book works for her so well in the first hour of the show. Her lines are dripping with ice and acidity, and Dee gets that. She brings the dry wit Alexis Smith can be heard delivering on the soundboard. But "Could I Leave You?" was trepidatious at best. She even forgot the lyrics of "would it pass? It would pass!" during the matinee, letting the orchestra take over it. She remembered during the evening show. In fact, I was reminded multiple times of my Roundabout audio, where the leads can barely sing a note. At times, this production rivals it.
Which brings me to Loveland. The worst and most amateurish point of the show. The set is CHEAP and looks it. The costumes are CHEAP. The entire affect is embarrassingly and just makes a point for those people who say the sequence is pointless. For "Buddy's Blues", Margie and Sally are men in drag. It didn't work for Hal Prince and Michael Bennett, so why should it work here? Imelda's "Losing My Mind" is a peon of anger, odd since Sally is singing a torch song as a singer in a metaphysical Follies, not as the actual character of Sally. Dee has to bring out her young self to dance with her during "Lucy and Jesse" and struggles during the... high notes (?). Oh, and Ben's breakdown is clearly framed as the character, not the actor, which loses the entire point of the sequence and the moment where the audience is unsure where it is.
The ending is fine, and during the Matinee Imelda delivered her "I should have died the first time" line directly to me. It was powerful and moving. Imelda has a great Sally in her. This is not it. Maybe a lot of these actors have great "Follies" performances in them. This production holds none of them.
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir
#230National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 7:14am
Wow. I think what shocks me the most is that the Loveland transition sounds so disappointing. I remember several of us were initially underwhelmed with the bed of roses in the 2011 revival, but the reveal always managed to get applause the multiple times I saw that production.
#231National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 7:20am
I suppose being naive to the original production it made it easy for me (and others apparently) to be impressed by the 2011 Loveland. When Bernadette stood centre-stage with just a whole flood of bright red roses piercing every possible corner of the audience vision (assuming seated centre front to mid orchestra) I thought it was quite spectacular. 
Absolutely stunning. Photos can't even quite capture what this looks like in person. I miss 2011.
"You can't overrate Bernadette Peters. She is such a genius. There's a moment in "Too Many Mornings" and Bernadette doing 'I wore green the last time' - It's a voice that is just already given up - it is so sorrowful. Tragic. You can see from that moment the show is going to be headed into such dark territory and it hinges on this tiny throwaway moment of the voice." - Ben Brantley (2022)
"Bernadette's whole, stunning performance [as Rose in Gypsy] galvanized the actors capable of letting loose with her. Bernadette's Rose did take its rightful place, but too late, and unseen by too many who should have seen it" Arthur Laurents (2009)
"Sondheim's own favorite star performances? [Bernadette] Peters in ''Sunday in the Park,'' Lansbury in ''Sweeney Todd'' and ''obviously, Ethel was thrilling in 'Gypsy.'' Nytimes, 2000
Updated On: 9/12/17 at 07:20 AM
#232National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 7:35am
While not my favorite rendition of Losing My Mind, Bernadette was wisely directed to perform it as a torch singer, with glimpses of Sally's actual heartbreak throughout, usually the traditional direction of the number. It sounds like Imelda is taking the Judith Ivey route, and performing it fully as angry Sally.
#233National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 7:48am
regarding LOSING MY MIND in the 2011 revival...i thought Bernadette's rendition the least favorite in all the show...her voice wasn't great on the live video i saw but else-where i thought she slayed it IN BUDDY'S ARMS...and about the transition to LOVELAND,,,i felt it looked clumsy...while it was happening actors were walking off stage and almost walked on a curtain on the floor...maybe that transition was cleaner when it came to Broadway
#234National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 7:51am
The conceptual approach to Loveland is different from any of the Broadway productions. In the RNT production, each is more a vignette playing on some form of domesticity- there are more scenic elements for each vignette than is customary. Sally for example is seated at an oversized mirror vanity in "Losing My Mind" and the duet for the young couples includes a 1940s living room.
i agree that the weakest past of this production are the normal "coup de theatre moments"- like the Loveland transition, and for me even the prologue.
The strength of this production comes from its acting and from striking stage pictures and of course the material itself. I preferred it to the last Broadway production but it's not definitive.
To really work, Follies needs to be staged on various staggered staging levels. I'm not sure why any of the major revivals have not realized this. Eric Shaffer totally wasted the space available to him in the 2011 revival.
“I knew who I was this morning, but I've changed a few times since then.”
#235National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 8:02am
I think the 2011 revival was light years better than this production.
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir
JBC3
Broadway Star Joined: 4/9/17
#236National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 8:03amQueenAlice said: "To really work, Follies needs to be staged on various staggered staging levels. I'm not sure why any of the major revivals have not realized this. Eric Shaffer totally wasted the space available to him in the 2011 revival."
Can you talk a bit more about this? The Chicago Shakespeare production (which I loved) that played around the same time as the last Broadway revival had two (maybe three?) levels with only a few steps delineating them if I recall correctly. They were used to good effect in many of the songs.
#237National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 8:22am
I definitely would not describe Imelda's interpretation of Losing My Mind as "angry." At least not at the first preview.
Updated On: 9/12/17 at 08:22 AM
#238National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 12:22pm
For those who've been discussing a movie version, there was almost a movie version in the 70s. Harold Prince was going to direct and MGM going to produce it, with the original leads, but MGM pulled out, probably due to costs. The film was going to be set at a closing Hollywood studio (ironic, as MGM was in its final days) with older Hollywood stars playing the supporting parts. Bette Davis was supposed to have played one. (unsure if it was Carlotta or Hattie). What might have been............
Updated On: 9/12/17 at 12:22 PM#239National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 1:15pm
It's very difficult to make the reveals of the ghosts especially in numbers like Whos that Woman -surprising and effective without some kind of upper playing level. Watch the original staging on YouTube and you will see what I mean. The entire original production used levels brilliantly- it's part of what made the imagery of the original production magical in people's memory of it. One of the "Follies" of the 2011 production was that they had upper playing areas and they never used them!
if I had to summerize the flaws of all the major revivals I would say the Paper Mill production was too glitzy, the Roundabout too dingy, the Kennedy Center too literal and the RNT production not grasping the key coup de musical theatre moments.
I did love the leads in the RNT production and they didn't feel as vocally weak at the performance I attended as the poster above describes. They also had the material of the original script which makes a huge difference (to me) in the over all effectiveness of the musical. The script changes for the Roundabout and Kennedy Center were unforgivable.
I'm still waiting for a truly visionary musical theatre director to take on this show. That's really what's been missing since every production since 1971.
“I knew who I was this morning, but I've changed a few times since then.”
Updated On: 9/12/17 at 01:15 PM
#240National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/12/17 at 4:41pm
Please don't group the 2011 script with Roundabout's. 2011 was actually closer to the Encores! script. 2011 and Encores! thankfully cut the ghastly ensemble exit lines in the finale. Also both of these versions reversed the order of the couples' finale dialogue, ending with Sally and Buddy, which arguably ends the show on an even darker note. No two scripts of Follies have been exactly the same. I think a lot of that is due to the Bobbie Goldman. There were some minor book changes in the 2011 production even after the production was frozen. The Papermill book had some odd changes throughout, especially the dialogue in the Loveland transition. While the RNT definitely sounds closest to 1971, from what I've heard there are definitely some new/changed lines.
Updated On: 9/12/17 at 04:41 PM
#241National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 12:35am
Taking a devil's advocate approach to the reported "cheapness" of the Loveland scenery, Boris Aronson, the original designer, once said that the original effect for Loveland was to be initially overwhelming but then reveal a certain flatness and non-surprise (I'm paraphrasing here), revealing Loveland for the lie it is. I haven't seen the new production, but I wonder if any perceived "cheapness" in Loveland isn't exactly the intent, in theatrical terms. From what I have been reading about this production, those involved seem to have been doing their homework, dating back to 1971. Remember, Loveland is no dream, it's a nightmare.
As for Bernadette Peters' version of "Losing My Mind", a friend once asked me why she was singing it in someone's intestines.
Well-well-well-what-do-you-think-of-that-I-have-nothing-here-to-pay-my-train-fare-with-only-large-bills-fives-and-sevens....
Updated On: 9/14/17 at 12:35 AM
#242National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 12:57am
Bernadette's performance of Losing My Mind did vary a bit across the run. As a cutting Variety article said on her replacement in LA, it is unclear even to me whether she was trying to be emotionally overwhelmed or whether her voice was not handling it well. In any case - when it came time to recording she sung it straight through in a rather vanilla/standard way. If people listen to the cast recording and are still unsatisfied I don't think she has the ability to improve upon it at this point in her career. Might have been interesting to hear her do it 20 years ago. Bernadette'a voice notably declined around the time of Gypsy and has remained pretty stable since.
"You can't overrate Bernadette Peters. She is such a genius. There's a moment in "Too Many Mornings" and Bernadette doing 'I wore green the last time' - It's a voice that is just already given up - it is so sorrowful. Tragic. You can see from that moment the show is going to be headed into such dark territory and it hinges on this tiny throwaway moment of the voice." - Ben Brantley (2022)
"Bernadette's whole, stunning performance [as Rose in Gypsy] galvanized the actors capable of letting loose with her. Bernadette's Rose did take its rightful place, but too late, and unseen by too many who should have seen it" Arthur Laurents (2009)
"Sondheim's own favorite star performances? [Bernadette] Peters in ''Sunday in the Park,'' Lansbury in ''Sweeney Todd'' and ''obviously, Ethel was thrilling in 'Gypsy.'' Nytimes, 2000
rattleNwoolypenguin
Broadway Star Joined: 10/11/11
#243National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 1:17am
We don't talk enough about how Victoria Clark was so SO SO good as Sally. What a shame she didn't get to do the role in NY. As much as I love Bernadette, Victoria's performance proved to me that it should've always been played by her.
#244National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 1:23am
Nothing about the RNT's production of FOLLIES is cheap. To say that the Loveland set is 'cheap' isn't, in my opinion, the right adjective - the show's scenic design for that segment is elegant and tasteful (perhaps too much so) and its monochromatic (pale blue to match and echo the colors worn by Sally and Phyllis). The reveal is definitely not the splashy explosion of color of the original. And I agree that it collectively is a bit of a disappointment of a design choice, but I don't believe any of it was done as an effort to save money.
“I knew who I was this morning, but I've changed a few times since then.”
Updated On: 9/14/17 at 01:23 AM
RippedMan
Broadway Legend Joined: 8/14/05
#245National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 1:34am
I think - for whatever reason - this show is too close to so many people, and we will never get a "perfect" show out of it. I'm curious to see the National Theatre's production in cinemas.
#246National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 1:48am
Well, I think even those who love the show recognize that its flawed. We will likely never see a definitive production its true. But do I think there could be a better production than each of the last major revivals? You bet. But like I said already, it really depends on the vision of the director. None of the major revivals of the musical has been helmed by a visionary musical theatre director.
“I knew who I was this morning, but I've changed a few times since then.”
djoko84
Broadway Star Joined: 3/14/13
#247National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 8:19am
I was looking for info about the National's Follies because I'm seeing it in December so I went to the WEST END board. Not sure why this is here.
Updated On: 9/14/17 at 08:19 AM#248National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 8:29am
Cora Hoover Hooper said: "For those who've been discussing a movie version, there was almost a movie version in the 70s. Harold Prince was going to direct and MGM going to produce it, with the original leads, but MGM pulled out, probably due to costs. The film was going to be set at a closing Hollywood studio (ironic, as MGM was in its final days) with older Hollywood stars playing the supporting parts. Bette Davis was supposed to have played one. (unsure if it was Carlotta or Hattie). What might have been............"
here is a link to the interesting article in the PARIS REVIEW about the attempt to make this a moviehttps://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2013/11/29/loveland/...a must read for any and all SONDEIMMANIACS!!
#249National Theatre: Follies
Posted: 9/14/17 at 9:28am
That's some good writing. Thanks for sharing, broadwaywannabe2
Caption: Every so often there was a rare moment of perfect balance when I soared above him.
Videos