![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
newmoonstarI guess it's lucky my car chose to break down in the middle of a heat wave, since it's too hot to leave the house anyway! So in the air-conditioning I stay, and it's given me a chance to listen to a lot of music and movies over the past week.
My musical theater kick still being in full force, I watched a DVD of the London production of the 2000 Kiss Me, Kate revival. Ugh, big mistake! SOOO bad! So boring I could barely keep awake, and really poorly cast. For starters, Rachel York is really obnoxious, way too stagey and insincere, and Brent Barrett is too nice and not obnoxious enough. They had no chemistry whatsoever, and weren't funny. Actually, no one in the cast was funny, or had any charisma whatsoever. I've never much liked Kiss Me, Kate as a show in general, but a good cast and effective staging can make it a pleasant enough trifle (i.e. the movie version). A bad production is pretty much my idea of torture. It's old-fashioned in a bad way (SO sexist, OMG!) and all the naughty jokes Cole Porter is wont to cram into his shows are just so old and tired that there's no way they could ever be made funny again. (But I honestly doubt they were ever funny even in the first place!) When you've got a bunch of good songs performed by genuine stars like Kathryn Grayson, Howard Keel and Ann Miller, you forgive how stupid the story is, but without that, there's really nothing worthwhile. I really can't figure out if it was the bad casting, or the uninspired choreography or direction, or what, but it stunk, and I'm really surprised, especially because Brent Barrett and Michael Berresse have been quite good in other stuff I've heard them in. Michael Berresse had one acrobatic dance number that was pretty impressive, but the only truly special thing in this production was Brent Barrett's reprise of "So In Love", which was beautifully sung with genuine emotion, and the only thing worth seeing or hearing in the whole thing. I think maybe this would have been better off as a studio album, since Brent Barrett's voice is wonderful, but he just doesn't have the swaggering, preening star-quality you need for Fred Graham on stage. But even that wouldn't really help, as you'd still be stuck with Rachel York. She was just awful, eww. Beautiful to look at, sure, but nothing special about her voice, and no human emotion in her over-the-top, shallow attempt at playing a star (which she emphatically isn't!). Skip this production, and just rent the movie!
Also listened to the cast recording of Triumph of Love, which was really good. I knew the story from a movie version of the play that came out a few years ago, which I thought was a really charming little gem, but I have to say that this musical version that was made a few years prior to that movie, is actually even better. An 18th century French play about the adventures of a cross-dressing princess and the tangled web of broken hearts her deception causes may not seem like a sure-thing for a fun musical, but it really is! Susan Egan, who I usually can't stand (Megara was the most annoying Disney heroine ever, I'm sorry, but she just was!) gives a very funny and charming performance as Princess Leonide, and it's a real plum role for any actress in general, since let's face it, in most musicals the juicy parts tend to go to the male leads. (Much as I'd love to play Christine Daae or Marian the Librarian, the Phantom or Harold Hill are the true star roles that let real actors show their stuff.) Leonide gets to be clever, lovestruck, comical, sexy, soul-searching, commanding, and noble all in one show! And she still ends up happily ever after! It's just great stuff! The other cast members are great too, Betty Buckley, always reliable, and does a fine job with the stuffy lady philospher who learns to loosen up, and surprisingly, F. Murray Abraham, a fine actor nonetheless not known for singing, is actually quite creditable even when singing as her stuffy philosopher brother who learns the same lesson. They both bring poignance to their roles and just the right tone to their subtle and clever songs, although it's definitely a comedy, and they're funny when they should be. (The very last line was priceless, and totally made the whole thing that much better. It's a smart show, and it's got heart, but it's all levened with humor.) Christopher Sieber, as Agis, the object of Leonide's devotion, was as good as the others, pulling off the male equivalent of an ingenue role with appeal and intelligence even while being totally thrown for a loop by the striking Leonide in her many guises. The score was lovely; some old-fashioned ballads, some rollicking comedy songs, even some mock-opera, and the three servants who make up the only other characters in the piece provided a more modern jazzy sound in their numbers, so that there was a nice mix of things to keep it interesting. Everyone in the cast was pretty much a belting-style singer, so there wasn't really the exquisitely beautiful singing to make me fall head over heels in love with it, but it was all very good stuff that made a cohesive and interesting show. (And the photographs in the liner notes give a taste of a production that was apparently quite visually delightful as well. Catherine Zuber's 18th's century costumes look luscious, and the sets look kind of minimalist, but artfully colorblocked.) All in all a good listen, and an intriguing show, and I'll definitely be giving it a second listen very soon! I'd recommend it to anyone who wants a musical that will engage both your head and your heart. :)
(And now I think I'm going to keel over, because I've eaten nothing but pizza and snickerdoodles for the past two days, and while it was fun at the time, I feel rather ill now! Must go back to eating healthy food today!!)
My musical theater kick still being in full force, I watched a DVD of the London production of the 2000 Kiss Me, Kate revival. Ugh, big mistake! SOOO bad! So boring I could barely keep awake, and really poorly cast. For starters, Rachel York is really obnoxious, way too stagey and insincere, and Brent Barrett is too nice and not obnoxious enough. They had no chemistry whatsoever, and weren't funny. Actually, no one in the cast was funny, or had any charisma whatsoever. I've never much liked Kiss Me, Kate as a show in general, but a good cast and effective staging can make it a pleasant enough trifle (i.e. the movie version). A bad production is pretty much my idea of torture. It's old-fashioned in a bad way (SO sexist, OMG!) and all the naughty jokes Cole Porter is wont to cram into his shows are just so old and tired that there's no way they could ever be made funny again. (But I honestly doubt they were ever funny even in the first place!) When you've got a bunch of good songs performed by genuine stars like Kathryn Grayson, Howard Keel and Ann Miller, you forgive how stupid the story is, but without that, there's really nothing worthwhile. I really can't figure out if it was the bad casting, or the uninspired choreography or direction, or what, but it stunk, and I'm really surprised, especially because Brent Barrett and Michael Berresse have been quite good in other stuff I've heard them in. Michael Berresse had one acrobatic dance number that was pretty impressive, but the only truly special thing in this production was Brent Barrett's reprise of "So In Love", which was beautifully sung with genuine emotion, and the only thing worth seeing or hearing in the whole thing. I think maybe this would have been better off as a studio album, since Brent Barrett's voice is wonderful, but he just doesn't have the swaggering, preening star-quality you need for Fred Graham on stage. But even that wouldn't really help, as you'd still be stuck with Rachel York. She was just awful, eww. Beautiful to look at, sure, but nothing special about her voice, and no human emotion in her over-the-top, shallow attempt at playing a star (which she emphatically isn't!). Skip this production, and just rent the movie!
Also listened to the cast recording of Triumph of Love, which was really good. I knew the story from a movie version of the play that came out a few years ago, which I thought was a really charming little gem, but I have to say that this musical version that was made a few years prior to that movie, is actually even better. An 18th century French play about the adventures of a cross-dressing princess and the tangled web of broken hearts her deception causes may not seem like a sure-thing for a fun musical, but it really is! Susan Egan, who I usually can't stand (Megara was the most annoying Disney heroine ever, I'm sorry, but she just was!) gives a very funny and charming performance as Princess Leonide, and it's a real plum role for any actress in general, since let's face it, in most musicals the juicy parts tend to go to the male leads. (Much as I'd love to play Christine Daae or Marian the Librarian, the Phantom or Harold Hill are the true star roles that let real actors show their stuff.) Leonide gets to be clever, lovestruck, comical, sexy, soul-searching, commanding, and noble all in one show! And she still ends up happily ever after! It's just great stuff! The other cast members are great too, Betty Buckley, always reliable, and does a fine job with the stuffy lady philospher who learns to loosen up, and surprisingly, F. Murray Abraham, a fine actor nonetheless not known for singing, is actually quite creditable even when singing as her stuffy philosopher brother who learns the same lesson. They both bring poignance to their roles and just the right tone to their subtle and clever songs, although it's definitely a comedy, and they're funny when they should be. (The very last line was priceless, and totally made the whole thing that much better. It's a smart show, and it's got heart, but it's all levened with humor.) Christopher Sieber, as Agis, the object of Leonide's devotion, was as good as the others, pulling off the male equivalent of an ingenue role with appeal and intelligence even while being totally thrown for a loop by the striking Leonide in her many guises. The score was lovely; some old-fashioned ballads, some rollicking comedy songs, even some mock-opera, and the three servants who make up the only other characters in the piece provided a more modern jazzy sound in their numbers, so that there was a nice mix of things to keep it interesting. Everyone in the cast was pretty much a belting-style singer, so there wasn't really the exquisitely beautiful singing to make me fall head over heels in love with it, but it was all very good stuff that made a cohesive and interesting show. (And the photographs in the liner notes give a taste of a production that was apparently quite visually delightful as well. Catherine Zuber's 18th's century costumes look luscious, and the sets look kind of minimalist, but artfully colorblocked.) All in all a good listen, and an intriguing show, and I'll definitely be giving it a second listen very soon! I'd recommend it to anyone who wants a musical that will engage both your head and your heart. :)
(And now I think I'm going to keel over, because I've eaten nothing but pizza and snickerdoodles for the past two days, and while it was fun at the time, I feel rather ill now! Must go back to eating healthy food today!!)
