Sepia tones? Now you're just making shit up.
I never mentioned sepia tones either, but somebody must have somewhere along the line. Dig the amber waves of boardwalk in this promotional image. http://memphis.broadwayworld.com/article/T…
I really do like first hand feedback, but some consistency would be nice.
I'm confused. In reference to the review, Mr. Robinson commented, "You should have known that the show is not a spoof or a tribute to the 1920’s, but a musical (re-written and reconceived in 1971 and set in the 1920’s) about people who fall in love, and who sing some of the most enchanting songs written for the theatre." I've read and re-read the review. I can't find any mention by the reviewer that he thought that "No No Nanette" was either a spoof or a tribute.
I wasn't reviewing the audiences. Suggest away. My only real suggestion for you is that it might have been a little too soon to toss the beach balls into the audience with the touring production La Cage such a recent memory.
Mr. Robinson: oh no you din't! What is it about "you can't criticize the critic" you don't understand? You might as well have stepped on Superman's cape, or told Cyrano his nose was....big. Seismographs in China are already starting to register the first signs of the reaction. Get thee to a bomb shelter, immediately.
While that last line of your - ahem - “review” leaves me too tempted to make a helpful suggestion for your next vocation, I will say that your comments went far beyond “catty” and revealed that the reason you didn’t like the show is because you – an expert on the 1920’s – didn’t get what you were expecting. You should have known that the show is not a spoof or a tribute to the 1920’s, but a musical (re-written and reconceived in 1971 and set in the 1920’s) about people who fall in love, and who sing some of the most enchanting songs written for the theatre.
To imply that the production has no affinity for the 1920’s is utterly ridiculous. The costumes, sets and color pallet of the show were based directly on images and fashions of that wild, colorful decade. And the orchestra, which you mentioned, is not only – and expertly – playing the show’s actual orchestrations, but also include a banjo and a ukuleles to bring out the sound of the 1920’s, with a modern jazz sensibility. What kind of authenticity were you expecting? Would you have preferred that the show looked like a faded sepia photograph and sounded like a scratchy gramophone record complete with pops and skips?
What you failed to mention in your glib writing – nor would you have – is that this production has been greeted with praise from the audiences since our preview performance. We’re very proud of this show; the hard work (including months of preparations and rehearsals) committed to “Nanette” have resulted in laughter and standing ovations by *thousands* of enthusiastic patrons who aren’t leaving the theatre with “gas” as your daughter allegedly suffered, but with elation, happiness and – could it be – an actual song or two to sing on their way home.
“No, No, Nanette”
Yeah, I don't think we'll agree about the color choices, but you're right on about the dancing. There is some concern that "the same old song and dance" is proving itself as a cliche here though. This isn't the worst thing I've seen at TM either, but it's in the running.
Ok, since you're happy to hear from dissenters ...
I saw No, No Nanette. I was prepared from your review to be bored to tears. Instead, I was pleasantly surprised. It isn't the best thing I've ever seen at TM, but it isn't anywhere near the worst (that would be Dracula).
Given the very hard work that obviously went into the choreography, and given how well it was executed, I am of the opinion that your review was simply unkind. The lady (alas, I returned my program for recycling) who played Lucille, the lawyer's wife was an impressive dancer. And I thought the set decoration was attractive. Your reference to an Easter basket throwing-up led me to expect something along the lines of Nanny McFee.
Cat, I'm not reviewing the hard work or the commitment, I'm reviewing a show. And this tour was sub-par, whether one is inclined to like the material or not. But thanks for the career advice, and keep supporting live theater.
Sometimes I agree with Chris's opinions. Sometimes I disagree. Strongly.
However, Cat Nass, he most assuredly knows how much work goes into a performance, being a (sometimes) performer/actor/director himself.
Not that he needs me to defend him...
I think it's time you got another job - critique something else because obviously you have no idea how much work goes into a performance of any kind let alone something like Mama Mia !!! Mama Mia στο Μέμφις δεν είναι τόσο άσχημα
I'm glad to know I'm not the only person who finds "Mama Mia" cloying and boring.
Well, no way it could be better than "Cats." :)
So SO smooth.
Neal Patrick Harris in a wig maybe?
Alas, as much as this needs to happen -- there is no such thing as too many musical theatre roles for actors with non-musical-theatrey voices who play instruments, in my opinion -- the lawyer in me fears it will never come to pass. Too many real-life people would have to sign off on inflattering versions of themselves or else it would be sunk by libel suits before it ever got started. And that's a shame. SO SMOOTH.
Nice review. Enroute to work, heard "Wild Thing" followed by "Take a Chance on Me." Can't stop singing them. Sometimes success seems so simple.
Me too. But who will play Hollywood Steve?
Yacht Rock: The Musical. Now THAT I would pay to see
i will be seeing this show for the 5th or 6th time sat day .I have seent it over the years and saw the movie...each time I love it more but that is just me plus now I really want to go to greece
It seems as though sound is often a problem in local theatre, even in the "big" budget "Phantom" at U of M.
By Louis Goggans
download this issue
click here to see more »