A Taste of Honey at Trafalgar Studios: Slice of Really, Really, Really Crappy Lifeby Randi / January 23, 2020Sugar, Butter, Fl-uck This Show is Amazing: Sara Bareilles Joins Waitress in London
It’s Theatre Thursday! Today’s show is Waitress, again, because it’s the best but also because composer Sara Bareilles is playing Jenna until March 7! We went to her opening night and it’s time to rave.
OH, IT IS ON. One of the best musicals ever (I mean it; I know all the musicals and I will fight you on this) is now even more special. Grammy-winner (that’s right babies!) Sara Bareilles has joined the London production of Waitress, the musical she wrote, playing forlorn but super talented pie-making waitress Jenna, singing the songs how she meant them to be sung and being like ‘oh WHAT yeah that’s right’. And Sara, praise the lord, brought Broadway’s favorite boyfriend/lovable goof Gavin Creel over with her to play Jenna’s inappropes/super adorbs gynecologist Dr. Pomatter, to the delight of everyone who is conscious. Waitress is a strong show that’s absolute joyous heartbreaking and heartbuilding perfection no matter what, but having Bareilles herself play Jenna Hunterson is one of those Experiences that despite sky-high expectations more than lived up to them.
We’ve talked about Waitress before on this site, and if we know each other in real life you have definitely heard me preach about how wonderful this show is and how anyone who disagrees just like DOESN’T GET IT or DOESN’T HAVE THE RIGHT SET OF EMOTION RECEPTORS or WAS ON THEIR PHONE DESPITE SARA’S WONDERFUL PRE-SHOW SHUT-YOUR-PHONE-OFF SONG or anything else that lets me shout at people who disagree with me like a true g-d American. But to recap, Waitress is based on Adrienne Shelley’s 2007 movie about a Russian spy (no) who makes amazing pies but is les miserables. Jenna, our waitress, is stuck in a loveless and abusive marriage and then she gets pregnant and doesn’t want the baby and instead of calling me for help (just like last week’s show) she decides to begrudgingly have the baby and she has a pretty rocking affair with her super fantastic gyno and then she has the baby and it all works out (unlike last week’s show) and it’s beautiful and amazing and the score is sensational and the book (by Jessie Nelson) is hilarious and poignant and I LOVE IT.
We were front and center (well, side; aisles baby you know) for Sara’s official London debut, scared that her stans might be annoyingly vocal when they shouldn’t be but too excited to care much (and for the record the audience was surprisingly well behaved for London) (although I did tell one man to put his phone away when he was taking photos and he was like shocked that someone didn’t want a phone sticking up during a show, so). Every time this show begins and I hear the motif of ‘sugar, butter, flour’ start, I get chills. To hear it from SB herself made the chills more like convulsions. Her Jenna is everything you hope for. Her quiet moments in the gorgeous opener and in “Soft Place to Land” are moving and lovely, while the belted notes that everyone expects and discusses like it’s some kind of sport now were there and were incredible, but they were also there for a reason. You absolutely felt the emotion and meaning behind them. Her acting is pretty impressive too. In the first scene, there were a few moments that reminded you that she isn’t a trained actress, but as she got her footing she only improved, and there were even some line deliveries that absolutely slayed more than they have in the past (her perfectly timed ‘she could be gay’, omg).
And yes, there was an immediate standing ovation after her flawless “She Used to Be Mine”, that extraordinary song. Sometimes that sort of thing feels like pandering or like the standers just want to be able to say they were a part of that, and it’s not based in truth. But here, it felt like a show of hospitality and thanks, the perfect way to welcome Sara to the West End and recognize what she has created. If it happens every performance it might seem forced, but given how special and how rare it is to see a writer perform a role they composed, it’ll still be meaningful.
Now about that boy. Gavin Creel is one of the best, like ever, and he makes the not-too-big part of Dr. Pomatter feel like the meatiest musical theatre role. He is the reason for the word ‘adorkable’, not Zooey Deschanel, and his Pomatter was so goshdarn adorkable and charming that I felt like that gif of the little squeeing girl, you know with her little fists by her cheeks? That was me the whole time. He makes so much out of every moment and gesture and my god, it’s just a nonstop ball of endless awkwardness and goofiness and charm and that forking voice. I was nervous because Gavin and Sara are good friends and sometimes it’s hard for friends in real life to have romantic chemistry onstage (which I know because in a college show I had to pretend to be in love with my best friend’s boyfriend (now husband) and we were so uncomfortable that we won 3rd Most Awkward Onstage Couple that season) but they were quite convincing.
As for the rest of the cast, they were great. I believe this was also the first performance for Evelyn Hoskins’ Dawn, and she was super winning and the audience was fully behind her, and she will surely only grow and improve as she learns to control her projection while dealing with that adrenaline. Marisha Wallace is back in the production after a break from playing Becky, and thank goodness because her Becky, man, dayum. Her book scenes were much different this go round, much quieter and almost deadpan sometimes, which is not what you get from the usually ‘sassy’ Becky (it seemed like a purposeful approach to avoid that word). I don’t know if I like it better but it was interesting, and her “I Didn’t Plan It” was as mind-blowing as ever. I always get chills (I mean just the whole show, really) on the line “to open your eyes and look around/and seeee the skyyyy when you’re underground” and she forking nailed it.
The supporting men were great too. Joel Montague’s Ogie was new to me, and although he doesn’t have the comedic brilliance that Mr. Kenneth Ellen Parcell did last year, he has a much better voice (not hard to), and that part is so well written and constructed that I don’t think it’s possible to be performed poorly. And my goodness, I think Andrew Boyer’s Joe might be my favorite Joe yet, yeah even more than Headmaster Charleston (I know)! He was super grouchy but his grouchiness was so clearly underwritten with loneliness and heart that it really moved me. His crotchety interplay with Sara was so realistic and so spirited (they may have had the best acting chemistry on that stage) and their last moment shocked me with how striking and simple it was (more nuanced acting from Sara).
There were some noticeable differences with the show too. Earl (Tamlyn Henderson/Will Forte) seemed much more obviously abusive and horrible (though a good performance), almost like they are making it too easy to paint him as the villain. He’s definitely bad news but when he’s less physically abusive I think it makes for a more interesting dynamic and more educational for people who might not even realize how bad emotional abuse is. Also, everything felt slower than than before. This isn’t necessarily bad, since I love to be enveloped by the world of this show for as long as possible, but it was noticeably slower pacing. I also recognized the simple and lovely choreography more than usual and enjoyed it, especially the truly riveting moment where Jenna packs up a suitcase, puts her jacket on, and the cast takes her jacket off, all in the span of about 6 seconds of her imagining a new pie and running away. That was the most incredible moment of the night for me, proving that while brilliant star power and fabulous performances are welcome, this show is beautiful and strong no matter who’s in it.
INFORMATION
Sara and Gavin will be in the show until March 7.
After a 7:36 ish start, Act I ended at 8:45 and the show ended at 10:06. A few minutes longer than it should be, possibly due to the extended applause breaks and also the aforementioned pacing.
If you sit on house right/stage left, there’s a sign for LADIES at around row H or so, but that bathroom only has 3 stalls. It DOES NOT lead you to the giant main bathroom downstairs – for that, go past that Ladies sign and enter the house right doors that say BAR and then you’ll find it there and you’ll beat everyone else who exits the house and goes from the lobby YOU’RE WELCOME.
I did not even attempt stage dooring are you crazy I’m sure it’s a madhouse.
Related Posts
Thoughts on: Murder Ballad, Off-Broadway
Every single review of this show says it’s ‘sexy’ and ‘the actors are so hot’, and that refrain is really annoying and unoriginal.
But this show is sexy and the actors are so hot.
It’s true. I felt like I was breaking some kind of law sitting in the Union Square Theatre, with fellow audience members wrapping around the bar set in the middle of the room. The beginning especially, with the fantastic Rebecca Naomi Jones opening the show with her gloriously raspy voice, felt dangerous. (As it should; it’s about murder. “I googled murder.”)
This excitement continues through most of the show, but starts to wane when the focus shifts way too much to the hard-to-believe relationship between Michael and Sara. I just didn’t buy their chemistry. Maybe the audience isn’t supposed to fully buy it, but then don’t spend so much time focusing on their domestic life.
But this show is sexy and the actors are so hot.
It’s true. I felt like I was breaking some kind of law sitting in the Union Square Theatre, with fellow audience members wrapping around the bar set in the middle of the room. The beginning especially, with the fantastic Rebecca Naomi Jones opening the show with her gloriously raspy voice, felt dangerous. (As it should; it’s about murder. “I googled murder.”)
This excitement continues through most of the show, but starts to wane when the focus shifts way too much to the hard-to-believe relationship between Michael and Sara. I just didn’t buy their chemistry. Maybe the audience isn’t supposed to fully buy it, but then don’t spend so much time focusing on their domestic life.
Despite the problems with the story, the heavy rock concert-vibe of the show coupled with the actors’ fearlessness drive the show forward and render it a very enjoyable evening. Will Swenson, who stood on my seat during the remarkably exciting 2009 revival of Hair, does a lot more standing on furniture and generally being insanely hot. However, his crazy good voice doesn’t really get a chance to shine through. The rock score forces him to be belt gravel-voiced shouts that don’t show off what this incredibly talented man can do.
Caissie Levy does get to shine vocally, but her character’s quick trip to motherhood seems very odd and out of place. Maybe that helps you feel even more for John Ellison Conlee’s character, who has the best diction. But Jones steals the show. I never appreciated her skills in previous shows, but this is definitely her showcase. The sexy rock score is perfect for her perfectly raspy yet strong voice. Her hilariously mocking faces made just for the audience’s pleasure lighten up the drama and get laughs, from those who can see them in this theatre in the round. I walked away definitely wanting to buy at least 80% of the songs, and wanting to see Jones in whatever she does.
While it was overall a great experience, the show has a few major missteps. In addition to the aforementioned issues with chemistry and story focus, my biggest problem with it is that, while so many smart lyrics go unheard (due to really quick rhythms or really poor diction), the one lyric that sticks out like a sore thumb is the worst thing I’ve ever heard – “Your kiss is like a mouth tattoo.” I mean really. Who says that. What does that mean. I can guess what it means but it is odd, and it’s not good that that’s the one lyric that stuck with me (and other audience members I spoke with).
Luckily, the good outweighs the bad, and I’m really glad I saw this show. It’s a great time, with insanely talented actors and some really kick ass music.
Caissie Levy does get to shine vocally, but her character’s quick trip to motherhood seems very odd and out of place. Maybe that helps you feel even more for John Ellison Conlee’s character, who has the best diction. But Jones steals the show. I never appreciated her skills in previous shows, but this is definitely her showcase. The sexy rock score is perfect for her perfectly raspy yet strong voice. Her hilariously mocking faces made just for the audience’s pleasure lighten up the drama and get laughs, from those who can see them in this theatre in the round. I walked away definitely wanting to buy at least 80% of the songs, and wanting to see Jones in whatever she does.
While it was overall a great experience, the show has a few major missteps. In addition to the aforementioned issues with chemistry and story focus, my biggest problem with it is that, while so many smart lyrics go unheard (due to really quick rhythms or really poor diction), the one lyric that sticks out like a sore thumb is the worst thing I’ve ever heard – “Your kiss is like a mouth tattoo.” I mean really. Who says that. What does that mean. I can guess what it means but it is odd, and it’s not good that that’s the one lyric that stuck with me (and other audience members I spoke with).
Luckily, the good outweighs the bad, and I’m really glad I saw this show. It’s a great time, with insanely talented actors and some really kick ass music.
“The Flying Lovers of Vitebsk”: Love, War, and Marc Chagall
IT’S THEATRE THURSDAY Y’ALL! Today we are talking about “The Flying Lovers of Vitebsk”, currently at Wilton’s Music Hall as it begins its tour.
A relatively new, fairly abstract play called “The Flying Lovers of Vitebsk” is currently playing at Wilton’s Music Hall in London, and you should see it. I had no idea what it was about, but I live nearby and it’s theatre so I was game. This charming little play, amusing and moving, surprised me with how much it accomplished with so little. It tells the love story of Marc Chagall and his wife Bella, and how they created art and love during world wars. Light acrobatics and mesmerizing movements augment their narrative, to create a touching, energetic story about a painter’s personal life. The play it seemed to be in the beginning was not the play we were left with in the end, but even so, it’s a worthwhile endeavor to tell this story.
Honestly the only thing I knew about Marc Chagall going in was that Julia Roberts owned the famous painting of his, the one with the goat playing a violin flying around in space, and gave it, the real one, to Hugh Grant in “Notting Hill”, as you do to shy lil bookkeepers who may or may not ever want to see you again. Luckily he did (spoilers!) so she didn’t like give away a priceless authentic Chagall painting that would be so stupid. Anyway it’s a great painting so I figured the creator of it might be interesting. Like all artists, his character seemed to have a not-great set of priorities, as they put creating their art ahead of things like oh I don’t know the birth of their child, but still seemed to be a man capable of great feeling and understanding of the more abstract things than common sense, like love. From writer Daniel Jamieson and director Emma Rice, this play – seemingly, from the director’s note, produced out of their actual love story – is small but often powerful.
At the start, we see young Marc and Bella meet in the town of Vitebsk, now in Belarus. More than half the population was Jewish and so it had a staggering number of synagogues at the time (early 1900s), and so it was completely decimated in the war, they tell us in the beginning. The 90-minute play, though it uses the two onstage musicians in the action sometimes, is essentially just Marc and Bella, what people in the theatre would call a ‘two-hander’ because there are only two actors but I will fight my whole life against that phrase unless the two actors each only have one hand. (It should be called a four-hander, am I right?) Anyway, it’s nice to see a play about two Jews in a room bitching. Especially in London, where many people think Jews are alien. So Marc and Bella instantly fall in love and their initial courtship is kind of adorable. They talk to the audience a lot, and Bella confides in us that she knew he liked her and yet he waited so long to kiss her. One day on a picnic she thought he was coming in for one but instead he asks for his jacket, which she is sitting on. Super awkward and so funnily adorable! It’s crazy to hindsight to think back on how lighthearted a romp it felt in these hilarious moments compared to the heartbreaking weight of the end. The best scene is when Bella celebrates Marc’s birthday – his first birthday, he says, because he never celebrated it before. This play, in its first iteration 25 years ago, was actually called ‘Birthday’, I assume to highlight this event which surely solidified Marc’s love for Bella.
As Bella and Marc’s relationship grows, they portray this by doing aforementioned acrobatics, just a little bit, enough to completely captivate and convey their story and make you want more. It was so effective to see how they were falling for each other when they were literally falling through the air and being caught by the other and stuff, to see a representation of all of Marc’s famous paintings of them flying through the air together, buoyed by their love. LOVES IT. I loves it so much that the fact that they used this incredible movement only sparingly and only in the first half made me very upset. The selling point for this show, in my view, is that it’s telling this biographical tale in this fascinating new way. I mean it’s literally called “the FLYING lovers”, you know? I wanted much more flying. To take away the part that’s different, the part that sets it apart from other straight biographical plays, makes it just like any other straight drama and it’s not strong enough without its special quirks to stand out. Still good, still moving, but not as special as it would be if the movement were incorporated throughout. And I get that the directing choice may have been to decrease the brightness of such movement as the subject matter darkened, but I am sure that they still could have integrated some sort of choreography to tell the more serious parts of the story. And some of the movement we did see was valuable in conveying melancholy. I think it could have worked throughout the darker parts. I mean Cirque du Soleil is terrifying as shit.
It also uses music to tell the story, and also moreso in the beginning. I am not sure if I would call it a musical as opposed to a play with music, since it doesn’t actually tell the story but add to it, and of course because the music, like the fun movement, is front-loaded. The two onstage musicians, James Gow and Ian Ross, jump into the action a lot to lend their voices to some songs and to say a few lines as Soviet police officers here and there, and they do a fine job supporting the two stars. Marc Antolin as Marc (I know his name is with a ‘c’ too it was fate) and Daisy Maywood as Bella are lovely actors who really make you believe that they are feeling all the things. Their trust for each other is remarkable, and since it’s there I mean why not put it to more use with more of the acrobatic partner work? I know I can just repeat myself over and over but I just so want to see what this play could be with more of what made it special since that unique aspect was so effective.
We see Marc and Bella move to Paris and to St. Petersburg, then back to Vitebsk, and hither and thither during the war time as their safety and the lives of all Jews were threatened. As the second half loses the acrobatics and a lot of the music, a little magic was lost as well, but it may also be due to the story getting serious. It felt like it was dragging a bit as we learned about how terrible the war was, but that may be because war sucks. Also, as we learned more about the characters, the initial sheen fell away. Marc, it turns out, had anger issues like many artists have when their work isn’t seen as the end all be all of everybody’s lives. At one point, Bella gives birth to their daughter while they are living in a tiny apartment amid horrible atrocities occurring, and Marc is nowhere to be found. Days later, days after his child is born, he comes home and Bella’s like ‘duuude what the hell, I’m still in so much pain and I need your help taking care of a NEWBORN’ and Marc replies “Do you think what I do happens painlessly?” Artists are not in touch with reality, I guess, is a lesson of this play.
But this artist is in touch with his emotions, and his love for Bella helped him create some of his best work. The two characters talk about how they see new colors together, through and in each others’ eyes, and it’s true that Marc was considered one of the best when it came to understanding color, probably thanks to their love, which seemed significant. As I said, the second half did drag and lose some of its distinctiveness, because as a straight play without its special assets it has to measure up to other regular straight plays, better ones. But the end kind of tied everything together in a heartbreaking bow. A song that the characters sing to open the show seemed meaningless, just a fun period-appropriate song to get the party started, but when they reprise it at the end, it seems to envelop and explain the whole story in a superb, poignant way, and in turn to fortify whatever weaknesses in the play came before it.
INFORMATION
This Kneehigh company production of “The Flying Lovers of Vitebsk” is playing at Wilton’s Music Hall in London until February 10. After that, this production will tour England as well as the USA, making tour stops in Los Angeles and South Carolina. So if you are in those places, you should see it.
At the start, we see young Marc and Bella meet in the town of Vitebsk, now in Belarus. More than half the population was Jewish and so it had a staggering number of synagogues at the time (early 1900s), and so it was completely decimated in the war, they tell us in the beginning. The 90-minute play, though it uses the two onstage musicians in the action sometimes, is essentially just Marc and Bella, what people in the theatre would call a ‘two-hander’ because there are only two actors but I will fight my whole life against that phrase unless the two actors each only have one hand. (It should be called a four-hander, am I right?) Anyway, it’s nice to see a play about two Jews in a room bitching. Especially in London, where many people think Jews are alien. So Marc and Bella instantly fall in love and their initial courtship is kind of adorable. They talk to the audience a lot, and Bella confides in us that she knew he liked her and yet he waited so long to kiss her. One day on a picnic she thought he was coming in for one but instead he asks for his jacket, which she is sitting on. Super awkward and so funnily adorable! It’s crazy to hindsight to think back on how lighthearted a romp it felt in these hilarious moments compared to the heartbreaking weight of the end. The best scene is when Bella celebrates Marc’s birthday – his first birthday, he says, because he never celebrated it before. This play, in its first iteration 25 years ago, was actually called ‘Birthday’, I assume to highlight this event which surely solidified Marc’s love for Bella.
As Bella and Marc’s relationship grows, they portray this by doing aforementioned acrobatics, just a little bit, enough to completely captivate and convey their story and make you want more. It was so effective to see how they were falling for each other when they were literally falling through the air and being caught by the other and stuff, to see a representation of all of Marc’s famous paintings of them flying through the air together, buoyed by their love. LOVES IT. I loves it so much that the fact that they used this incredible movement only sparingly and only in the first half made me very upset. The selling point for this show, in my view, is that it’s telling this biographical tale in this fascinating new way. I mean it’s literally called “the FLYING lovers”, you know? I wanted much more flying. To take away the part that’s different, the part that sets it apart from other straight biographical plays, makes it just like any other straight drama and it’s not strong enough without its special quirks to stand out. Still good, still moving, but not as special as it would be if the movement were incorporated throughout. And I get that the directing choice may have been to decrease the brightness of such movement as the subject matter darkened, but I am sure that they still could have integrated some sort of choreography to tell the more serious parts of the story. And some of the movement we did see was valuable in conveying melancholy. I think it could have worked throughout the darker parts. I mean Cirque du Soleil is terrifying as shit.
It also uses music to tell the story, and also moreso in the beginning. I am not sure if I would call it a musical as opposed to a play with music, since it doesn’t actually tell the story but add to it, and of course because the music, like the fun movement, is front-loaded. The two onstage musicians, James Gow and Ian Ross, jump into the action a lot to lend their voices to some songs and to say a few lines as Soviet police officers here and there, and they do a fine job supporting the two stars. Marc Antolin as Marc (I know his name is with a ‘c’ too it was fate) and Daisy Maywood as Bella are lovely actors who really make you believe that they are feeling all the things. Their trust for each other is remarkable, and since it’s there I mean why not put it to more use with more of the acrobatic partner work? I know I can just repeat myself over and over but I just so want to see what this play could be with more of what made it special since that unique aspect was so effective.
We see Marc and Bella move to Paris and to St. Petersburg, then back to Vitebsk, and hither and thither during the war time as their safety and the lives of all Jews were threatened. As the second half loses the acrobatics and a lot of the music, a little magic was lost as well, but it may also be due to the story getting serious. It felt like it was dragging a bit as we learned about how terrible the war was, but that may be because war sucks. Also, as we learned more about the characters, the initial sheen fell away. Marc, it turns out, had anger issues like many artists have when their work isn’t seen as the end all be all of everybody’s lives. At one point, Bella gives birth to their daughter while they are living in a tiny apartment amid horrible atrocities occurring, and Marc is nowhere to be found. Days later, days after his child is born, he comes home and Bella’s like ‘duuude what the hell, I’m still in so much pain and I need your help taking care of a NEWBORN’ and Marc replies “Do you think what I do happens painlessly?” Artists are not in touch with reality, I guess, is a lesson of this play.
But this artist is in touch with his emotions, and his love for Bella helped him create some of his best work. The two characters talk about how they see new colors together, through and in each others’ eyes, and it’s true that Marc was considered one of the best when it came to understanding color, probably thanks to their love, which seemed significant. As I said, the second half did drag and lose some of its distinctiveness, because as a straight play without its special assets it has to measure up to other regular straight plays, better ones. But the end kind of tied everything together in a heartbreaking bow. A song that the characters sing to open the show seemed meaningless, just a fun period-appropriate song to get the party started, but when they reprise it at the end, it seems to envelop and explain the whole story in a superb, poignant way, and in turn to fortify whatever weaknesses in the play came before it.
INFORMATION
This Kneehigh company production of “The Flying Lovers of Vitebsk” is playing at Wilton’s Music Hall in London until February 10. After that, this production will tour England as well as the USA, making tour stops in Los Angeles and South Carolina. So if you are in those places, you should see it.
1 Comment
Looks like I HAVE TO SEE THIS … thanks for a wonderful review… as always