Gimme Some of That Suite Tea: Vegan Afternoon Tea at La Suite West Hotelby Randi / February 11, 2019
It’s Theatre Thursday! Today we are talking about Home, I’m Darling, which is currently playing on theWest End at the Duke of York theatre.
If this picture looks familiar to you, it’s for a good reason: we looked at the new play Home, I’m Darling only five months ago, when it played London’s National Theatre. Further confusing the rules about what constitutes West End and what doesn’t (and more confusingly, since shows at the National are sometimes eligible for Olivier Awards, what the fork the Olivier eligibility is), this play that I absolutely adored last time around has transferred to the official West End. Funnily enough, I saw the very last performance of this show at the National, and I didn’t realize until the interval that I was at the very first preview performance of this West End run, so even though they were five months apart, I saw back-to-back performances. Usually I would frown upon any public critique of a first preview, since they are supposed to be used for making changes. But I have nothing but praise for this show, so I don’t think they’ll mind. Despite a few changes from the last go round, the show was just as I remembered, except tighter and maybe even more enjoyable.
Home, I’m Darling, the pitch perfect comedy from Laura Wade, is the story of Judy (Katherine Parkinson, perfect as ever) and Johnny (Richard Harrington), a married couple who decides to fully immerse themselves in the ‘50s lifestyle they admire by having Judy stop work to become a housewife. Judy is devoted to cleaning the house with era-appropriate methods, cooking era-appropriate meals, wearing era-appropriate clothes (the costumes are still amazing) and generally letting her husband lead the way. While the concept could easily become cartoony, or fail to connect if audiences (like me) think ‘that’s a bad move, Judy’, the play delves into all the issues around this kind of lifestyle and all the problems people would encounter whether they are fully on board or not, making the story much more thought-provoking and interesting than it’s (incredible) candy-colored set would have you initially guess. Doing this in such a masterful way means the whole ‘50s thing is kind of just a framing device for analyzing a typical marriage and the problems couples face after a certain amount of time. I can’t think of another modern play that explores the intricacies of the relationship between husband and wife in such a compelling way while remaining as entertaining and funny.
As ever, Katherine Parkinson gives a star performance, with every decision and movement the property of Judy, even, I believe, the intriguing tone of her voice and manner of delivery. But my real surprise here was Harrington, who didn’t strike me the last time through as Parkinson did. With the passage of time, he has really come to understand Johnny and make his decisions much more convincing and understandable. Together, the two are flawless.
Excitingly, the rest of the cast is mostly changed, and all the newcomers were giving spot-on performances at the first performance. Judy’s mother, now played by Susan Brown, continues to be the persuasive voice of reason, at least to me, in her quest to end this game of her daughter’s that is wasting her potential. It’s a small role, though the mother does get some great monologues, but Brown makes her presence felt so strongly and does so much with what she has that she seems a much bigger character.
I was upset at first to see that Judy’s friend Fran was recast, because at the National, Fran was played by the only actor of color in the whole cast (Kathryn Drysdale). Being a woman of color gave Fran’s interest in following Judy’s lead as a ‘50s-style housewife even more depth, and could have been enhanced to show her assessment of the role. But the new Fran, Siubhan Harrison, really is fantastic. I’ve only seen her in musicals before, so I was impressed by her performance in this straight play. My absolute favorite small moment of the whole show came from her: when Fran and her husband Marcus (still an entertaining scumbag!) are at Judy and Johnny’s house having tea, and Judy brings out her ridiculous achievement of a cake (which Marcus proclaims the best he has ever had), Judy cuts herself a piece and I noticed she shoved the rest of her slice of the ‘interesting’ cake that Fran brought back onto the serving tray. As everyone kept talking and the focus was elsewhere, Fran looked downward for a second and seemed embarrassed. I found this moment incredible, doing so much in literally one second when we’re not even supposed to be looking at Fran.
Yet everything in this play feels this detailed, from the delightful set (and that Act II change, wonderful) to the accurate costumes to the never-ending ballet of food. I mentioned last time that I’ve never seen so much food in a play before. I think we see Judy preparing all three of Johnny’s daily meals (plus snacks and drinks and dessert) for every day we see. I don’t know how they keep it all straight (and I really hope it doesn’t all go to waste). But every aspect of the play had to be this precise to keep up with the writing, which is engaging and unpredictably captivating. Home, I’m Darling is such an unexpected gem that I can’t help but love.
INFORMATION
Every single other piece about this show annoyingly repeats “for 11 weeks only” so I will give you the actual end date: April 13. Was that so hard, everyone else?
After the run on the West End, the show will be touring the UK, with dates in Bath, Salford, and back to its Welsh home of Theatre Clwyd which no I have no idea how to pronounce, it’s probably like Smith or something.
The show is 2 hours 30 minutes with one interval. Like all West End theatres, the Duke of York is in need of a refurb, especially when it comes to the bathrooms – if you sit in the front right stalls, the closest ladies room is up the stairs in the mezzanine, which is very, very stupid.
It’s Theatre Thursday! Today we are talking about Home, I’m Darling, which is currently playing on theWest End at the Duke of York theatre.
If this picture looks familiar to you, it’s for a good reason: we looked at the new play Home, I’m Darling only five months ago, when it played London’s National Theatre. Further confusing the rules about what constitutes West End and what doesn’t (and more confusingly, since shows at the National are sometimes eligible for Olivier Awards, what the fork the Olivier eligibility is), this play that I absolutely adored last time around has transferred to the official West End. Funnily enough, I saw the very last performance of this show at the National, and I didn’t realize until the interval that I was at the very first preview performance of this West End run, so even though they were five months apart, I saw back-to-back performances. Usually I would frown upon any public critique of a first preview, since they are supposed to be used for making changes. But I have nothing but praise for this show, so I don’t think they’ll mind. Despite a few changes from the last go round, the show was just as I remembered, except tighter and maybe even more enjoyable.
Home, I’m Darling, the pitch perfect comedy from Laura Wade, is the story of Judy (Katherine Parkinson, perfect as ever) and Johnny (Richard Harrington), a married couple who decides to fully immerse themselves in the ‘50s lifestyle they admire by having Judy stop work to become a housewife. Judy is devoted to cleaning the house with era-appropriate methods, cooking era-appropriate meals, wearing era-appropriate clothes (the costumes are still amazing) and generally letting her husband lead the way. While the concept could easily become cartoony, or fail to connect if audiences (like me) think ‘that’s a bad move, Judy’, the play delves into all the issues around this kind of lifestyle and all the problems people would encounter whether they are fully on board or not, making the story much more thought-provoking and interesting than it’s (incredible) candy-colored set would have you initially guess. Doing this in such a masterful way means the whole ‘50s thing is kind of just a framing device for analyzing a typical marriage and the problems couples face after a certain amount of time. I can’t think of another modern play that explores the intricacies of the relationship between husband and wife in such a compelling way while remaining as entertaining and funny.
As ever, Katherine Parkinson gives a star performance, with every decision and movement the property of Judy, even, I believe, the intriguing tone of her voice and manner of delivery. But my real surprise here was Harrington, who didn’t strike me the last time through as Parkinson did. With the passage of time, he has really come to understand Johnny and make his decisions much more convincing and understandable. Together, the two are flawless.
Excitingly, the rest of the cast is mostly changed, and all the newcomers were giving spot-on performances at the first performance. Judy’s mother, now played by Susan Brown, continues to be the persuasive voice of reason, at least to me, in her quest to end this game of her daughter’s that is wasting her potential. It’s a small role, though the mother does get some great monologues, but Brown makes her presence felt so strongly and does so much with what she has that she seems a much bigger character.
I was upset at first to see that Judy’s friend Fran was recast, because at the National, Fran was played by the only actor of color in the whole cast (Kathryn Drysdale). Being a woman of color gave Fran’s interest in following Judy’s lead as a ‘50s-style housewife even more depth, and could have been enhanced to show her assessment of the role. But the new Fran, Siubhan Harrison, really is fantastic. I’ve only seen her in musicals before, so I was impressed by her performance in this straight play. My absolute favorite small moment of the whole show came from her: when Fran and her husband Marcus (still an entertaining scumbag!) are at Judy and Johnny’s house having tea, and Judy brings out her ridiculous achievement of a cake (which Marcus proclaims the best he has ever had), Judy cuts herself a piece and I noticed she shoved the rest of her slice of the ‘interesting’ cake that Fran brought back onto the serving tray. As everyone kept talking and the focus was elsewhere, Fran looked downward for a second and seemed embarrassed. I found this moment incredible, doing so much in literally one second when we’re not even supposed to be looking at Fran.
Yet everything in this play feels this detailed, from the delightful set (and that Act II change, wonderful) to the accurate costumes to the never-ending ballet of food. I mentioned last time that I’ve never seen so much food in a play before. I think we see Judy preparing all three of Johnny’s daily meals (plus snacks and drinks and dessert) for every day we see. I don’t know how they keep it all straight (and I really hope it doesn’t all go to waste). But every aspect of the play had to be this precise to keep up with the writing, which is engaging and unpredictably captivating. Home, I’m Darling is such an unexpected gem that I can’t help but love.
INFORMATION
Every single other piece about this show annoyingly repeats “for 11 weeks only” so I will give you the actual end date: April 13. Was that so hard, everyone else?
After the run on the West End, the show will be touring the UK, with dates in Bath, Salford, and back to its Welsh home of Theatre Clwyd which no I have no idea how to pronounce, it’s probably like Smith or something.
The show is 2 hours 30 minutes with one interval. Like all West End theatres, the Duke of York is in need of a refurb, especially when it comes to the bathrooms – if you sit in the front right stalls, the closest ladies room is up the stairs in the mezzanine, which is very, very stupid.
Related Posts
“Falsettos” Revival on Broadway: March Me to Another Theatre
For a show that begins with four Jews in a room bitching, in a song called “Four Jews in a Room Bitching”, you would think I’d love “Falsettos”. But when I saw the current Broadway revival of this show, I was somehow left cold, which is pretty hard when the focus is on family dynamics and, suddenly, AIDS. I was having trouble with the choppy direction and erratic pacing throughout the show, but I believe the suddenness of the AIDS story is what fully shut down all my feelings aside from ‘disbelief’ and ‘like you’re being punked’. I’ve been told that I would have enjoyed this particular production more if I was at all familiar with it beforehand (I wasn’t), and I could see how this cast would be a treat if you were a fan of the show. But you shouldn’t need to know a piece beforehand to enjoy it. And honestly, it’s a weird show. There are moments of brilliance (possibly due to the actors involved here), but oof, it was difficult to get through. I’ve never been so impatient for a show to end. And I barely remember ¾ of what I saw.
“Falsettos” is the story of a ‘tight-knit family’ of Trina (Stephanie J. Block), her ex-husband Marvin (Christian Borle), their son Jason (a child), Marvin’s new male lover Whizzer (Andrew Rannells), and their therapist Mendel (Brandon Uranowitz). Marvin has just left Trina for Whizzer but still wants to keep his family close and have them accept Whizzer as a new member, which is supes awks for everyone. But even more awkward is the opening number, which I enjoyed tremendously before thinking, wait, WTF, what’s happening. The four male characters are dressed like Israelites straight from the desert as they ‘bitch’ and Trina does some community-theatre-style assistant directing, flying flags and banners and adding some props to the mix. So, going into this cold, my actual first thought was, is this show about an acting troupe? Not joking. It made more sense than the truth, which is that this opening had nothing to do with their reality because no, they weren’t putting on a show, so it was just breaking the fourth wall I guess for a few laughs. Yet it was one of the most enjoyable parts of the show, so I can’t knock it too much.
Weirder was when that vaguely odd number ends and the real story begins, and you realize that despite this being an expensive Broadway production, there is no set aside from some giant gray cubes. And the actors throughout the entire show are constantly rearranging the blocks into different shapes to represent tables, chairs, therapy couches, beds, exteriors of houses, &c. This set design was really distracting and had very little payoff, the only interesting uses being as a house that could be easily knocked down, a decent metaphor for the family strife, and when all the cubes rearranged into a grave at the end. But despite how strong that ending visual was, I don’t think it was worth two hours and 45 minutes of wasted set design and extra jobs for the actors. It looked very ill-fitting for such an enormous stage, and I thought how much more appropriate this production and show in general would be in a small black box theatre. I think I could have appreciated it more in that setting.
Early on, as the cast forms the gray blocks into living room and bedroom furniture, we learn that Jason, the child, is scared that he’ll be gay because his ‘father is a homo’, as he sings. The funniest part was that Anthony Rosenthal, playing Jason, seemed to have a bad cold, and he kept sneezing and coughing in Christian Borle’s face and they tried not to laugh. Not as funny was that, in the wake of Sydney Lucas in “Fun Home” putting all other child actors and child roles to shame, this role (and sadly the actor) was indeed put to shame. We also learn that Marvin sees a therapist to figure out his tumultuous relationship with Whizzer – based more on lust at first than love, though they do admit that they truly love each other. Christian and Andrew’s chemistry was stronger than that of most couples, onstage or onscreen, and these two Broadway superstars made the thin story of the first act more compelling because of it. Nonetheless, their characters were kind of thankless until the very end, which is unfortunate for such incredible actors. They both do extremely well with what they’re given, but aside from a few money notes and their killer chemistry, they aren’t given much.
Then we learn that Trina needs a therapist because of this very difficult time for her family, which is understandable. But what isn’t understandable – except for purposes of the fake story – is that she goes to Marvin’s therapist Mendel. And then they all decide that Jason, who is having an understandably rough time with this transitional period, needs a therapist too…so they also enlist Mendel to therapize Jason. One really important lesson that I wish the characters learned before the show started is that there are lots of psychiatrists in New York City. Like I bet there’s at least one on every block of Manhattan and more when you get to the Upper East Side. So, there’s no good reason for a father, mother, and the son to all see the same psychiatrist. That’s the kind of crazy talk that would merit a visit to a psychiatrist. A different one.
Mendel quickly falls in love with Trina, which is against lots of rules and makes Marvin feel even more alienated from his family. He also needs a new therapist now. We’re supposed to feel bad for Marvin when these things start biting him in the ass but he did leave his family for a hot young thang so I mean what did he expect would happen. Mendel seems great at first, if severely in breach of ethics rules, but he really is the same immature sort that Marvin is, and Trina knows it, but having a husband turn out to be gay has apparently destroyed her confidence so she tells herself she could do worse and convinces herself that its in her best interest to marry Mendel. And I can see how one could arrive at that conclusion because Brandon Uranowitz is flipping hilarious. His subtle gesticulations really made the character and I was loving it for a while. But his character didn’t live up to the early potential. At one point amid all the constant familial drama, Marvin slaps Trina, and I was sooo ready for Trina to stand up and fight back (physically or verbally) but Mendel physically holds her back to prevent any escalation. I think that’s when I lost it. I was pretty close to the stage so it was really hard for me to remember that this wasn’t real and it took all my might to stop myself from climbing up on that stage, punching Marvin for hitting a woman/his ex-wife and then beating the crap out of Mendel for failing to stand up for his new wife. Like what is that shit about. It doesn’t matter that there are two lesbians in the second act (conveniently referred to continuously as ‘the two lesbians who live next door’); this is really a show by, about, and for (gay) men.
Even so, I really tried to love it. I wanted to love it. And one scene got me closer to that point than any other. In fact, as incongruous as it sounds for a show I didn’t really enjoy that much, this one scene – Trina’s “I’m Breaking Down” – might be one of the best performances of a song I’ve ever seen live. I know! Stephanie J. Block is that talented, and this song is directed that perfectly and performed that impeccably. In it, Trina is chopping up food for dinner or a pie or something while she sings a hilarious song about how all this tumult and disorder in her family and in her life is making her lose her mind and all her control, which isn’t that funny on its face, I guess, but Stephanie nails every nanosecond of this scene with perfect comic timing and hysterical frenzied humor, and this one song was worth the ticket price alone. She gets so wild in her crazy that by the end she’s singing through a mouthful of banana and is just a complete mess and it’s amazing. I never thought of Stephanie as a comedian or saw her do anything funny, but this shot her up to the top of the musical comedy list. So, everyone else in the theatre community thought this production was fantastic, to the point where it’s a frontrunner for the Best Revival Tony award. As much as I disagree with that, I would condone such a win just because of Stephanie and this one song. She was that great. As much as I kind of wished I chose a different show to see that night, I am so happy I got to witness this expert performance. I really can’t get over it.
After that scene, I tried even harder to get a bit more into it, as the dynamic was more understandable, with a growing family trying to get through all these changes. But I could not get past how unfortunately terrible a lot of the music was. Not all; there are some bright spots. But too much of the score was terrible. I remember literally gagging when Mendel sings a line about going ‘to jaw’ – as in TO EAT, just so it would rhyme with ‘my paw’ – as in A HANDSHAKE. I can’t stop having nightmares about how terrible that lyric is. There’s no reason for a rhyme that forced when both sides of it are horrendous. Just change both lines!!
And then two insane surprises happen. The first is the most unforgivable because I still don’t understand what it was going for – “The March of the Falsettos”. The four male characters come out in the dark and march over the cubes which are set up as a city skyline or some such. They are wearing bodysuits with patches that reflect the blacklight in the dark, so it’s very 1970s college dorm vibe. And they are singing in falsetto voices. This is legit the one reference to the title of the show. And they march and they sing in those high voices “march of the falsettos, march of the falsettos” and it’s WEIRD. Like, look-around-at-all-the-patrons-around-you-to-see-if-it’s-just-you weird. It was like the opening number in that it was divorced from the reality of the characters’ story and was just for fun or something, I don’t know, but I know my eyes were open rull wide.
The next unforgivable thing is unforgivable for an entirely different reason. See, this is the 1980s, and it’s about some gay men. So maybe I should have seen it coming, but I didn’t because so far it was a comedy, and a silly one at that, at least at times. And its first act didn’t let on that anything of the sort was coming. So when Whizzer starts getting sick, I didn’t get sad; I got ANGRY. Really angry. You can’t have a kind of absurd tone and then all of a sudden start talking about AIDS and expect everyone to quickly get on board with the requisite depth of emotion necessary to discuss the AIDS crisis. It made me angry that they broached this topic in such a poor manner as to prevent me from getting emotionally invested, because we all should always be emotionally invested when this disease comes up. I was pissed that I wasn’t able to connect with this more serious material because it came out of nowhere. And I guess the argument is that well the disease came out of nowhere, to unsuspecting people, and that’s totally true. But so far, this show wasn’t about reflecting pure reality, as the march of the falsettos showed. So I don’t buy that, instead of continuing to tell the story in an artistic way that allowed for maximum empathizing and connection, they suddenly switched to a cold blank reflection of reality. And the whole section of the story about Whizzer dying was incredibly emotional and well done, but because there was no bridge from the former section of the story (the whole first act and change) to this intense drama, I never found a way to catch up to that drama. We were never given another route to it, so it felt very far away and detached from any emotional connection with the audience. Well, some people did manage to find another bridge because there was some SERIOUS sobbing at the end, and I wanted to be there with them, but I wasn’t.
I learned after the fact that my feelings of disjointedness and choppiness were warranted, because the original show was a series of three separate one-acts presented Off Broadway in 1990, like sequels. The Broadway incarnation of “Falsettos” is composed of the second and third one-acts in that series, so, although they are related and follow the same characters and story, the first and second acts are really two completely separate shows. That explains a lot for me. Well, except for the “March of the Falsettos” number. And why they didn’t work more on combining the two more cohesively. And why they kept the second act longer than the first, which should be rule #1 of theatre – never have a longer second act omg especially when people’s attention spans are getting shorter. The show was so long. My hair is so now.
A few days after I saw it, I heard that they are going to air it this season on PBS, as is usually done with one Broadway production per season or so. Despite my frequent exhortation that musical theatre has to be enjoyed live to be appreciated, and despite how lucky I feel having seen these amazing actors live, I kind of wish I’d skipped this one and waited to see it on TV. For free. Still, I’m ecstatic about a few things: one, that I did indeed get to see these actors live, and especially that I saw Stephanie J Block perform this role so wonderfully, and two, that I get to see her perform that role again. For free.
Weirder was when that vaguely odd number ends and the real story begins, and you realize that despite this being an expensive Broadway production, there is no set aside from some giant gray cubes. And the actors throughout the entire show are constantly rearranging the blocks into different shapes to represent tables, chairs, therapy couches, beds, exteriors of houses, &c. This set design was really distracting and had very little payoff, the only interesting uses being as a house that could be easily knocked down, a decent metaphor for the family strife, and when all the cubes rearranged into a grave at the end. But despite how strong that ending visual was, I don’t think it was worth two hours and 45 minutes of wasted set design and extra jobs for the actors. It looked very ill-fitting for such an enormous stage, and I thought how much more appropriate this production and show in general would be in a small black box theatre. I think I could have appreciated it more in that setting.
Early on, as the cast forms the gray blocks into living room and bedroom furniture, we learn that Jason, the child, is scared that he’ll be gay because his ‘father is a homo’, as he sings. The funniest part was that Anthony Rosenthal, playing Jason, seemed to have a bad cold, and he kept sneezing and coughing in Christian Borle’s face and they tried not to laugh. Not as funny was that, in the wake of Sydney Lucas in “Fun Home” putting all other child actors and child roles to shame, this role (and sadly the actor) was indeed put to shame. We also learn that Marvin sees a therapist to figure out his tumultuous relationship with Whizzer – based more on lust at first than love, though they do admit that they truly love each other. Christian and Andrew’s chemistry was stronger than that of most couples, onstage or onscreen, and these two Broadway superstars made the thin story of the first act more compelling because of it. Nonetheless, their characters were kind of thankless until the very end, which is unfortunate for such incredible actors. They both do extremely well with what they’re given, but aside from a few money notes and their killer chemistry, they aren’t given much.
Then we learn that Trina needs a therapist because of this very difficult time for her family, which is understandable. But what isn’t understandable – except for purposes of the fake story – is that she goes to Marvin’s therapist Mendel. And then they all decide that Jason, who is having an understandably rough time with this transitional period, needs a therapist too…so they also enlist Mendel to therapize Jason. One really important lesson that I wish the characters learned before the show started is that there are lots of psychiatrists in New York City. Like I bet there’s at least one on every block of Manhattan and more when you get to the Upper East Side. So, there’s no good reason for a father, mother, and the son to all see the same psychiatrist. That’s the kind of crazy talk that would merit a visit to a psychiatrist. A different one.
Mendel quickly falls in love with Trina, which is against lots of rules and makes Marvin feel even more alienated from his family. He also needs a new therapist now. We’re supposed to feel bad for Marvin when these things start biting him in the ass but he did leave his family for a hot young thang so I mean what did he expect would happen. Mendel seems great at first, if severely in breach of ethics rules, but he really is the same immature sort that Marvin is, and Trina knows it, but having a husband turn out to be gay has apparently destroyed her confidence so she tells herself she could do worse and convinces herself that its in her best interest to marry Mendel. And I can see how one could arrive at that conclusion because Brandon Uranowitz is flipping hilarious. His subtle gesticulations really made the character and I was loving it for a while. But his character didn’t live up to the early potential. At one point amid all the constant familial drama, Marvin slaps Trina, and I was sooo ready for Trina to stand up and fight back (physically or verbally) but Mendel physically holds her back to prevent any escalation. I think that’s when I lost it. I was pretty close to the stage so it was really hard for me to remember that this wasn’t real and it took all my might to stop myself from climbing up on that stage, punching Marvin for hitting a woman/his ex-wife and then beating the crap out of Mendel for failing to stand up for his new wife. Like what is that shit about. It doesn’t matter that there are two lesbians in the second act (conveniently referred to continuously as ‘the two lesbians who live next door’); this is really a show by, about, and for (gay) men.
Even so, I really tried to love it. I wanted to love it. And one scene got me closer to that point than any other. In fact, as incongruous as it sounds for a show I didn’t really enjoy that much, this one scene – Trina’s “I’m Breaking Down” – might be one of the best performances of a song I’ve ever seen live. I know! Stephanie J. Block is that talented, and this song is directed that perfectly and performed that impeccably. In it, Trina is chopping up food for dinner or a pie or something while she sings a hilarious song about how all this tumult and disorder in her family and in her life is making her lose her mind and all her control, which isn’t that funny on its face, I guess, but Stephanie nails every nanosecond of this scene with perfect comic timing and hysterical frenzied humor, and this one song was worth the ticket price alone. She gets so wild in her crazy that by the end she’s singing through a mouthful of banana and is just a complete mess and it’s amazing. I never thought of Stephanie as a comedian or saw her do anything funny, but this shot her up to the top of the musical comedy list. So, everyone else in the theatre community thought this production was fantastic, to the point where it’s a frontrunner for the Best Revival Tony award. As much as I disagree with that, I would condone such a win just because of Stephanie and this one song. She was that great. As much as I kind of wished I chose a different show to see that night, I am so happy I got to witness this expert performance. I really can’t get over it.
After that scene, I tried even harder to get a bit more into it, as the dynamic was more understandable, with a growing family trying to get through all these changes. But I could not get past how unfortunately terrible a lot of the music was. Not all; there are some bright spots. But too much of the score was terrible. I remember literally gagging when Mendel sings a line about going ‘to jaw’ – as in TO EAT, just so it would rhyme with ‘my paw’ – as in A HANDSHAKE. I can’t stop having nightmares about how terrible that lyric is. There’s no reason for a rhyme that forced when both sides of it are horrendous. Just change both lines!!
And then two insane surprises happen. The first is the most unforgivable because I still don’t understand what it was going for – “The March of the Falsettos”. The four male characters come out in the dark and march over the cubes which are set up as a city skyline or some such. They are wearing bodysuits with patches that reflect the blacklight in the dark, so it’s very 1970s college dorm vibe. And they are singing in falsetto voices. This is legit the one reference to the title of the show. And they march and they sing in those high voices “march of the falsettos, march of the falsettos” and it’s WEIRD. Like, look-around-at-all-the-patrons-around-you-to-see-if-it’s-just-you weird. It was like the opening number in that it was divorced from the reality of the characters’ story and was just for fun or something, I don’t know, but I know my eyes were open rull wide.
The next unforgivable thing is unforgivable for an entirely different reason. See, this is the 1980s, and it’s about some gay men. So maybe I should have seen it coming, but I didn’t because so far it was a comedy, and a silly one at that, at least at times. And its first act didn’t let on that anything of the sort was coming. So when Whizzer starts getting sick, I didn’t get sad; I got ANGRY. Really angry. You can’t have a kind of absurd tone and then all of a sudden start talking about AIDS and expect everyone to quickly get on board with the requisite depth of emotion necessary to discuss the AIDS crisis. It made me angry that they broached this topic in such a poor manner as to prevent me from getting emotionally invested, because we all should always be emotionally invested when this disease comes up. I was pissed that I wasn’t able to connect with this more serious material because it came out of nowhere. And I guess the argument is that well the disease came out of nowhere, to unsuspecting people, and that’s totally true. But so far, this show wasn’t about reflecting pure reality, as the march of the falsettos showed. So I don’t buy that, instead of continuing to tell the story in an artistic way that allowed for maximum empathizing and connection, they suddenly switched to a cold blank reflection of reality. And the whole section of the story about Whizzer dying was incredibly emotional and well done, but because there was no bridge from the former section of the story (the whole first act and change) to this intense drama, I never found a way to catch up to that drama. We were never given another route to it, so it felt very far away and detached from any emotional connection with the audience. Well, some people did manage to find another bridge because there was some SERIOUS sobbing at the end, and I wanted to be there with them, but I wasn’t.
I learned after the fact that my feelings of disjointedness and choppiness were warranted, because the original show was a series of three separate one-acts presented Off Broadway in 1990, like sequels. The Broadway incarnation of “Falsettos” is composed of the second and third one-acts in that series, so, although they are related and follow the same characters and story, the first and second acts are really two completely separate shows. That explains a lot for me. Well, except for the “March of the Falsettos” number. And why they didn’t work more on combining the two more cohesively. And why they kept the second act longer than the first, which should be rule #1 of theatre – never have a longer second act omg especially when people’s attention spans are getting shorter. The show was so long. My hair is so now.
A few days after I saw it, I heard that they are going to air it this season on PBS, as is usually done with one Broadway production per season or so. Despite my frequent exhortation that musical theatre has to be enjoyed live to be appreciated, and despite how lucky I feel having seen these amazing actors live, I kind of wish I’d skipped this one and waited to see it on TV. For free. Still, I’m ecstatic about a few things: one, that I did indeed get to see these actors live, and especially that I saw Stephanie J Block perform this role so wonderfully, and two, that I get to see her perform that role again. For free.
The 71st Annual Golden Globe Awards Are Tonight!! Let’s Predict Stuff!!
Tonight is one of the greatest holidays of the year! Yes, that’s right, it’s time for the Golden Globes, the most meaningless but most hilariously fun awards show there is. Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, queens of the modern era and of my heart, are the hosts again this year, after their stellar turn last year when they made the best joke ever about James Cameron. So yeah, with the two of them entertaining us again, the show is sure to be worth watching. But yes, these are the most meaningless awards out there. I think even the People’s Choice mean more. That’s because the Hollywood Foreign Press is famous for nominating and voting for famous people they want to come to their show and go onstage, regardless of desert. And we have the infamous ‘Musical or Comedy’ movie category, which means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Some of the ‘hilarious’ movies qualifying as comedies this year include the traumatic family drama ‘August: Osage County’ and the depressing-as-shit ‘Nebraska’, along with the tragically serious ‘Inside Llewyn Davis’. See, the movie studios decide what categories they will submit in, so if there’s an abundance of quality dramas that year, cunning/lying studio execs will decide their tearjerking poverty-stricken story is quite funny. Liars, the lot of them. Anyway, so that’s why this shit means shit, but it’s still going to be amazingly fun. Here are my predictions.
|
BEST MOTION PICTURE – DRAMA
Saw it twice. It’s epic and amazing and as tough to watch as it should be. Please win the Oscar too. BEST ACTOR – DRAMA
All of these men were great, and this could very well be the Oscar list as well. But Chiwetel gives the performance of a lifetime and deserves to win. BEST ACTRESS – DRAMA
Another category that I hope is the Oscar list. All of these women give incredible performances, especially Emma Thompson, but Cate Blanchett’s stunning, haunting work will be hard to beat. BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
If Lawrence wins, I will be so angry. SO ANGRY. Nyong’o was amazing. Also, I wish Scarlett Johansson was nominated for ‘Her’. What a remarkable voice-only performance. BEST DIRECTOR
Russell could win because of the aforementioned conning of the voter pool, but I am rooting for McQueen to triumph for his triumph. BEST ANIMATED FILM
FROZEN BEST MOVIE EVERRRRR! |
BEST PICTURE – FAKE COMEDY
I am begrudgingly saying ‘American Hustle’ because I believe it will win, because for some reason people think it’s the best movie of the year. I don’t even think it’s the 4th best of these 5, but whatever. If I were voting, I would vote for ‘Her’, one of my favorites of this year. It’s incredibly creative and moving. But yeah, ‘American Hustle’ has conned enough voters into thinking it was a good movie that it will win. BEST ACTOR – COMEDY
If I were voting, I’d be voting for Joaquin for his beautifully touching performance. But the HFP loves Leo so much, and they love ‘Wolf’ for being so cool and vulgar (said like Miley Cyrus), so I think he’ll be winning tonight. BEST ACTRESS – COMEDY
Oh my god Greta is nominated!!!! ‘Frances Ha’ was one of my favorite movies not of the year but OF ALL TIME. OF ALL TIIIIME, KANYE! I’m so happy she’s nominated. But she won’t win. Adams could, but I’m going with Meryl because she’s amazing as always and she famously lost last year to Lawrence (famous because of Lawrence’s “I beat Meryl” acceptance speech). BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
I’m hoping so much for Leto. He was so heartbreaking and beautiful in ‘DBC’ and really deserves it, though Fassbender and Abdi would be solid winners too. |
|
BEST TELEVISION DRAMA
This better not even be a question. I like when shows are honored for their final season. As long as they are fantastic shows and stellar final seasons, which is true here. BEST ACTRESS TV DRAMA
I would be so happy if Kerry or Tatiana won, but I think ‘Scandal’ has more traction with voters. Probably because IT’S THE BEST SHOW EVER. BEST ACTOR TV DRAMA
Not even a questions. Final season, genre-changing show, done. Although I’d be happy for Liev because I think we are related. |
BEST TELEVISION COMEDY
If Big Bang or Modern Family wins AGAIN, I will cry, because Parks & Rec is the greatest comedy on tv and has been for a while now. It better win, and with Amy hosting, it has a better chance now. BEST ACTRESS TV COMEDY
I’m going with Amy because hosts get a little push in voting, but I’d be just as pleased if the Veep one. So amazing, both of them. BEST ACTOR TV COMEDY
I mean really, Samberg? Nice for him but so silly, these nominations, all of them almost. I don’t even watch ‘House of Lies’ but I am feeling this one. Just as long as it’s not Parsons again right? |
What do you think? What are you rooting for? If this happened already, what was your favorite part? Do you get as angry as I get about the ridiculous things they call ‘comedies’? Did you think ‘American Hustle’ was really the best movie of the year? Did you throw up during ‘Gravity’ like people did in the Gravitron? Enjoy!!!!