Archive for Musicals.Net Musicals.Net |
| louison |
Follies disappointingSo a little background first. I got into Sondheim a while ago. I started with Assassins which I loved from the first listen. I still rate it as my favourite Sondheim so far. Second was Into the Woods. This wasnt as immediate. At first i was disappointed, but gradually it grew on me and now I love it very much. Next up Sweeney Todd. From the start there were parts of it that i loved. And others that i didnt. I actually saw the show recently and some of the parts i didnt like made a lot more sense. Company. Do not like this at all. It has some great songs but it just doesnt do it for me. I can go back and listen to 'Someone is waiting' and 'Being Alive' but there seems to be no story.Which brings me to Follies. I went to get Sunday in the Park with George, but none of the shops had it so I got Follies instead. My problem with it is the same as Company. Only in this there are no songs at all that i can see myself listening to. I will keep trying with it and hope its a grower. But i am disappointed. |
||||||||
| what_the_heck013 |
You have to see Company and Follies to "get" them. The songs don't really relate to the plot.
What in particular did you like about Assassins? Maybe I can use that to help you find something else that you might like. |
||||||||
| Sweeney Hyde |
If your going to judge shows without seeing them, especially Sondheim, buy the script, which you can get nearly all of Sondheim's scripts on www.amazon.com , along with the CD. However, this, although extremely helpful in getting a great feel for the show, it still may not set in how great a show is until you see it. For instance, when I first read Sunday in the Park With George, without the CD mind you, I didn't like it...however...I didn't really get it...then I got the CD...and I liked it better...however it took multiple readings and listenings of the show before I got it...I mean really got it...it is a very complex show. So you can't nearly judge a show by the recording. The recordings only take you so far. Take Dear World, for instance...it has a fantastic recording...you wonder, "How could this show have failed?" Then you get your hands on the script...and then it makes since...not that Dear World has a horrible script...not by a long shot...there are problems, yes, but I think it failed because it didn't set in with audiences as well because they were used to Herman writing these big splashing shows...and Dear World was a dark story...that make sense? | ||||||||
| louison |
I suppose when I first get a CD from a show I havent seen yet I judge it solely on the music. For me every song on the Assassins CD was outstanding. There isnt one that I skip or dislike, so that would be my reason for liking it so much.
And really for me a musical lives or dies by its music. I argue with a friend all the time about this. He judges stuff like this on lyrics and sees them as the most important thing about a song. Whereas I always value music higher. My point about the plot I suppose wasnt really the main reason I dislike Company or Follies, its really the music. If I liked the music better then I wouldnt really care that i didnt get the plot. Take Sweeney for example. Like I said there are parts I love about that show. But one song that I never particularly liked was A Little Priest. This seems to be a lot of peoples favourite song in the show. But i never got it. Until I saw it, then I appreciated it for what it was. But as a piece of music I still dont love it. I think I compare Company and Follies because on the first listen the music seems very similar. Like any song from one could appear in the other seamlessly. Forgive me for that sweeping generalisation as I know I have only listened to Follies once. So yeah in short all the musicals I love I love because of the music. Everything else is just a bonus. If the music doesnt get me then the lyrics, plot, performances will never win me over. On reflection there are a couple of songs I do like from Follies 'Losing my Mind' and 'Buddys Eyes'. |
||||||||
| Dvarg |
Don't worry. I believe I have experienced the same with nearly every single Sondheim musical. They take time to grow on you. I didn't like Follies at all until I got my second recording of it (the first was the OLCA). Now I love it. Don't give up if you don't like a Sondheim score the first, second or third time you listen to it. It takes an effort, but they are definately worth getting used to. |
||||||||
| The REAL Ciaron |
How old are you? | ||||||||
| louison |
A lady never reveals her age. Its safe to say in the vacinity of my twenties. Why? | ||||||||
| The REAL Ciaron |
Ladies without the crutch of vanity always reveal their age. Anyway........the reason I asked your age is I find one needs to be a bit older to really get Follies. It is a very adult show. |
||||||||
| Salome |
its also Sondheim's best show by far. | ||||||||
| louison |
This would only be the case if the subject matter of the show was what I had the issue with. But its not, its the music I found disappointing. On further listens I have to admit that I am finding some of the music absolutely lovely, so maybe it really was just a case of having it grow on me. Someone upthread mentioned getting the script. The CD I have has nothing really in the liner notes, not even lyrics. So if any of you could recommend a site that has these or even the story laid out in context of the songs then that would be great. |
||||||||
| The REAL Ciaron |
Which cd do you have? |
||||||||
| louison |
I have the Original London Cast recording. | ||||||||
| Salome |
no wonder! although the london vbersion has a strong cast..it massacres the show musically..taking out some really impoortant osngs and adding some newer ones. get the Papermill Playhouse recording for the most complete version of the show. and for the finest cast gewt the OBC although there are some musical moments missing the cast is exceptional.
oir... may you can pm ciaron for something special. |
||||||||
| Dvarg |
The same happened to me. I didn't "get" the show at all when I had only the OLCR. Then I bought the complete Papermill recording, and fell in love with it. Now I even enjoy the OLCR, despite it's flaws. |
||||||||
| The REAL Ciaron |
Papermill sucks!!! It's complete but there is very little magic in any of the performances (besides maybe Ann Miller). Donna McKechnie is a very flat Sally. She was even worse on stage. The OBC cannot be topped. |
||||||||
| Dvarg |
Who said it was the best recording? |
||||||||
| The REAL Ciaron |
I wasn't saying you said it was the best. I was simply stating that it sucks! Sort of like you =) |
||||||||
| ByeByeBirdieFan89 |
The Papermill is a must have because it's the complete score. I think Donna McKechnie sounds amazing.
The OBC is unmatched. But the recording is a TRAVESTY. Missing songs - and nearly every song is butchered. |
||||||||
| Dvarg |
What? |
||||||||
| The REAL Ciaron |
|
||||||||
| sallydurant |
Thank God you said that - I thought I was the only one who thought this of McKechnie (at least from reading the Amazon reviews). Part of the problem is that she drops nearly all of her "t"s, so her diction sounds really sloppy. That said, Dee Hoty is a great Phyllis - certainly the best sung of any of the recordings. I don't agree about Ann Miller - she sounds far too old to play Carlotta, who's supposed to be the youngest of the "older" ladies, and she takes too many liberties with the music. The real star of the recording is IMO Phyllis Newman as Stella, who knocks the socks off "Who's That Woman". It's a valuable recording to have - I love the opening and some of the cut songs - but it's nowhere near "complete". Why not include a few more of the London songs? They performed "Ah, But Underneath" on stage, so there's no excuse (apart from space limitations on the CDs). I have a particular fondness for "Country House", and the London "Loveland" is an improvement, although I'd be happy to see "Make the Most of Your Music" buried for all time in a lead-lined box! |
||||||||
| Sweeney Hyde |
|