Archive for Musicals.Net Musicals.Net |
| RainbowJude |
GUYS AND DOLLS: Revival PhotographsPlaybill has some great photos from the Guys and Dolls revival, in two galleries.These are from the first gallery: 
Second gallery to follow.... |
||||||
| RainbowJude |
GUYS AND DOLLS: Revival PhotographsThese are from the second gallery:
There are 28 photos in total, so go have a peek. I think it looks great! Later days David |
||||||
| LittleGavroche |
Craig Bierko is such a perfect looking Sky, in my opinion. And I love his expression in that last photo. He is so dashing a la Frank Sinatra. | ||||||
| SomeoneLikeYou |
I read a poor review for this in my local paper yesterday. They criticized Adelaide and Nathan, praised Sarah and Sky, and commented that if the revival focused more on the music and story than on the glitz and special effects, it could have been good. | ||||||
| Brigantine |
I like them for the most part, but in that first group, Lauren Graham looks washed out and old... to old. Sarah looks too old to me as well, except in the scene that I guess would be "If I Were a Bell". I guess 90% of the audience won't be as close as the photographer to notice. 
But in that second group of pics, especially the linked arms classic pose, Lauren looks great. Brighter lipstick I think. Holy buckets, those Mink costumes are something else!! And I thought the ones I've worn before were barely there! I didn't know plaid suits could be so... plaid.
I'd still love to see it. 
Last friday, NPR's "Fresh Air" program had a story on Frank Loesser... clips of him singing songs from Guys and Dolls, and interviews with his daughter and his second wife: http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=13&prgDate=3-6-2009 |
||||||
| SomeoneLikeYou |
EDIT... | ||||||
| fjays |
Hahaha
http://musicals.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=51862 But I also thought Sarah and Sky were the leads. Anyway, I also think both Sarah and Adelaide look old.. too old. I just always saw the woman as under 40. Not that they look that much older, but you know what I mean.. |
||||||
| nabla |
I think adelaide looks ok because she was always supposed to be a little older... like 35 older but whatever.
Overall the revival seems pretty crummy though, i guess i'd have to see a video before i could really judge though |
||||||
| LittleGavroche |
I think most people assume she is on the younger side but still, she has been engaged for a long time. Her age plays fine on stage. Especially with the significantly older looking Oliver Platt. If she looked like a young thing it would have been so awkward.
Kate Jennings Grant as Sarah looks beautiful on stage, by the way. Younger than these pictures, in any case. I was sitting pretty damn close. Third row center, and they all looked a proper age. I think it's reasonable that Oliver Platt and Lauren Graham get top billing. They are the two 'names' in the production. If it were up to me, Tituss Burgess would have his name in flashing lights over the title. He was amazing. Such a voice on that man. Most of the reviews are pretty much right, if harsh. The show has too much frouf. And it takes away. But not enough that it should deter anyone from seeing the show. The added plot with Damon Runyon is superflous, but the sets make the opening ballet sequence spectacular. |
||||||
| Salome |
for the 100th time! NATHANAND ADELAIDE ARE THE LEADS!!!!! even though they are miscast this time around. |
||||||
| SomeoneLikeYou |
Sorry!  I've never actually seen the show live as of yet. 
I agree about the miscasting though. |
||||||
| LittleGavroche |
No need to be sorry. There is no common consensus on the topic. Salome clearly thinks that Nathan and Adelaide are the leads, but there are still many others who think Sky and Sarah are. They have about equal stage time, generally, Nathan and Adelaide are the comedic leads, Sky and Sarah are the romantic leads. I personally like the four names above the title as in the current revival. |
||||||
| SomeoneLikeYou |
I do have reason to be sorry. This has nothing to do with opinion...I made an incorrect assumption about a show I've never actually seen live, which was a silly thing for me to do.
Dawn was not in the wrong here. I was. |
||||||
| jackissensational |
Frank Sinatra don't agree.
I think it looks like every other major production of Guys and Dolls... cept poor casting and some weird costuming choices. "Meh" overall. |
||||||
| LittleGavroche |
I never said she was. Just that it is not incorrect to assume Sarah and Sky the leads. Just as it is not incorrect to assume Adelaide and Nathan the leads. And it's true, Frank Sinatra certainly thought Sky was a more desireable role 
This production also clearly sets the time period as shortly after the stock market crash. I thought it was a bit unusual, the productions I've seen haven't done that. |
||||||
| Baker |
Some of the shots look like a very glamorous community theatre production. Specifically, almost every shot of a big group of men and the picture of "Marry the Man Today." | ||||||
| Salome |
sinatra just wanted to simg luck be a lady on screen thats all. |
||||||
| Disney-Bway27 |
I always thought Sky was the male lead. *shrugs*
The production looks alright. The set looks killer from the first couple of pictures, but the casting and some of the costuming is just bizarre looking.
|
||||||
| jackissensational |
And rightfully so- What a great song! |
||||||
| Polo_girl14 |
I totally dont agree that Nathan and Whatever were the leads..because when you think about it....Nathan and Adelaide were flat characters . But Sky changed and fell in love..decided to join the mission. and Nathan well he didnt change at all. He still didnt really want to get married but felt like he should ((14 years is a long time)) and Sarah didnt except to fall in lvoe with aGambler. so i think they were the leads because they really showed how much they changed. but ALL FOUR WHERE THE MAIN LEADS! My brother was in his high production of it and this is basically how they explained it to them. | ||||||
| TylerMcMahon |
No they aren't. Sorry the whole show is based on the short story: "The Ideal of Miss Sarah Brown" Hell "Adelaide" isn't even in it. I'm not saying they aren't leading roles but Sky and Sarah are the lead male and female. That's why they have more scenes. |
||||||
| Salome |
its based on 3 STORIES not just the Idyll of Sarah Brown. | ||||||
| TylerMcMahon |
The main story line is Sarah Brown.
She's always been the lead female and always will be. |
||||||
| Jman383 |
But her entire plot revolves around Nathan's game, as does Sky's. If it wasn't for Nathan's storyline, which many consider the main storyline, Sarah and Sky would never happen. In my opinion, all four parts are equal. Sure, two of them are the character parts (Nathan & Adelaide) and two are the romantic leads (Sky and Sarah), but they're both the leading men and women. Look at the TONY records if you want further proof. |
||||||
| curlyhairedsoprano91 |
I agree that all four parts are basically equal -- I think that Sky and Sarah have more depth as characters, but in terms of stage time and importance to the story, they're all pretty much equal. There are arguments for either couple being "the leads" -- my director gave us (Sky and Sarah) first billing and last bow, but it could go either way. If one character had to be called the "catalyst," it would be Nathan, I think (not Nathan and Adelaide, just Nathan), because its his need for the $1000 that sets off the whole Sky and Sarah plot, like Jordan said. "Catalyst" isn't necessarily "lead," but it does mean that Nathan might have a slight edge on the other three as to how important he is to the story. |
||||||
| TylerMcMahon |
I'm not saying Adelaide and Nathan are secondary characters. I totally believe they are leads but they are not bigger than Sky and Sarah. |