This topic is locked
Saw it this afternoon. I see a theme running in these posts..... What is that set about? No magic anywhere. The cast are doing their best whilst surrounded by a dull (really dull) set. Also… Where was the Jitterbug? It's my favourite bit. And boy, does act 2 need livening up with a good dance! Boring Winkies, no castle, just a dodgy bit of am dram house. And where was the Great Oz? Considering we’d spent the last hour and a half trying to find him what a let down.
Seeing a production like this makes me so cross. The cast and orchestra are clearly a very talented bunch, but they’ve been betrayed by a pretty useless director and a designer. The place is full of people who have this story somewhere special in their heart. To see it messed up like this is really agonising.
1
75 replies to this topic
#22
jimee1987
-
- Full Members
-
- 158 posts
Advanced Member
Posted 26 July 2008 - 10:00 PM
I was going to post a comment about what I thought but there's not really any point. Everything I would have said has already been said.
Me and my friends decided the kids playing the munchkins got given pens and paper and got told to have fun. These drawings then ended up on the screen.
We got our tickets really cheap so it was a fun night out for the price but if i'd paid anymore I would have been a lot more disappointed.
Me and my friends decided the kids playing the munchkins got given pens and paper and got told to have fun. These drawings then ended up on the screen.
We got our tickets really cheap so it was a fun night out for the price but if i'd paid anymore I would have been a lot more disappointed.
"Condoms don't even go with lasagne"
#23
Lyle
-
- Full Members
-
- 67 posts
Advanced Member
Posted 26 July 2008 - 10:20 PM
QUOTE(jimee1987 @ Jul 26 2008, 11:00 PM) 
I was going to post a comment about what I thought but there's not really any point. Everything I would have said has already been said.
Me and my friends decided the kids playing the munchkins got given pens and paper and got told to have fun. These drawings then ended up on the screen.
We got our tickets really cheap so it was a fun night out for the price but if i'd paid anymore I would have been a lot more disappointed.
Me and my friends decided the kids playing the munchkins got given pens and paper and got told to have fun. These drawings then ended up on the screen.
We got our tickets really cheap so it was a fun night out for the price but if i'd paid anymore I would have been a lot more disappointed.
Such a shame. I saw the Michael Rose production last December in Southampton, directed by Nigel West. With the full RSC score - including Jitterbug (One of the best bits of Act 2). The projection was incredible, they actually managed to create a twister on stage by projecting onto 2 gauze's, one in front and one behind with the real house set in the middle. The rest of the set was equally impressive right down to Galinda's (sorry Glinda's) flying bubble.
Why didn't transfer this production into town?
http://www.mayflower.org.uk/event.asp?show...&info=video
#24 Guest_Guest_TOM_*_*
Guest_Guest_TOM_*_*
-
- Guests
Posted 26 July 2008 - 10:31 PM
I saw it tonight and its awful. Dreadful acting and the design is shockingly cheap. Theres certain things people expect from The Wizard of Oz...colour.....spectacle...and escapism..and none of these things appear here. The only positive thing i can say about it is Nick Winstons choreography is pretty good. Again, a ropey musical offering from the Festival Hall..how about next year they give us a break?
#25 Guest_Guest_achilles_*_*
Guest_Guest_achilles_*_*
-
- Guests
Posted 27 July 2008 - 08:23 AM
are the designs and projections by the same people who did Kelly's Singin' in the Rain? Again very simplistic drawings conveying nothing other than the use of a cheap trick. Dreadful and the audience felt cheated. It's a shame theses teams never go to a real animator who could do some true stage magic.
#26 Guest_Guest_achilles_*_*
Guest_Guest_achilles_*_*
-
- Guests
Posted 27 July 2008 - 08:36 AM
and isn't Kelly looking after the opening ceremony of the Olympics as well?..........now that does seem an odd choice when they are so many other and I'm afraid much more imaginative people around.
#27
Matthew Winn
-
- Global Moderators
-
- 2804 posts
Advanced Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bletchley
Posted 27 July 2008 - 10:21 AM
QUOTE(Guest_achilles_* @ Jul 27 2008, 09:23 AM)
are the designs and projections by the same people who did Kelly's Singin' in the Rain? Again very simplistic drawings conveying nothing other than the use of a cheap trick. Dreadful and the audience felt cheated.
I thought the drawings for Singin' In The Rain were interesting. Sometimes "poor" drawings can work as an effective way of defining a style. Consider Roobarb, for example, or the cutout animation from Monty Python's Flying Circus.
On the other hand a particular technique should be used because it's right for the task, not merely because it has worked before.
Huzzah!
#28 Guest_guestofoz_*
Guest_guestofoz_*
-
- Guests
Posted 27 July 2008 - 05:52 PM
this really was a terrible let down. especially with such a wonderful leading cast. however this really is poor direction and design at its poorest. lazy, unimaginative, and possibly slightly arrogant. im all for reinvention but this was very weak on ideas. the concept they are playing with is that its all set in dorothys mind and reflects the world shes from so that everyone is dressed like a ranch hand and the emerald city folk are like a travelling circus. it feels like the director and designer became so attached to what they thought was a clever idea and forgot to put any magic into the piece.
the only part that worked for me was the moment the large poppies came on stage, because they were an odd scale and looked magical. the rest however was so rooted in naturalism that it was unimaginative to look at. worst pieces that come to mind were the witches "castle" which was just dorothy's room with a grey wash over it and the weird shower curtain thing in the wizards chamber. the thing that the designer has got wrong here is that they have made kansas look great. rusty, colourless, worn down... the problem with this is that we are always looking at it. we never leave it. and the costumes are unimaginative too, when the munchkins came on i really felt for those down at the front who'd paid £50 for a ticket, as it looked like they had raided the Gap kids sale.
and the projections... i do like abstract projections but they really were terrible. and sometimes difficult to understand. worst moment has to be the end of act one and they see the skyline of Oz. absolutely dreadful, especially when they say "its beautiful". it looked promising at the top of the show but became like a bad powerpoint presentation throughout oz.
all this said, i didnt pay much to see it as i sat at the back after reading previous posters on this forum when deciding whether to see the show. and i did enjoy myself, just not the production. its worth paying cheap just to hear the score played by a wonderful orchestra and sang really well too. nick winstons choreography is very good too, and the crows are a fantastic touch from him.
the only part that worked for me was the moment the large poppies came on stage, because they were an odd scale and looked magical. the rest however was so rooted in naturalism that it was unimaginative to look at. worst pieces that come to mind were the witches "castle" which was just dorothy's room with a grey wash over it and the weird shower curtain thing in the wizards chamber. the thing that the designer has got wrong here is that they have made kansas look great. rusty, colourless, worn down... the problem with this is that we are always looking at it. we never leave it. and the costumes are unimaginative too, when the munchkins came on i really felt for those down at the front who'd paid £50 for a ticket, as it looked like they had raided the Gap kids sale.
and the projections... i do like abstract projections but they really were terrible. and sometimes difficult to understand. worst moment has to be the end of act one and they see the skyline of Oz. absolutely dreadful, especially when they say "its beautiful". it looked promising at the top of the show but became like a bad powerpoint presentation throughout oz.
all this said, i didnt pay much to see it as i sat at the back after reading previous posters on this forum when deciding whether to see the show. and i did enjoy myself, just not the production. its worth paying cheap just to hear the score played by a wonderful orchestra and sang really well too. nick winstons choreography is very good too, and the crows are a fantastic touch from him.
#29 Guest_Guest_achilles_*_*
Guest_Guest_achilles_*_*
-
- Guests
Posted 27 July 2008 - 10:31 PM
this does sound a dull production. People often blame the festival Hall as a venue, but we've all seen productions in even more restricting spaces that have been enlivened by a bit of theatrical imagination. Harping on about the projections again, I adored the recent Sunday in the Park with George but felt let down by the projections. It seems as if they had the idea to use animation but forgot to get an animator. They only really scraped the surface of what could have been done there...and most likely here with Oz. Though I'm not sure I've seen a truly magical production of OZ. The Ian Judge one for the RSC confused camp with theatricality and was so full of in-jokes that he forgot to include the children. Probably the last West Yorkshire Playhouse was the best I have seen though they copped out in the transformation scene by using a film of a twister and a falling house - they did however have some brilliant flying and a very disconcerting huge floating eye. Can't wait for their Peter Pan this year. They certainly know how to do christmas shows and on a huge scale.
#30 Guest_frenchlondoner_*
Guest_frenchlondoner_*
-
- Guests
Posted 28 July 2008 - 09:44 AM
Focusing on the positives for this show:
- a great cast. They can sing, dance, act. Lots of talent. I was really impressed by Sian Brooke, who plays Dorothy, and all the supporting cast, who really looked like they enjoyed themselves.
- a great score. As other posters say, it's great to hear it performed live by an orchestra. That's where the magic is in that production, really...
- a great cast. They can sing, dance, act. Lots of talent. I was really impressed by Sian Brooke, who plays Dorothy, and all the supporting cast, who really looked like they enjoyed themselves.
- a great score. As other posters say, it's great to hear it performed live by an orchestra. That's where the magic is in that production, really...
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
