Company

[bostonman]

13 minutes ago, sam.fitzpatrick said:

I'm pulling for Jennifer Simard to get the Featured Actress - Musical win.  I'm heard her in a couple of other venues and always enjoyed her performances.  

I worked with Jen some years back, in the Boston company of Nunsense in its last few years - she played Sister Amnesia. So funny, always. And a great lady also. I'm so thrilled to see where she has gone over time. 

[skynyc]

Actually, Lenk's vocals have improved drastically since when I first saw this in December. The first time I saw her do Being Alive I was underwhelmed. The big 11:00 number and it was "meh". I've been back a couple times with different out of town visitors and she really has gotten to where she nails it. Still within the character she's created for Bobbi, but with much more control and oomph. 

I would certainly have nominated her over Mare Winningham or Carmen Cusack, both of whom I enjoyed, but Lenk is in almost every minute of Company. 

 

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

On 5/13/2022 at 10:40 PM, bostonman said:

I worked with Jen some years back, in the Boston company of Nunsense in its last few years - she played Sister Amnesia. So funny, always. And a great lady also. I'm so thrilled to see where she has gone over time. 

She was a worthy replacement for the incredible Lisa Howard in The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee.

I saw that show more times on Broadway and tour than I care to admit.  Simard was always a highlight.

[handiacefailure]

On 5/14/2022 at 11:58 AM, skynyc said:

Actually, Lenk's vocals have improved drastically since when I first saw this in December. The first time I saw her do Being Alive I was underwhelmed. The big 11:00 number and it was "meh". I've been back a couple times with different out of town visitors and she really has gotten to where she nails it. Still within the character she's created for Bobbi, but with much more control and oomph. 

I would certainly have nominated her over Mare Winningham or Carmen Cusack, both of whom I enjoyed, but Lenk is in almost every minute of Company. 

 

I thought she was pretty good in the part.   I like Rosalie Craig better in the London production but thought Lenk was worth of a nomination.

Especially seeing the others that received nominations.   With the exception of Sutton Foster, I think she was better than any of the other nominees  

[+ sf westcoaster]

Saw Company last night and was blow away by the imagination and creativity that went into this revival. However, I do feel there are a few problematic areas,  such as the Barcelona number - only my reaction! Link is adequate but I do believe she has been miscasted

[pleasureseeker]

Sorry, wish I could share everyone's  enthusiasm. I very much enjoyed the production and I thought the cast was good. Wasn't sure about Katrina Lenk at first (liked her so much in Band's visit) but she gained on me. My big issue with the show is that its theme feels so dated, that in my opinion all the attempts at making it contemporary made it worse. I think our value system has changed so much in the last 20 some years that to watch a show built on - should I or shouldn't I be in a couple - at age 35 should have been left in the 70's when that kind of angst made perfect sense. Just an opinion.

[bostonman]

7 minutes ago, scrtlovr said:

Sorry, wish I could share everyone's  enthusiasm. I very much enjoyed the production and I thought the cast was good. Wasn't sure about Katrina Lenk at first (liked her so much in Band's visit) but she gained on me. My big issue with the show is that its theme feels so dated, that in my opinion all the attempts at making it contemporary made it worse. I think our value system has changed so much in the last 20 some years that to watch a show built on - should I or shouldn't I be in a couple - at age 35 should have been left in the 70's when that kind of angst made perfect sense. Just an opinion.

I, too, prefer my Company to be set in 1970. I think that overarching idea that every show produced has to be "relevant" to our time is rather silly. There's no reason at all that we can't enjoy Company as written, in the time it's set. That said, I think there still are very relevant themes that DO remain for us to look at, so I still don't buy the need to update the piece so much. 

I understand the "biological clock" idea that runs in this production, but that in itself is also a very different story than is in the text. There is never any sense that the original Bobby wants to be a father. I don't think he ever uses the word "family" or thinks about future generations. He's very much a "me generation" bachelor who can't even figure out if or why he needs an emotional connection to a woman beyond the fun of casual relationships. (Or that yeah, he'll settle down eventually like everyone else, "for company" as he suggests - but that time is always in the future, not something he has to commit to yet, no matter what everyone else is saying to him.) So in this version, the text being essentially the same, Bobbie has no way to outwardly express any interest in having kids/family, even though this is the supposed "clock is ticking" reason she feels the pressure to marry, It's a little like a regietheatre opera production where we're being asked to make a lot of leaps that just aren't there. 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 5/27/2022 at 12:14 PM, scrtlovr said:

Sorry, wish I could share everyone's  enthusiasm. I very much enjoyed the production and I thought the cast was good. Wasn't sure about Katrina Lenk at first (liked her so much in Band's visit) but she gained on me. My big issue with the show is that its theme feels so dated, that in my opinion all the attempts at making it contemporary made it worse. I think our value system has changed so much in the last 20 some years that to watch a show built on - should I or shouldn't I be in a couple - at age 35 should have been left in the 70's when that kind of angst made perfect sense. Just an opinion.

I saw Company last weekend at the suggestion of some friends.  It was a last minute decision and I knew nothing about the play going into it.  I saw it sitting by myself, single, in my late 30s.  It was very relatable to me. I can tell you that the angst of being single in mid or late 30s is very much real today.

I thought it was great and would see it again with the current set design, direction, and cast.  Its message (or lack of message?) felt very pertinent to me at this stage in my life.  I have a greater appreciation for all Company in my life now, whether that be married friends, sex partners, or someday a life partner, or not.

Plus, it was very entertaining

Edited June 13, 2022 by Vegas_nw1982

[pleasureseeker]

Fair enough.

[skynyc]

Closing date at end of July announced this morning. Even with 5 Tonys, there are still lots of empty seats, and a large company is expensive in the summer. As of July 1, masks are no longer required, just recommended. Will be interesting to see if this makes a difference. I know two people who said they won't go to theater if they have to be masked...and several who say they won't go to theater if folks aren't masked. 

At any rate, the Jacobs is a popular theater and won't be empty for long. 

 

[handiacefailure]

6 hours ago, skynyc said:

Closing date at end of July announced this morning. Even with 5 Tonys, there are still lots of empty seats, and a large company is expensive in the summer. As of July 1, masks are no longer required, just recommended. Will be interesting to see if this makes a difference. I know two people who said they won't go to theater if they have to be masked...and several who say they won't go to theater if folks aren't masked. 

At any rate, the Jacobs is a popular theater and won't be empty for long. 

 

I think the theater can still require masks though if they want.   My city hasn't been requiring masks for a long time, but when I saw Berndette peters last month, she was requiring proof of vax plus masks even though the venue wasn't.

I have tickets to see it Friday (love that is' a 7 pm show instead of 8 friday) and there were only a few seats open when I bought the tickets two weeks ago

[EZEtoGRU]

I saw Company on Saturday and really enjoyed it.  It's the first version of the musical I have ever seen so I have no other version or actors to compare it too.  I felt Lenk and LuPone were both excellent.  The staging was creative and unusual.  Unusually boisterous crowd.  Huge applause and cheers after almost every number.  It seems fans are rushing to see it before it closes.  I don't blame them!  Definitely a winner.

[MikeThomas]

On 5/27/2022 at 2:37 PM, bostonman said:

I, too, prefer my Company to be set in 1970. I think that overarching idea that every show produced has to be "relevant" to our time is rather silly. There's no reason at all that we can't enjoy Company as written, in the time it's set. That said, I think there still are very relevant themes that DO remain for us to look at, so I still don't buy the need to update the piece so much. 

I understand the "biological clock" idea that runs in this production, but that in itself is also a very different story than is in the text. There is never any sense that the original Bobby wants to be a father. I don't think he ever uses the word "family" or thinks about future generations. He's very much a "me generation" bachelor who can't even figure out if or why he needs an emotional connection to a woman beyond the fun of casual relationships. (Or that yeah, he'll settle down eventually like everyone else, "for company" as he suggests - but that time is always in the future, not something he has to commit to yet, no matter what everyone else is saying to him.) So in this version, the text being essentially the same, Bobbie has no way to outwardly express any interest in having kids/family, even though this is the supposed "clock is ticking" reason she feels the pressure to marry, It's a little like a regietheatre opera production where we're being asked to make a lot of leaps that just aren't there. 

The US tour version is coming to Dallas.  Never saw the West End or Broadway versions, so thought I might take it in.  But not sure I want to see a reimagined production.

[bostonman]

37 minutes ago, MikeThomas said:

The US tour version is coming to Dallas.  Never saw the West End or Broadway versions, so thought I might take it in.  But not sure I want to see a reimagined production.

I saw the tour in Boston in April. On the plus side, it's a very strong cast. The design and staging are clever. But the reimagining largely had me scratching my head. Some of it works by default, but mostly it doesn't make a lot of sense. 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 7/11/2024 at 3:46 PM, MikeThomas said:

The US tour version is coming to Dallas.  Never saw the West End or Broadway versions, so thought I might take it in.  But not sure I want to see a reimagined production.

I saw the "reimagined" Company in 2023 on Broadway and I loved it so much that I'm seeing the touring version twice when it comes to Las Vegas this autumn (once each with two different friends).  I've also seen videos of previous revivals.  I think the "reimagined" version works perfectly, maybe even better, except for the "ladies who lunch" song and that character's relationship with the main character, Bobbie.

[handiacefailure]

Debating on seeing the touring version.   I saw it four times (three on broadway and pre broadway in London).   Love the musical but main reason I loved it was Patti Lupone and Matt Doyle.   If they were in the travelling production, I’d see it again for sure

[bostonman]

10 hours ago, Vegas_Millennial said:

 I think the "reimagined" version works perfectly, maybe even better, except for the "ladies who lunch" song and that character's relationship with the main character, Bobbie.

I'd be curious to get your take on the end of Act I. Originally, Bobby steps in to try to save a precarious moment and proposes to Amy after Paul has walked out. But in this version, it's a gay man named Jamie, and the proposal makes no sense whatsoever. But why do you think this is "maybe even better" than the original? 
 

There are other moments I felt that the gender switch didn't work ("Poor Baby" could have remained being sung the women, not the men, and the rewritten "Bobbie ought to have a fella" just sounds wrong - I'm not sure why Sondheim or whoever made the change simply didn't go for the word "husband."), but that end of Act I was one of the big glaring moments for me. 

Another bungle - having less to do with the gender switching, was how the "couples tap" sequence was handled in "Side By Side." This was one of the few times in my experience with the show, if perhaps the only time, that the Bobby/Bobbie solo moment (i.e. the character has no partner to dance with) wasn't absolutely devastating. The moment barely registered in this production IMO. 

And yes, the moment in this production where Joanne tries to set female Bobbie up with her husband (instead of originally Joanne making a play for male Bobby herself) really missed the mark entirely. This is what happens when you try to rewrite a show's concept - you wind up with moments that just can't fit the new concept at all, and the new version tries to bend over backwards to no avail. 

Edited July 13, 2024 by bostonman

[MaybeMaybeNot]

I recently saw the tour. I had seen the show once before in a community theatre production. It was fine enough, but overall, I don't think the tour registered. Something about the translation and the staging didn't feel spot-on. I did not pick up on the couples tap issue bostonman mentioned in "Side By Side" because I know the score better than the show, but the number needed something more; it didn't feel weighty enough. Our lead has a beautiful voice, but she didn't have the heft to make "Being Alive" a major revelation. I think the moment needs a belter, not just a pretty voice that almost gets drowned out by the orchestra. I would cast her in any other role in the world; I just don't think her vocal style suited the character in some of the solos.

On the shallow end, I loved seeing Jacob Dickey in his blue briefs so much during the show!

[bostonman]

12 minutes ago, MaybeMaybeNot said:

I did not pick up on the couples tap issue bostonman mentioned in "Side By Side" because I know the score better than the show, but the number needed something more; it didn't feel weighty enough.

I should clarify that they didn't actually tap in this production - but they did in the original (and in most productions I've seen over the years.) 

The moment as originally choreographed is that three of the couples share tap breaks late in the song (if you listen to the original cast recording you can hear in stereo effect that first one person taps, then their spouse), then Bobby gets a turn - but where his partner (if he had one) would have tapped, there's just silence. Usually in the moments after that, we see Bobby react to the realization that he wasn't "completed" and also most often the couples (who of course realize) scramble to finish the song and in essence pretend that moment didn't happen. It can be a very emotional moment - one of my favorites in the show, actually. But in this production, the business they did in place of the tap breaks just didn't register in the same way, and I really didn't see any acknowledgement of the silence and how that affects the number. 

I think it's fine not to do literal tap, but what I didn't see in this version is how Bobby and the couples reacted to the moment where Bobby has no one to share with. 

Edited August 18, 2024 by bostonman

[handiacefailure]

I can’t believe they didn’t do a recording of this show.   They did of the west end production.   Patti and Matt both won Tony’s and the show won Tony for best revival  

[bostonman]

3 minutes ago, handiacefailure said:

I can’t believe they didn’t do a recording of this show.   They did of the west end production.   Patti and Matt both won Tony’s and the show won Tony for best revival  

The Broadway cast was the same, wasn't it? There wouldn't have been enough reason to re-record the show with the same cast and merely a different orchestra. (Much as, yes, speaking as a professional musician, it still would have been nice to have a recording with the Broadway pit.)

[handiacefailure]

Just now, bostonman said:

The Broadway cast was the same, wasn't it? There wouldn't have been enough reason to re-record the show with the same cast and merely a different orchestra. (Much as, yes, speaking as a professional musician, it still would have been nice to have a recording with the Broadway pit.)

Different cast, except for Patti.   

Katrina Lenk played Bobby on Broadway and Rosalie Craig played her in West End (who was much better than Lenk IMO).   

Matt Doyle wasn’t in the West End production (he was a lot better than the guy who played Jamie in the west end production).  I also know Andy (the guy in Guilded age who plays Oscar’s boyfriend had the part on broadway) was a different actor.

Something interesting about “the little things” is every time I’ve heard it when Elaine Stritch sang it and when Patti sang it on broadway is they use the line “Jesus Christ is it fun” and on the west end it was “Oh my God is it fun”. Not sure why they changed it for the west end production. 

[bostonman]

You are absolutely right - I'm sorry. So yes, maybe they should have rerecorded. Perhaps they thought the main draw would be Patti, and for that reason alone felt they didn't really need two recordings. (Whereas, for instance, Spider Woman got rerecorded when the cast changed over, but all 3 leads were different, and I suppose they felt differently then. It was also a different time then, and cast recordings are more of an expense than they used to be.)

And yes, much as I adored Lenk in The Band's Visit, from all I've heard her Bobbie wasn't nearly as good. 

I wonder if they felt the stiff upper lip Brits just wouldn't appreciate "Jesus Christ" used in that context. ;-)

BTW - it's also interesting that Larry Kert had to wait for London to get recorded in the original production, even though he took over for Dean Jones on Broadway a month after the show opened. And for that recording, they just replaced Jones' tracks with dubs by Kert.

 

Edited August 18, 2024 by bostonman

[MaybeMaybeNot]

These days, it seems like if the Brits get it first, we are less likely to get a recording with the Broadway cast (Sister Act, Mary Poppins, Company all come to mind).