GYPSY with Imelda Staunton

[MrMiniver]

I've just watched this BBC Live presentation of the current London stage show. Just a few impressions, not a comprehensive review.

 

It's a terrific production but, apart from Staunton, I didn't find any of the other actors particularly memorable or compelling. Staunton has received enormous praise from the London critics for her performance as Mama Rose. I guess these days it has become popular to cast this role with an "actress" and usually one who can't sing (calling Tyne Daly). To start with, Staunton "sings" the role transposed down 1/3 and even that is a stretch for her. There is very little discernable melody that she sings. The big moments pass by without much enthusiasm because she doesn't have the voice to make the stand out. I'm not a fan of shouting out big notes (a la Patti Lupone).

 

Her acting is superb if you like the fact that she plays Mama Rose as if she was bat shit crazy before the curtain went up. She stays that way throughout the entire show. No tenderness, just craziness. I'm sure it's even more intensified for TV cameras than it would be onstage. But there you have it. I am undecided if I liked it much or not. It certainly is a valid interpretation but I would think one would tire of it and one would never listen to it on records.

 

Just my two cents.

[body2body]

I saw this production at the Savoy the night before it closed. Staunton plays Mama Rose as a virago from the start as Mr. Miniver noted. I thought her singing was not bad, but she is not a great singer. Mama Rose was not a nice person, and was suspected of murder, so for me the interpretation worked. The young woman playing Louise was very good. I enjoyed the Strippers in "You Gotta Get a Gimmick". Mazeppa played it like a deadpan singer who was over it all and could barely be bothered to move.

I liked this production better than the one with Bernadette Peters in New York who was terribly miscast. Neither measure up to the production in the 70's with Angela Lansbury who was riveting ( and who I went back to see three times).

The most amazing thing about this London production was the ticket price £68 for 8th row center of a sold out run. That's about $111, in New York that seat would have cost $300. While in London I saw the RSC's new production of Henry V ( superb) 4th row £45, Pericles at the Sam Wanamaker Playhouse ( performed by candlelight as it would have been in a Jacobean theatre) £62, and opening night of "Wonder.land" at the National ( the only disappointment of this trip) center orchestra (stalls) £50. A concert of the Philharmonia Orchestra with Salonen conducting and Lang Lang as piano soloist was only £55 ( 14th row keyboard side) .

It's getting to be worth the extra expense of a flight from L.A. to have a theater week in London instead of going to New York.

[RyanDean]

It is interesting that this is the role in the musical theater canon that has developed a Lear-like stature. Judging solely on the BBC Live capture, I enjoyed Staunton's clarity throughout and found her handling of Rose's hairpin emotional transitions to be fascinating. I mean, even "Have an eggroll Mister Goldstone" was an emotional epic. But I've never found the score especially "listen-able" (though the original orchestrations are thrilling), so I'm probably more forgiving on that front than MrM. (Ohhh to have seen Lansbury in this, though.)

 

Plus I thought the Tulsa quite cute.

[+ WilliamM]

"But I've never found the score especially "listen-able" (though the original orchestrations are thrilling), so I'm probably more forgiving on that front than MrM.

 

Wow. Many people consider the original Broadway cast album with Merman in A or A+ territory.

[MrMiniver]

I saw this production at the Savoy the night before it closed. Staunton plays Mama Rose as a virago from the start as Mr. Miniver noted. I thought her singing was not bad, but she is not a great singer. Mama Rose was not a nice person, and was suspected of murder, so for me the interpretation worked. The young woman playing Louise was very good. I enjoyed the Strippers in "You Gotta Get a Gimmick". Mazeppa played it like a deadpan singer who was over it all and could barely be bothered to move.

I liked this production better than the one with Bernadette Peters in New York who was terribly miscast. Neither measure up to the production in the 70's with Angela Lansbury who was riveting ( and who I went back to see three times).

The most amazing thing about this London production was the ticket price £68 for 8th row center of a sold out run. That's about $111, in New York that seat would have cost $300. While in London I saw the RSC's new production of Henry V ( superb) 4th row £45, Pericles at the Sam Wanamaker Playhouse ( performed by candlelight as it would have been in a Jacobean theatre) £62, and opening night of "Wonder.land" at the National ( the only disappointment of this trip) center orchestra (stalls) £50. A concert of the Philharmonia Orchestra with Salonen conducting and Lang Lang as piano soloist was only £55 ( 14th row keyboard side) .

It's getting to be worth the extra expense of a flight from L.A. to have a theater week in London instead of going to New York.

 

I agree about Bernadette Peters. She was awful. It just isn't the part for her. I think it was Lara Pulver as Louise. She wasn't bad just memorable.

 

As for Staunton's singing. I said she "can't sing" because to me the basics of being able to sing include nuance, singing on pitch, singing the role as written, being able to sing in something other than a monotone. She didn't do any of these things. So, for me, she can't sing. She "declames" the songs which is fine if you're Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady. But that's how those songs were written. Mama Rose's songs are written for a real singer.

[MrMiniver]

It is interesting that this is the role in the musical theater canon that has developed a Lear-like stature. Judging solely on the BBC Live capture, I enjoyed Staunton's clarity throughout and found her handling of Rose's hairpin emotional transitions to be fascinating. I mean, even "Have an eggroll Mister Goldstone" was an emotional epic. But I've never found the score especially "listen-able" (though the original orchestrations are thrilling), so I'm probably more forgiving on that front than MrM. (Ohhh to have seen Lansbury in this, though.)

 

Plus I thought the Tulsa quite cute.

 

Of course, I'll disagree. The Tulsa was dull as dishwater, seemed 3 feet tall with big ears like Dumbo. But worse, I wondered if he could actually dance. It was not much in evidence. His big number "All I need is the girl" fell compeletely flat. It was very rote, by the numbers, nothing exciting. That should be a stop the show moment, it wasn't.

 

Emotional transitions? I'm sorry but I have to laugh at that one. Staunton, while good, was one note throughout. Just bat shit crazy. It was like Glenn Close in Sunset Blvd. I felt there was nothing subtle. I'm not sure what you mean by her "clarity."

 

I find it one of the great scores and very listenable when done by Merman or Lansbury (who I saw many times do it in NYC and London). At the end of the day, a producer friend on Broadway said to me "this is how the British think American musicals should be done. They often bear no resemblance to how we do it here. Just like Americans often have no clue how to do "brit" stuff the Brits have no idea how to do American stuff."

[RyanDean]

Wow. I had no idea I was so fundamentally wrong about everything. Good to know.

 

Happy New Year to you, MrMiniver.

I trust your unerring certitude will continue to guide and sustain you in all you do.

[MrMiniver]

Wow. I had no idea I was so fundamentally wrong about everything. Good to know.

 

Happy New Year to you, MrMiniver.

I trust your unerring certitude will continue to guide and sustain you in all you do.

 

I don't think it has to do with anyone being "wrong or right." Just different opinions. The only right or wrong that could come into it is a discussion of Staunton's technical ability as a singer which is not subject really to opinion as there are pretty clear objective standards about that.

 

Happy New Year!

[actor61]

A London actor friend of mine saw Staunton at the Savoy in "Gypsy" and hated her and the show, so I'm looking forward to seeing the BBC production and finding if I agree or disagree with him. He also just saw the new British revival of "Funny Girl" with an actress from a t.v. show I am not familiar with. He was mystified that she didn't sing "My Man" or "Roller Skate Rag" and accused the producers of cutting the numbers from the show. Sigh. People see a dreadful movie version of a musical and assume that it's a faithful version of what was presented onstage. "West Side Story", "Sound of Music", "On the Town", "Funny Girl" all interposed songs from other composers, cut numbers, put numbers in different places, gave numbers to characters who didn't do them in the original and then people think THAT'S the show. Personally, I think "Cornet Man" is superior to "Roller Skate Rag", "Rat-A-Tat" is funnier than the Swan Lake parody in "Funny Girl" and it would be difficult to find a better 11 o'clock number than "The Music That Makes Me Dance", which is replaced in the movie by "My Man". I recently saw a stage version of "West Side Story" with a young friend who thought that the boys must have been ill on the night we saw the show because they didn't do "America" with the Shark girls as in the movie, which he had watched on DVD a few weeks earlier. When I explained to him at intermission that the number is only done by the Shark girls in the stage version, his reply was "That sucks". Sigh.

[+ WilliamM]

He also just saw the new British revival of "Funny Girl" with an actress from a t.v. show I am not familiar with. He was mystified that she didn't sing "My Man" or "Roller Skate Rag" and accused the producers of cutting the numbers from the show. Sigh. People see a dreadful movie version of a musical and assume that it's a faithful version of what was presented onstage. "West Side Story", "Sound of Music", "On the Town", "Funny Girl" all interposed songs from other composers, cut numbers, put numbers in different places, gave numbers to characters who didn't do them in the original and then people think THAT'S the show. Personally, I think "Cornet Man" is superior to "Roller Skate Rag", "Rat-A-Tat" is funnier than the Swan Lake parody in "Funny Girl" and it would be difficult to find a better 11 o'clock number than "The Music That Makes Me Dance", which is replaced in the movie by "My Man" Sigh.

 

Sigh indeed. I did see the Boston tryout of "Funny Girl," then still in much flux. But, I remember the tryout far more than the film which I only saw once and many years ago. Actor61, You probably have a much better memory because I assume you have appeared in productions of some of the musicals you mentioned in your posts. Have you appeared in several productions of "The Sound of Music?"

 

Again, I really enjoy your comments!

[bostonman]

People see a dreadful movie version of a musical and assume that it's a faithful version of what was presented onstage. "West Side Story", "Sound of Music", "On the Town"...

 

Poor On The Town. The story goes that MGM thought Bernstein's score was too "highbrow," so they got Roger Edens to write a bunch of new songs. Now, Edens was certainly no slouch, and the tunes he wrote for the film aren't bad on their own terms ("Main Street" is a particularly nice song IMO), but they don't hold a candle to Bernstein's score. And though the ballet music in the film is all based on Bernstein's music for the stage show, it seems to me like they took the stage ballet music and threw it up in the air, and however it landed is how they reworked it for the film. It's all a big random-sounding mish-mosh of Bernstein's themes.

 

And of course with the Hays code, they couldn't even sing the correct lyric "New York, New York, a helluva town", changing it to "a wonderful town" - which is not only much weaker, but is confusing in light of the next Bernstein/Comden/Green stage collaboration, called Wonderful Town.

[N13]

A few random imho's.

Merman's Gypsy still stands as the finest Broadway musical performance that I have ever seen. The only performance that came anywhere near was Streisand in Funny Girl.

Benadette Peters' only great performance was "Dames at Sea." She has single-handedly ruined a number of shows for me i.e. "A Little Night Music", "Follies, etc."

Hated the revival of "On The Town."

Rap music, for the most part, is an abomination and has no place on Broadway.

"Fun Home" was terrible and I can't understand it winning a Tony for best musical. It is, at best, a play with music and not a musical.

The current production of "Chicago" is the best musical I have ever seen.

 

Let the mayhem proceed!

[actor61]

Sigh indeed. I did see the Boston tryout of "Funny Girl," then still in much flux. But, I remember the tryout far more than the film which I only saw once and many years ago. Actor61, You probably have a much better memory because I assume you have appeared in productions of some of the musicals you mentioned in your posts. Have you appeared in several productions of "The Sound of Music?"

 

Again, I really enjoy your comments!

I have done various productions of "The Sound of Music" since the age of 9. I played Kurt, then played Friederich, then played Rolf and as an adult, I have played Franz (the butler) and Max. I've also directed the show. I have grown to hate the thing with a passion but it got me my Equity card as a child in 1961, paid for schooling, took me around the country and so, I am grateful to it. But I'm not a huge Rodgers and Hammerstein fan, even though I've done several of their shows. I know "Oklahoma!" is a classic and changed musical theatre forever but I find it a stultifying bore. "Carousel" makes me sleepy too, although I acknowledge that the scores for both are sublime. I'm rather fond of "South Pacific" but it's too long. Of all the R&H shows, I think "The King and I" holds up best.

 

I'll be 64 in March, so that means I have been a professional actor for 55 years. I'm still working but rarely in musicals anymore, although I still take 3 dance classes a week, sometimes 4. I've been doing it for so long that dancing is like breathing to me. I've also become a dreadful theatre snob, and freely admit it. I have a lovely, dear friend in his 80s who sees everything that moves across a stage and loves it all. He gets furious with me when I say that Bernadette Peters' voice makes my ears bleed, that I can't sit through 5 minutes of a Danny Burstein or Mandy Patinkin performance, that Catherine Zeta-Jones did not deserve a Tony (I'll give her the Oscar - grudgingly), or that just because they put "The Sound of Music", "Peter Pan" and "The Wiz" on t.v. with so-called stars we should give thanks and praise. He didn't speak to me for 2 days when I told him I thought "The Wiz" was atrocious and barely on the level of a community theatre production!!

 

I don't want to be one of those boring, pompous old actors who sits around and bellows, "In my day, we were pros!" but things have changed so, so much and it's difficult to resist thinking that my era had more quality than the current one. The hugest difference is amplification. We belted "Do Re Mi" and "Lonely Goatherd" with nothing but floor mikes at the foot of the stage. I didn't wear a radio mic until the 1970s when I did "Pippin" and even then, you still had to sing out. Now, the mics are so sensitive that you can whisper and be heard. I did "A Chorus Line" in the early 1980s and we had a company warm-up onstage before every performance. I had young friends in the recent B'way revival and they looked at me like I was nuts when I asked if they did a ballet barre before going on. The reply was generally, "We use the opening number as the warm-up." And I absolutely hated the fact that I could see their mic packs in the back of their costumes.

 

I'm an old fuddy duddy and I take a lot of heat for it. I think if you sign a contract for 8 shows a week, then you do 8 shows a week. I don't understand "stars" not doing matinees. I cannot fathom being cavalier about being on time, being rude to a stage manager, disrespecting a director or yelling at a producer because you don't like your dressing room. I've worked for some horrendous stage managers, directors, choreographers and producers but I was always polite to their faces. Of course, what I said when they weren't around is a different story!!!

 

I've rambled. The theatre's a mess right now and it makes me sad. So much mediocrity gets pushed at us as brilliant because there's just nothing else to praise. So many performances are hailed as superb when they are merely competent, again because the bar is so low. They say Merman couldn't act, Martin was too cute, Hayes was self indulgent, Cornell was too grand and the Lunts were sometimes called the Lungs because they tended to declaim but by God, they showed up for every performance, respected their audiences, gave them their money's worth and I would assume that they were probably very grateful for their opportunities.

 

I'm rehearsing a Shakespeare play at the moment and the 19 year old actor playing my son confided in me that he was only doing the play to keep his benefits going. I pulled my Laurence Olivier shoulders back, lifted my John Gielgud eyebrows and in my best James Earl Jones diction said, "What a great reason to do this play. Bravo."

 

Sigh.

[actor61]

A few random imho's.

Merman's Gypsy still stands as the finest Broadway musical performance that I have ever seen. The only performance that came anywhere near was Streisand in Funny Girl.

Benadette Peters' only great performance was "Dames at Sea." She has single-handedly ruined a number of shows for me i.e. "A Little Night Music", "Follies, etc."

Hated the revival of "On The Town."

Rap music, for the most part, is an abomination and has no place on Broadway.

"Fun Home" was terrible and I can't understand it winning a Tony for best musical. It is, at best, a play with music and not a musical.

The current production of "Chicago" is the best musical I have ever seen.

 

Let the mayhem proceed!

You won't get any arguments from me! I can't back-up your statement about Merman because I didn't see her but I did see Streisand in "Funny Girl" and have never forgotten it. I don't know whether it was great acting but it sure was magnificent performing. By the way, I returned when Mimi Hines took over and she was pretty wonderful in the role too. I cannot bear Bernadette Peters. I saw her in "Song and Dance", "Into the Woods" , "Annie Get Your Gun" and "Follies". I really, really wanted to like her because everybody said I should but she just irritates the shit out of me. From what I understand, she's a nice lady but I won't pay money to see her onstage anymore. And like "Funny Girl", I returned to "Annie/Gun" when Reba Macintire took over and she was delightful, funny, raucous, full of mischief and terrific. I second your opinion of "On the Town", especially when they stunt casted the show with Prima Diva Copeland in its last months. Haven't seen "Fun Home". "Chicago" is timeless and although they are certainly guilty of stunt casting (Melanie Griffith, Christie Brinkley), the show is so good that it would probably work with trained seals playing Velma and Roxy. Oh wait, they did have trained seals - Melanie Griffith and Christie Brinkley!

[N13]

You won't get any arguments from me!

 

Coming from you, I am flattered!

[+ WilliamM]

A few random imho's.

Merman's Gypsy still stands as the finest Broadway musical performance that I have ever seen. The only performance that came anywhere near was Streisand in Funny Girl. Rap music, for the most part, is an abomination and has no place on Broadway.

 

The current production of "Chicago" is the best musical I have ever seen.

 

 

I totally agree about Merman's "Gypsy." As much as I liked Streisand in "Funny Girl" and "I Can Get It For You Wholesale," I enjoyed Barbara Harris in "On A Clear Day...." more.

 

Liked "Hamilton" a lot the one time I saw it, but still have not really gotten into the album, and I have really tried.

 

My favorite musical is "South Pacific." I do not have a best production but liked both the Reba McEntire-Brian Stokes Mitchell concert version & the Lincoln Center revival.

 

I liked your picks, N13.

[+ WilliamM]

And like "Funny Girl", I returned to "Annie/Gun" when Reba Macintire took over and she was delightful, funny, raucous, full of mischief and terrific.

 

Wow. I must be the only person who wasn't crazy "Annie Get Your Gun" with Reba McEntire. I forget whether Tom Wopat was still the male lead or not. But, whomever it was I liked him a lot.

 

However, I thought Rebe McEntire was wonderful in the concert version of "South Pacific." I know she should have studied her lines more, but it did not ruin the performance for me.

[bostonman]

I think Chicago is a wonderful show - a show that originally got knocked out of the spotlight because of the concurrent phenomenon known as A Chorus Line, but the Encores production that led to the current revival put the show back on the map where it belongs. BUT - the production is deserving of better than the Encores-influenced bare bones design, and the Weisslers have long relied on too many "stunt casting" decisions. Most industry people I know consider the production currently to be a tired hanger-on. That's not right. It deserves much better.

 

The On The Town revival -- well, somewhat like Actor61's experience with The Sound Of Music, I've been involved in 4 productions of On The Town since I was 16, as either pit pianist and/or musical director. And it's a show that is still very near and dear to me. (Somewhat ironically, the most recent production I did was a regional production in Boston that ran the same summer as the Barrington Stage production that was the starting point for the recent Broadway revival.) My viewpoint as a musical director is that the full orchestra (with the inexplicable addition of a 2nd keyboard player, who I assume was adding in synth strings?) was the true star of the show. Not only was it heartening to see the show done with care placed on the orchestra size (and the use of the original orchestrations - no funny business going on in reinventing the wheel), but they played the show with a clarity and energy that really flattered the music. Credit also to the sound designer, who didn't over-amplify the orchestra or the singers - yes, one could tell everything was miked, but not to the point that you so often hear these days. I think the principal line was very good, with the possible exception of the Chip, who clowned around too much (more on that in a sec). I'm hoping we see more and more of Tony Yazbek (Gabey) who was just right in the role. I had also seen him some years ago as Tony in a regional West Side Story, and I'm thrilled to see he's moved up to Broadway.

 

Oh, but the clowning. Aside from the Chip, and a few of the ensemble members who overplayed, the most offensive performance to me came from Jackie Hoffmann, who, whether it was her doing or John Rando's, simply didn't trust any of the material and hit every joke with a sledgehammer. Awful.

 

I liked the design more than a lot of people did, though I'd agree that the style of the projections, though colorful and whimsical, were a bit too contemporary in feel. THIS was 1944, lol? But the only time it was truly distracting was during the taxi song, when the actors, yes, even the chew-the-scenery Chip, were dwarfed by a quasi videogame/google map-ish video projection of the cab ride. Unnecessary.

 

But, as I said, at least there was that beautiful orchestra. It could have been a "teeny tiny band" like we got for the most recent Night Music or La Cage...hell, if John Doyle (shudder) had directed, we might have been "treated" to our 3 sailors marching about endlessly with tubas. So I think god that at least the music was given the attention it deserved. Maybe not a production for the ages, but they did get some things very right.

[actor61]

I think Chicago is a wonderful show - a show that originally got knocked out of the spotlight because of the concurrent phenomenon known as A Chorus Line, but the Encores production that led to the current revival put the show back on the map where it belongs. BUT - the production is deserving of better than the Encores-influenced bare bones design, and the Weisslers have long relied on too many "stunt casting" decisions. Most industry people I know consider the production currently to be a tired hanger-on. That's not right. It deserves much better.

 

The On The Town revival -- well, somewhat like Actor61's experience with The Sound Of Music, I've been involved in 4 productions of On The Town since I was 16, as either pit pianist and/or musical director. And it's a show that is still very near and dear to me. (Somewhat ironically, the most recent production I did was a regional production in Boston that ran the same summer as the Barrington Stage production that was the starting point for the recent Broadway revival.) My viewpoint as a musical director is that the full orchestra (with the inexplicable addition of a 2nd keyboard player, who I assume was adding in synth strings?) was the true star of the show. Not only was it heartening to see the show done with care placed on the orchestra size (and the use of the original orchestrations - no funny business going on in reinventing the wheel), but they played the show with a clarity and energy that really flattered the music. Credit also to the sound designer, who didn't over-amplify the orchestra or the singers - yes, one could tell everything was miked, but not to the point that you so often hear these days. I think the principal line was very good, with the possible exception of the Chip, who clowned around too much (more on that in a sec). I'm hoping we see more and more of Tony Yazbek (Gabey) who was just right in the role. I had also seen him some years ago as Tony in a regional West Side Story, and I'm thrilled to see he's moved up to Broadway.

 

Oh, but the clowning. Aside from the Chip, and a few of the ensemble members who overplayed, the most offensive performance to me came from Jackie Hoffmann, who, whether it was her doing or John Rando's, simply didn't trust any of the material and hit every joke with a sledgehammer. Awful.

 

I liked the design more than a lot of people did, though I'd agree that the style of the projections, though colorful and whimsical, were a bit too contemporary in feel. THIS was 1944, lol? But the only time it was truly distracting was during the taxi song, when the actors, yes, even the chew-the-scenery Chip, were dwarfed by a quasi videogame/google map-ish video projection of the cab ride. Unnecessary.

 

But, as I said, at least there was that beautiful orchestra. It could have been a "teeny tiny band" like we got for the most recent Night Music or La Cage...hell, if John Doyle (shudder) had directed, we might have been "treated" to our 3 sailors marching about endlessly with tubas. So I think god that at least the music was given the attention it deserved. Maybe not a production for the ages, but they did get some things very right.

I'm really chuckling over your John Doyle comment! His production of "Company" was possibly one of the worst "concept" shows I've ever seen. Just fuckin dreadful. As for Jackie Hoffman - she doesn't know how to underplay. Did you see "The Addams Family"? And she's just as "on" in real life as she is onstage. A truly annoying woman who wears me out every time I see her.

 

Oh lord, I've become such a bitch! I've been in theatre for far too long!

[RussJohnson]

It's a terrific production

 

Did you mean terrible?

[+ WilliamM]

They say Merman couldn't act, Martin was too cute, Hayes was self indulgent, Cornell was too grand and the Lunts were sometimes called the Lungs because they tended to declaim but by God, they showed up for every performance, respected their audiences, gave them their money's worth and I would assume that they were probably very grateful for their opportunities.

 

Here's the exceptions prove the rule, or whatever the saying is. Martin claimed that she missed one performance of "The Sound of Music." Merman missed a week of "Gypsy" with a serious throat condition. It was so unusual that her understudy appeared on "What's My Line" or "I've Got A Secret."

[bostonman]

I'm really chuckling over your John Doyle comment! His production of "Company" was possibly one of the worst "concept" shows I've ever seen. Just fuckin dreadful.

 

It's funny. Given his first 2 American imports (Sweeney and Company) I expected Company to work well because, after all, it's already an abstract piece. Boy, was I wrong. As much as the Doyle Sweeney was problematic, Company was actually worse. The whole actors-as-musicians thing comes with so many issues already - but Doyle's basic style of not wanting actors to interact is just deadening. (Again, with Company being so much about trying to find a connection, that forced sense of disconnect might have worked on paper - but it didn't work at all onstage.) Another problem with Company was that unlike the Sweeney cast, the Company cast as a whole were not nearly as proficient on their instruments - the music making that was actually pretty impressive for Sweeney was just not good at all in Company. You could have had the same cast accompanied by a high school band and it would have sounded better.

 

But even when Doyle isn't doing his actor/musician gimmick, it's no better. His Mahagonny at LA Opera was fair but disappointing on the whole. And he somehow managed the impossible, draining Peter Grimes of all its emotional/dramatic impact at the Met a few seasons ago.