Louisville Reviews

[jdmag44]

Thanks so very much for your detailed review of Noah's debut, As you know I was there for Ben's debut but was unable to stay for Noah. Your review made it almost like being there Thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed and thoughtful review. I certainly appreciate it. I hope to get to see Noah in Boston.

[ERinVA]

I am not much on writing reviews, so I will just second what everyone else has said about the wonderful Billy weekend in Louisville. It does not come better than this!

I would like to add one other comment, however. Despite (or more likely due to) the inconvenience of having to crawl over others to get to your seat because of the "clam shell" design of the auditorium, with no aisles breaking up the expanse of the rows from one side to the other, this theatre had the best acoustics of any venue in which I have seen the show. The sound was crisp as could be. Nothing was muddled, and I actually heard bits and pieces in the dialogue and lyrics that often have a tendency to get lost. Also, anyone tapping had better get it right, because every individual tap was audible. I have never had a better sound experience at a performance of the show.

Bravo, Kentucky Center for the Performing Arts!

[maria]

I agree with Ellen - the sound system at the Kentucky Center was sharp and clear.

Just wanted to add a couple of my thoughts about the four Billies I just saw - with a few words describing them each:

Ben - pure joy - probably has as much to do with seeing him perform as Billy as his performance itself - his debut performance was as much a celebration of his remarkable accomplishment as it was the story of Billy Elliot.

Ty - sweet - Just a sweet kid who puts on an amazing show - he is absolutely at the top of his game right now with his Electricity being a highlight among highlights.

Noah - winsome - somewhere in the first act, this word came to mind as I watched Noah's debut performance - totally charmed by his performance, and can't wait to see him again! He has it all - great singing voice, great acting and of course, there's the dance!

Zach - sheer determination - In some ways, Zach reminded me very much of the original Billy Elliot, Jamie Bell, with his serious, focused, determined attitude to make it despite everything happening to him and around him. Loved the finale where Zach became Zach, a kid who absolutely loves to dance, and it shows...

So, it was quite a weekend, seeing four unique interpretations of the role - all of them special and bringing their own brand of magic to this amazing show.

Again, I want to mention Janet Dickinson as Mrs. W. I had not realized that she had just started in the role earlier that week (Thursday, I believe). She has a beautiful singing voice, and is a great all around performer. Everyone seeing the tour will be in for a real treat. She is definitely a new favorite of mine.

I forgot to mention Tim Funnel in my review - he is from the original London cast, and is currently playing scab and posh dad. His posh dad is very funny and always gets a great laugh - I see he has added his personal touch to the role, the way he did in London, and you just have to see him "run" across the stage to believe it - too funny! Great to see Tim on stage again! Well done!

And I would also like to mention music Director Susan Draus who has been with the tour since it started - have always enjoyed chatting with her, and it's fun to see a woman at the helm of this great show! Well done!

And lastly, I would like to the thank the BE friends I met in Louisville - both old and new. It makes these trips so much more fun when I can meet up with others who share a passion for the show.

Now I'm really done... I think!

Thanks for reading!
maria

[Rich B]

Nice assessment of the Billys, Maria. No way I could pick a favorite - each one impressed me so much last weekend. I'm still buzzing at how strong this tour cast is!

[Dancer]

Thanks everyone for your reviews from Louisville, they really brought the show to life and I could imagine being there with you. It certainly sounds as if the tour is going from strength to strength with no end to the line of brilliant Billys and Michaels! I loved your descriptions of all the new cast, Maria .

[TravisSMcClain]

This blogger generally liked the show, though was troubled by, as he puts it, the "subplots" and the portrayal of the character of Michael:

http://travismcclain.blogspot.com/2012/ ... sical.html

I've noticed my view count for that post was conspicuously high, and it seems a significant amount of that can be attributed to your link here, so firstly allow me to thank you for reading and sharing! I saw a few reactions to my review and I thought I'd offer a response in the interest of discourse.

I wonder who 'Ty Forman' is? Dies he sell grills under his own name?

Good catch! I have fixed that, though I discovered I got it right in the very beginning and the end of the post, and I spelled his name correctly when I assigned the tag labels. Why I botched it in that middle portion, I have no idea!

This blogger admits no previously knowledge of the story and therefore cannot place Michael's role in the context of 1984 northern England. I can understand the context, having lived through it myself, and I can understand this bloggers difficulty understanding since he/she did not.

That's not quite accurate, actually. It's true I had no idea what the story was about going into it, but I am familiar with the era itself - though certainly not as well as you or anyone else who was there.

I think the musical gets it right for a stage production; it makes the role comical enough that those who do not understand the context can at least enjoy it, and poignant enough that those who can get it -do. To read too much psychology into it is not really any use. The film version is better suited for that, where Michael is in much more pain than in the musical. (In fact, when I first saw the film, I was relieved that Michael appears in the final scene, happy and having 'found himself' just as Billy had; I was afraid he would have descended into a living hell or ended it all - a feeling I never get in the musical).

All fair points, and I should have added that Michael was a scene-stealing hit with the rest of the audience. I think for me, it's simply a matter of the fact that I've grown very tired of gender-bending characters like Michael only existing as comedic relief in stories. It's as though the message is, "See? There's nothing threatening here. You can just laugh at people like this!" and that wears on me.

It's a rather widespread matter in entertainment, though, and hardly something unique to Billy Elliot - another point I should likely have emphasized.

It is interesting to read the reviews from different parts of America, which is less homogenous as a society than it may think it is. Yet, this musical seems to leave behind it a warm feeling in every city, which means it is a great success!

Don't forget; my review wasn't just from America, but from Kentucky! I think it may be worth mentioning here for the sake of context that, much to my chagrin, much of the stereotypes you may have of the South are actually grounded in reality. I'm a rather liberal guy in a sea of very conservative people, and this has colored my outlook on many issues including LGBTQ equality. I very likely took into the musical a heightened sensitivity to these issues. I think it was a matter for me that, knowing the kinds of people in the audience (yes, even the theater-going cultured people here), they were laughing at, rather than with, Michael and the community he represents.

Does this blogger sleep with a dictionary under his pillow?

If you asked my old classmates, they would be quick to share with you that they've shared that suspicion. I've never slept with a dictionary under my pillow, but I do confess to having consulted one often as a child, prompted by the comic books I was reading. I wanted to really understand what I was reading!

I didn't think the blogger did a bad review to be honest - apart from mangling the concept of transvestism & transsexualism. To say he went in cold and with low expectations the show really won him over but he had questions about certain aspects of the show that were unfamiliar to him.

I've read back over what I wrote and I'm not sure I see the "mangling." If anything, I may have made it confusing as I tried to clarify the distinctions of gender identity and sexual orientation, specifically as I fear that the character of Michael muddies that for the lay audience with hetero/cis-normative views on such matters.

I honestly have no idea how the concept of men dressing as women goes down in mainstream US entertainment (I'm not talking drag queens here). In the UK, particularly from the 60's - 80's it was very common on mainstream UK tv (no pun intended) and quite often the men doing it were not gay. Men playing women just seems to make Brits laugh for some reason and of course, at Christmas, it is the mainstay of that most family friendly entertainment - the pantomime.

The reason is that it's incongruous with the aforementioned hetero/cis-normative paradigm that insists people with male bodies are attracted to people with female bodies and dress in a manner consistent with masculine aesthetics, etc. In general, that often means that the straight male who dresses in women's clothing is either mocking the paradigm itself or, at times, those who do not conform to it. In Michael's case, I believe the point was to challenge that paradigm, but it's again done in a way that marginalizes the character and reduces him to a sort of side show.

So the fact that Michael dresses in women's clothing may or may not be related to his sexuality but the two are not inextricably linked. The only reason it's in there is because it plays well to a British audience, which might of course be confusing to different cultures.

Again, I readily concede that cross dresser =/= gay. Michael is both, however, and because he's played just for laughs in this story, it just felt to me that it was somewhat dismissive of the LGBTQ community.

[Rich B]

Thanks for your comments, Travis, I enjoyed reading them. Despite the heat, I really enjoyed my time in Louisville. I thought the audience reaction to the show was very positive. Add to that some very friendly and helpful staff members at the Kentucky Center and outstanding acoustics in the theatre, I left Louisville on a high note.

regards,
Rich

[TravisSMcClain]

Thanks for your comments, Travis, I enjoyed reading them. Despite the heat, I really enjoyed my time in Louisville. I thought the audience reaction to the show was very positive. Add to that some very friendly and helpful staff members at the Kentucky Center and outstanding acoustics in the theatre, I left Louisville on a high note.

regards,
Rich

Yeah, you definitely caught the brunt of our summer! I've always enjoyed the Center for the Arts, and I was pleased to see they've done a solid job keeping up with the place over the years since I was last there. It's very encouraging to hear such nice things about the facility and its staff from someone on your side of the stage!

[Rich B]

It's very encouraging to hear such nice things about the facility and its staff from someone on your side of the stage!

Not sure what side of the stage you refer to, but i was in the audience that weekend.

[TravisSMcClain]

It's very encouraging to hear such nice things about the facility and its staff from someone on your side of the stage!

Not sure what side of the stage you refer to, but i was in the audience that weekend.

My mistake; I misunderstood what the significance of the staff was. Still, it's nice to hear positive remarks about the facility!