MickeyJo, i think this was one of your most thorough and thoughtful reviews. I've noticed that often, when you don't love a show you wanted to love, it brings out the best of you as a critic and a theater fan. Lovely, thoughtful review. 10 stars.
I really appreciate the respect and fairness you show even when outlining criticisms, and the fact that you give full credit where it's due while offering enough detail for us to understand specific weak points without condemning the whole thing. I also find your commentaries incredibly informative because your knowledge of all the elements that create a production allow us to see under the hood and grasp how those elements interact to produce the overall identity of the show. I'm not even that interested in musical theatre, but I love how much I learn from your insights, and how much wit and intelligence you bring. You're a great reviewer and advocate for theatre-makers. Thanks!
There's actually a wonderful Playbill interview video with Bill Berloni about the various animals that he's trained for the theater, he trained the dogs for Gypsy! He talks at length about how difficult it was to have a live lamb on stage during a production of Gypsy that he worked on in the 90s, they had to drive hours away and get a new one super frequently because they grow FAST! For this production he vowed, *no live lambs*. I highly recommend the video, it's a great watch.
This is an excellent and very fair review. I saw it yesterday and while I loved it, it was flawed. However, Audra's arc absolutely broke my heart in a way that none of the other dozen productions or actresses I've seen have ever done. I was truly devastated by her final scene with Herbie and Rose's Turn. Also, shout out to my favorite lighting designers who came out of retirement for this show. That was a treat.
Before seeing this version of Gypsy I expected Audra’s vocals would be magnificent. But I wasn’t prepared for her acting to be so incredible. She took my breath away. I understand your concerns, but I this is one of the best performances I have seen on Broadway. And I’ve been seeing Broadway shows for over 50 years. The rest of the performers were also excellent, and hearing a full orchestra was a real treat
With the exception of Merman I for one have seen literally everyone play Rose.From Lansbury to Lupone with Tyne Daley, Linda Lavin,Betty Buckley,Bernadette Peters...etc. Audra MacDonald is a revelation in the role. She makes the role her own because she doesn't try to fit in any of the steel cast molds that preceded her. I for one thought she was a great Momma Rose and can't wait to see it again.
the colorism conversation around June/Louise and the replacement of the black newsboys with white men was completely noticeable - and jarring! even in Act II around the conversations of hair with the blonde wig for Louise. and Audra's "too brash, too soon" is very much not the vibe I got, it is very much being a Black mother in America. there's so much nuance, cultural specificities that me as a non-POC that I can't even begin to unpack them all
There's one line near the end, where Gypsy is putting on makeup to go to the party and Rose comments that she doesn't need so much blush, because "You've always had good color," that took on so much more meaning.
"we have to talk about the fact that within the musical theatre canon, there are not enough roles written for sopranos who aren't young ingenues." Yes! Speaking as a middle-aged soprano, thank you so much for saying this. Composers, take note: our voices don't all drop after 40.
MickeyJo, I think you did a very fair job articulating what I felt after I saw this production in December. It was preview #3 so I chalked up some of my "meh" reaction to setting the bar too high and seeing it when the kinks were still being worked out. I adore Audra and was never able to see her perform on stage before this opportunity and I have to say I also felt the choices for her singing certain numbers to be... odd? I love her voice and I think they could have highlighted her strengths instead of trying to shoehorn her talent into a style that exposes her weaknesses more. While there were some great moments with the kid cast and I will ALWAYS come to anything Lesli Margarita shows up in, I don't think this show was greater than the sum of its parts. I also saw this show the same day that I saw Sunset BLVD. and Gypsy just can't hold a candle to what they are doing at the St. James across the street.
Great review, MJ! I saw the show right after it closed for Xmas week. I don’t love the story of Gypsy, and I wouldn’t have bought tickets with another cast. But I am one of those aging lyric sopranos who longs for us to be given more roles, and I was absolutely dying to see what Audra brought. And for me, she ABSOLUTELY delivered, and the production delivered in giving her room to do so. I must admit, I thought the sets were kind of cool, but you’re right that they were spare. (You didn’t mention the ridiculous car!) I loved Tulsa‘s song and dance, and I’m so glad you pointed it out. He was AMAZING. But in the end, I wonder how many people will simply love this production for the same 2 reasons I did, which are: 1: I love Audra’s voice and I’m **so tired** of brassy screaming belters. I *love* hearing her sing these songs. I cried at the end of everything‘s coming up roses and Rose’s Turn, because I thought the way she delivered her big numbers was extraordinarily beautiful, vocally nuanced, and moving. But in addition, #2: I find Gypsy on paper to be a portrayal of, well, just a mean lady. (It’s interesting to me that you mentioned that this production doesn’t have her develop from being understandable to being horrible. I guess the other productions that I have seen over the years had the same problem, so I did didn’t realize there was any other way to do it ) When Patti LuPone or Ethel Merman played this one-dimensional awful person, I didn’t like listening to their voices, so there was nothing redeeming in Rose for me. But Audra has this gorgeous voice, and Audra is, of course, a black woman. So suddenly the narrative moved for me from “this crazy very unpleasant stage mom destroys her kids’ lives”, to a *heart-rending* portrait of what would happen if an incredible singer was born too early and wasn’t able to have the career that she deserved because of racism, and the pathos of that loss is enough to drive her crazy. THAT is an interesting story to me! I feel that the casting of Audra brought both the vocal style *and* the social subtext that made this so much more meaningful to me than gypsy with all white people. I don’t disagree with the things that you said didn’t work; they just weren’t enough to stop me from absolutely basking in Audra’s performance, and the story it was telling.
I saw the second preview performance and gave it a solid B. I preferred the Patti Lupone version, especially the scene where the secretary asks June her age and she replies "nine" in a deadpan way that made it clear she was in on the farce. The humor came not only from her delivery but also from the secretary’s bemused reaction. In Audra's version, the humor leans more on the secretary's response, and it’s ambiguous whether June truly believes she’s still nine. Additionally, in Patti’s version, the actress playing June dropped the child voice when not in front of an audience in the show, effectively foreshadowing her eventual escape from pretending, whereas the June in Audra's version maintained the high-pitched voice even in private. Another great production was Imelda's in the West End, which did a better job conveying she was trying to convince herself maybe more so than Louise during Everything Coming Up Roses. It was a layered scene in Imelda's version as it felt like she was both coming up with a plan in real-time and convincing herself it was a good one. Louise was more of an afterthought versus a focus in that scene. In Audra's version, it came off more as it's time to sing that song everyone knows now.
We’ll agree to disagree. While there’s something I’d say is missing from this production in my opinion (I think it def has to do with sound design!) I didn’t hate the direction. I think the fact that people aren’t grasping what’s happening when Rose replaces the young black news boys with white ones and then pushes Louise to the back and hides her with the flag is also commentary within itself lol how many white people are oblivious to the things black people have to do to be successful I think some people missing the point was expected. As a black woman I understood immediately and while that act itself is cruel it doesn’t need to be chilling to me to make that point I don’t think they were going to “chilling” it was heartbreakingly realistic I like that this production didn’t hit us over the head about racism I like that George doesn’t treat the audience like we’re 5 it’s subtle in a you get it or you don’t and if you don’t maybe it’s a reason to self reflect. Also re: Rose at the start mannn that lady is a black mother down hahaha like going into Uncle Jockos like that is exactly what I’d expect her to do what’s interesting is by the end when she cries in Louise arms that such a real experience at least to me who grew up with a mother that was tough and didn’t show emotion till later because as black women we are always taught to be “strong” and I think that moment of vulnerability at the end just added to the whole story of Rose which is while I didn’t agree with ALOT of her choices I did understand her. Just my two cents.
PREACH!!!! We need more legit voices in the industry! As a legit/crossover singer myself, we need more of this. You hit the nail all the way on the head either we are Christine Daae or bust. What about the legit altos/true mezzos of the world?
@ It didn’t wow me. I was glad to see this review. It puts things together in a way I couldn’t have articulated, but overall, I was underwhelmed by most of it. Pacing was quite slow.
I have so much respect for you, forever and always. I appreciate the depth to which you took this show in and have so thoughtfully crafted this review, that said... I am stunned. Gagged even. I feel like many of the observations you have made about Audra's characterization of Rose were sticking points for me watching Imelda (who is my favorite modern actor, period, stop, etc.). I felt Imelda was too much too soon, and her arch was too small, she started too big. Of your complaints about Audra, I find this one to be most surprising and wholly disjointed from my viewing. Her performance was intricate to me, small in the right places, and thoughtful first. This is live theatre, so maybe she's performing more variably than we're accounting for, but I am stunned at this assessment of her and of this staging in general!!!! I found Audra wholly compelling, charming at times and terrifying; I liked her legit vocals, and was surprised by how much I found her vocal performance fit. The cast!!!! Woods was incredible. I am so lost in how you wound up where you did with this take, but still holding space for you. I don't agree with you on this one Mickey, I really don't agree. Xoxo.
Ahhh...a rare instance where I disagree with you! I've seen Tyne, Bernadette, Patti, Audra, and Imelda in this role (in addition to many other regional and community productions) and I have to say this production blew me away. The subtle shift of having a woman and children of color in the roles totally changed the perspective for me and I thought Wolfe's direction was spot-on. It's one of the few productions I've seen where there's real chemistry between Rose and Herbie - and with it being an interracial relationship at that time added another layer of complexity for the couple. Audra is giving a master class and left it all on the stage the night I saw it. The minimalist sets didn't bother me at all - I go for the story and the performances, not the sets, and I don't need fancy sets or gimmicks like projections to distract from a good book and music. All that said, one of the things I love about theater is that we all see things differently as we all come to it with our own perspectives...that's what makes it fun!
This was my first time seeing Gypsy and I was impressed with the material/show, but not as much the production. I loved Jordan Tyson! Maybe in 10-15 years, I would love to see Lindsay Mendez take on Rose!!
MickeyJo, I thought you were going to agree my review of the production, given the title of your review. I, too was disappointed, but my disappointment goes much further. I saw an early performance during previews and shared my opinion on social media: Gypsy - looks like a lousy touring production. Audra is wrong for the role. Best Louise-transforming-into-Gypsy - that we've ever seen. Good orchestra. Terrible choreography. SAVE YOUR MONEY. For me, Gypsy was a disappointment. Audra's singing just didn't cut it (that annoying vibrato), and her acting ranged from A to B. Supporting cast was good, especially Louise and her transformation into a Josephine Baker-like Gypsy Rose Lee. Until the "I'm beautiful" moment, you never imagined that she could possibly transform into a star. Production was just average - could have been a touring show. The new choreography was terrible, but the Orchestra was fantastic. I blame George Wolfe for the lack of focus and the general mediocrity. I had heard rumors about how Wolfe would handle a black Rose, and I actually found the concept interesting and plausible: - Rose had been married to both black and white men. While June was light-skinned with curly hair, Louise was dark-skinned with traditional black hair. - Herbie got them gigs because he pushed pictures of June to the theater owners, who thought they were getting an all-white act. - Grantziger wants June because he can pass her off as white. - Tulsa rehearses with Louise because she's a good dancer, and there seems to be chemistry. - Tulsa runs off with June because she can ultimately pass as a white and ensure success in the act. - Louise transforms not into a traditional Gypsy Rose Lee but a Josephine Baker. If true, Wolfe abandoned these ideas and went for blind color casting without explaining how a black/white act would have been in mainstream Vaudeville at the time. I would have loved to see the former. I know many people are raving about Audra's performance, but I was not impressed. For some reason, she plays Rose as a hunchback old lady with a weird southern accent (Rose is from Seattle). If they had put a grey wig on her head and given her a walker, she could have been one of the old ladies from THE PRODUCERS. And the voice is all wrong - sounding more operatic than belty. I especially felt that way about EVERYTHING'S COMING UP ROSES. I know she is beloved in the community, and I wanted to like her... Take another look at Imelda Staunton's performance as Rose in Gypsy. That continues to impress me. IMHO
I totally agree. My expectations were high - too high perhaps. The sophistication inherent in the text is extraordinary but its brilliance and depth are not apparent in this production. The great Audra is miscast or misdirected - I’m not certain which. I wanted to like her but she just didn’t work for me. Yes the production was misguided - there was an opportunity to do something distinctive and it failed to manage that. Louise is a lost opportunity too. June did work though. The issue of “colour” could have been handled in the chilling way you indicated but wasn’t. And there were problems with that set. It did look cheap but not in the right way. Yes, it was a production unworthy of its cast! Your review was brilliant! Dazzling in fact!
I loved the 90s movie version of Gypsy and watched it a lot as a teenager, but I always felt the pacing at the end was weird -- it went through her rise to fame way too fast. I think it's just an inherent issue in the show -- my theory is that, in the fifties, it worked OK, because it was, "...and then she became the Gypsy Rose Lee we all know and love," since Gypsy was still a well-known figure at that point. Nowadays, we need a lot more exposition of what's happening there.
Thank you for this thoughtful review! I had the opportunity to see this production a few days ago and had a fabulous time, in large part because I was ecstatic to finally get to see Audra act on stage. (Had seen her in concert previously!) Although I'm familiar with previous cast recordings, I'd never seen Gypsy performed before and loved it, but I appreciate your perspective regarding some of the elements that didn't totally cohere for me, particularly regarding the pacing of Louise's development in the second act. Mostly I'm commenting just to echo your praise for Jordan Tyson, who I thought was astoundingly good as June. A dynamite comedic and vocal presence who absolutely inhabited her character!
I have been saying this about Audra’s Rose since the casting was announced and got bowled down for it, so it’s gratifying yo hear you say this. To be clear, none doubts her astounding talent. I just think she isn’t a scrappy junkyard dog, and Rose needs that imo.
Great review, spot on! My all time favorite (have seen all Broadway except Ethel Merman) was Angela Lansbury. This production did appear like it was headed on a bus and truck tour.
This is a superb break down of the production. Well done. I do wish you had mentioned Imelda Staunton's version. Even though it never made it to broadway (they tried) it is the only stage version that is available to see on streaming and dvd. I have seen a lot of Roses. Australia's Gloria Dawn (brilliant, even though she was dying at the time), Betty Buckley, Linda Lavin (also needed to be mentioned), Bernadette Peters, Patti (eat and tug the scenery) Lu Pone. yet Imelda Staunton who I saw on stage and have the version on blu ray etc constantly surprises me as the best "Rose" I have ever seen. Staunton came closer than the Broadway dames and it was more an actors performance (I imagine Lansbury would be the closest to it). The show has never found a successful film to give it what it should-yet !!!!(Cynthia Erivo under Lin Manuel Miranda's direction would be interesting). Again this is a terrific painting of a production I have never had much interest in coming across the world to see. Maybe a segment on all the productions and movies would be very good.
Interesting review. It makes total sense to me that Audra's core characteristics get in the way of her playing a real down-and-dirty role. Audra has a natural class, dignity and integrity. That's partly who she is, and partly the persona generated by all the previous roles she's played. That's a lot to overcome.
Vocally, the role of Rose calls for a trumpet. Audra brought a cello. Unlike you, I loved her acting chops in the context of Wolfe's production. But musically, the Emperor is naked. I'll never listen to this cast recording.
I saw Patti LuPone, who’s my favourite performer, 4 times so I don’t feel the need to see anyone else. I love Audra, but, she’s not that much of a draw to see her in this. I also find that the over praise from a lot of people who have seen her in Gypsy, seems forced to me. I feel they wanted to love her in this, but, ended up only liking her but don’t want to say it for the backlash they’d get.
@ … I did see Bernadette and she always looked like she was going to pop a vein struggling to suck in enough breath to belt out a note. My only regret was not seeing Tune Daly!
I'm glad you liked Danny in this production. I Thank You for your thoughtful and considered review that is NOT just a slam-dunk, knee-jerk reaction rave. It looks like this revival exhausted you. What I get from your review is that the direction and production elements don't mesh; are not cohesive; resulting in a "half-baked" production. Yes, "GYPSY" is one of the greatest musicals ever written, and Audra is BEYOND phenomenally talented. That does not mean that every production of "GYPSY" is going to HIT a home run out of the park; for a variety of different reasons; all of which you pointed out. Thank You.
You lost me almost entirely when you opened up saying that there was no perspective. The perspective is that Rose in this production is a Black woman, she is a Black mother trying to break her children into entertainment at a time where she was not welcome in most places. Audra depends on code-switching pretty clearly in the early scenes. The way she speaks at Jocko's (a Black entertainment venue) is very different from how she speaks and behaves at the vaudeville houses. There is nothing naive about this Rose, she is world-weary and knows the pain that comes with being a Black woman trying to be an entertainer. I don't think Audra is playing the role brash from the beginning at all, she is playing the role as "I'm comfortable being demanding in this building" at Jocko's. But you immediately see her withdrawn and gentler when she goes to the vaudeville house and runs into Herbie. Because that is a place she is *not* comfortable. I don't see how you can say she's playing it too brash, but then saying she has a naivety. Those two things do not make sense together. The way colorism has found its way into the production is a stroke of brilliance. Of course she would push her lighter-skinned daughter to the forefront and try to make her a star, she thinks that would be more acceptable. Even the delivery of the lines about the blonde wig make Louise "looks like...a star" take on new meaning. I don't see how you can say there is no perspective, when it is abundantly clear from the first scene that the entire perspective is seeing this show through a racial lens it has not been seen through before.
@@zachhhhhhhhhhh326 if you put in the work to see it through that lens, then sure! The production doesn't do *nearly* enough to articulate this I'm sorry to say.
@@MickeyJoTheatre I find this a baffling response. There are clear moments that you point out in your review that clarify this perspective. A production does not need to hit you over the head with it to make it clear. And as white people, I don't actually think it's up to us to say whether or not the production does enough to make it clear. The choices made are intentional and thoughtful, the casting and decisions made illuminate layers of the text heretofore not seen because they were not being delivered by actors of color. If anything, it's disappointing that *you* didn't put in the work to see it through that lens and instead seemingly expected someone to turn towards the audience and say "And THAT was a microaggression."
@@MickeyJoTheatreAgain, I agree with you. I appreciate and also instantly thought of some of the perspectives that zach326 expresses here, in real time, while I was in my seat. But I found that I was trying hard too justify certain choices instead of the more preferred feeling that I was intentionally being invited to consider a different perspective, through the creative team's choices. To more simply reiterate, the perspectives of colorism, racism etc felt more like something I wanted to see instead of simply just being cruel reality of the world that Rose and her family were surviving in.
@@zachhhhhhhhhhh326 I appreciate your passion in articulating perspectives of colorism, segregation, microagressions, etc... But I don't find Mickey Jo's perspective "baffling". As I've said in my previous reply, I also felt the nuances expressed in this production to be far too hazy, grey and politely presented for the impact that we are assuming onto the material. And I say this as a very proud, strong & resistant to racism Black man. You are absolutely right: theater and art in general doesn't always have to be hit you over the head literal. I actually think that many Broadway shows still lack the courage to be more thoughtful. But the extreme opposite can also be true. If something is too subtle, then it can do a disservice to the important stakes that we as audience members should be forced to confront. "Gypsy" was created for audiences of a certain time. And it wasn't created for phenotypes or even voice types like Audra and Joy in mind. So without boldly tweaking the book, the perspectives or even the musical presentation, the subtle changes are way too quiet. It's like taking a brand new 2025 camera but still using old, incompatible lense from 1925. The picture is a little hazy. I respect the entire team wanting to have a more purist approach to the material, but again, the material was written in a context where Audra and company were not the considered the accepted standard for "pure". Sunset Blvd is a great example of a revival of a classic show that elevated the material by embracing the obvious differences that exist about its current star and its current audience. I still enjoyed Gypsy though and think all who can, should experience it.
I don't think that the Mama Rose role in Gypsy, *necessarily* needs a "belt" tone, but I would argue that it requires an earthy, squalid, street-wise tone; this can be acidic, growly, bawling, or any other down-and-dirty vocal quality you can think of; my main problem with Audra in this role is that she's uptown in her manner and voice training, and it simply doesn't translate. Rose isn't a lead character, arguably - she's a 'character part' in a lead role - something that the afore-mentioned actresses who have taken the role could handle without making it look like they were struggling to fit the part.
I saw Gypsy at the majestic a couple weeks ago and I wasn’t blown away the way I thought I would have been. I’ve never seen any gypsy performance before in my life so I went in blind but I didn’t love it. Everything you said makes perfect sense.
Allow me to be a little bit controversial by mentioning the movie, and not any particular stage version. In my opinion, Rosalind Russell was number 1. No strong pyrotechnical singing virtuoso for which the role may have been created, but the fact that she couldn't sing at a high octane level made her the best of them all because it provides stronger insight into why Rose and her off key talent damned her to being a far better stage mother than a talented and believable performer herself. Great movie, and a great review MickeyJo!
@2:06 the last Gypsy revival was over 16 years ago in 2008 and I think it's ok to revive a musical the classic/original way without new messages since there's a new generation of theatergoers seeing GYPSY for the first time. This was the first production of GYPSY I had ever seen and simply hearing the original orchestrations and seeing a Broadway icon/legend perform live! :) I do, however, agree with you that if a revival is going to happen again in a short span of years (ie the 2003 and 2008 revivals) then there should be something different or perhaps a new message. I also think where you sit matters. I first watched this show from rear mezzanine aka cheap seats and then watched it again from side orchestra row M and boy what a difference! I think the upgrade is worth every penny.
Girl same. I feel so validated hearing you articulate what I felt. The show was ok, solid 6/10 which is far far faaaarrrrrr from what Gypsy deserves. Audra did the bullish and charming parts of Rose amazingly but none of the threatening and unsettling elements (I saw it in previews, it might have changed). Joy Woods was ok, she felt like she went from A to D without passing through the rest of the arc. She just walks into the burlesque theater and she’s a different person. And the sets, oh my who was the idiot who placed touring size sets into this massive theater. Most scenes felt empty, just a vacant stage with two or three cardboard walls on it. Just bad. Don’t be discouraged, if this is your first time seeing Gypsy you’ll have a good time but if your expectations are high, your are not going to be satisfied.
Baby June was a piss . It was the first time I actually got thru the obnoxious Dainty June numbers without too much cringe. This review was exactly what I thought. The character Gypsy herself was kinda blah. I wish she slowly improved her strip routine , getting better and better with time. I never really believed she became the Star stripper. Audra's heart-felt acting floored me at times. Thankyou for such a well thought out and honest review!
@MickeyJoTheatre I agree with you. Audra was stellar as she always is. Even for the almost impossibly high (but well earned) expectations that audiences have for her, she always meets them. But I too was a little underwhelmed by the production overall. I feel almost blasphemous even typing that because I have such PROFOUND respect and admiration for the legendary George C. Wolfe and his phenomal & brilliant approach to theater. Maybe the intention was for this production to feel more like a raw bts peak into to decline of Vaudvevile and less like the well polished, more literally delivered spectacles that we've come to expect from today's musicals and ticket prices. If that's the case, I respect that intention. It was a solid show. Not bad by any means. But with this casting and production team, I think I was hoping for a Gypsy that gave the story refreshing energy & a more thoughtful and bold perspective. Phenomenal cast. But the show came across as being more of a safe homage more than a necessary revival. Which again, feels wild to say considering that it was still very good!
I am an Audra STAN. It was a little distracting when she switched to head voice but hell, She's AUDRA! I accepted it and she acted her face off!!! There were things about the production I didn't love, but overall, LOVED seeing Audra in this iconic role!
I always enjoy your vlogs when you're in NY. But I see from the background that you're already back home. Did you really jet to NYC just to see one show?!
I thought Audra was excellent. Maybe it's because it's the first time I've seen a production of Gypsy, but there wasn't a second where I felt like she was miscast. I also thought her vocals were beautiful.
I think that's a big factor here. I'd only seen the movie version some 25 years ago, and came away hugely impressed by the performances (particularly Audra and Jordan) while either missing entirely many of the aspects Mickey Jo highlights as problems with this particular staging (because I didn't have anything to compare them to) or seeing them as inherent to the material.
My only previous experience with Gypsy are the various cast albums and the pro-shot of Imelda Staunton (which I loved). I think I prefer Staunton's take on the character (have a hard time imagining anyone past or future measuring up to her) but Audra was still great and her singing was indeed beautiful. And I was thrilled just to see such a classic show live for the first time.
@@yankee04I saw Nicole in Sunset. She was very compelling but sounds like a singer from “Six”. I don’t think it was best actress great but I liked the production as a whole.
I saw the original with Ethel Merman and there was no layering of energy and discovery. Merman just planted herself center stage and SANG! From the beginning the mother was the strongest character in a show named GYPSY. There was always an imbalance. If there isn’t a strong Gypsy actress you forget what the title is.
Totally agree with you. Although I thought Audra was amazing her performance didn’t fit into this production. I was also incredibly disappointed in Louise. She came across as a minor character in the show which totally leaves a giant whole in the production. And yes, I was blown away by Jordon Tyson’s portrayal of June. I’ve seen 3 Broadway productions of Gypsy but this is the first time I felt June’s fierce ambition to succeed as an entertainer by getting as far away from her mother as possible. It would have been more satisfying to have seen a show down between Rose and June at the end of the show.
Just saw it today, loved it! Audra is so amazing. The only thing that felt underwhelming was the sets & customs, which both felt flat. Loved everything else.
Omg thank you for bringing up the role inequality in musical theater. It makes me want to tear my hair out on a weekly basis. Forget classical soprano roles. I'll settle for ANYTHING more than the one or two substantial female roles most shows offer. I do mostly community theater, and IMO that setting is even worse for women. Auditions are always cutthroat for those couple of female roles, while the director often has to struggle to fill the spread of male roles. A guy who can halfway act and sing gets to write his own ticket, at least in my region.
Audra is in her own league. Comparing her to the others who have played this role is a disservice to them. She totally channels this character and makes it her own. A stellar and compelling interpretation.
Thank you for this! I had many similar feelings to yours. I was particularly disappointed in the lack of arc afforded to Louise, when there's so much to play within the material. I feel that she is done a great disservice with the new staging of "All I Need is the Girl". Normally she's down front alongside Tulsa, and we really see her emotional arc play out as she imagines being his dance partner. I think she's left in the shadows far too long in this version, only to really be seen at the tail end when she joins him for the last few bars. It really lessens the impact of the end of the act when, not only has her sister run away, but it's with her secret crush. The Strip segment is equally frustrating. I'm sorry to say that Joy being in when I saw the show didn't help any of this. I imagine her understudy is doing just as lovely of a job, but the direction she's been taken in just doesn't give her the build-up that the character needs for the end of the show.
I don't think that every revival needs to try and reinvent the wheel. Most of us were not around to see Ethel Merman do it and if (if) that's the ultimate version of Gypsy, its worthwhile to try in some ways to replicate that experience. Don't forget the members of the audience who aren't familiar with it.
I'm so glad I wasn't the only one disappointed by it, it felt dated and slow - I kept dissociating because I was so bored. The cast was great, I just couldn't get into the story at all.
I know the show so I’m watching this review. I’m seeing it on Wednesday(a $20 passport ticket) so I’m excited for this review. I saw Kevin Csolack in The Outsiders, so I’m excited to see him in this
As someone who largely agrees with your take on this production, I still had a WONDERFUL night at the theater. Worth every penny of the $195 I splurged on orchestra seats! So if you have tickets and might be discouraged by reviews, its still a very good show!
I paid a lot of money to see it, and wanted to leave at intermission. I stuck it out - and regretted staying. lol. I would go as far as saying it was bad. So disappointing considering the hype.
Saw Gypsy in early previews. I was very underwhelmed. I feel like most people are raving because it’s Audra and giving the production a pass. NYT Critic’s Pick, which It doesn’t need to sell tickets. Thank you for delving into things. I had never seen Gypsy before so had no preconceived notions. I thought Act 1 dragged. I looked at my watch a number of times, Don’t know if that was fixed by the end of previews. Some of the voice issues were distracting especially at the beginning. I had high expectations and they were not met. Definitely not exceeded. She passed right in front of me with the dog since she entered left orchestra, break in mid orchestra and down to the stage. I enjoyed Danny Burstein and the solo tap sequence. Would not see this production again. Not having seen Idina Menzel yet, so far I am hoping Nicole S wins the Tony. She is far more compelling. That, and Sunset over Gypsy for Best Revival.
I sat in pretty much the same spot, @yankee04, and noticed several people around me glancing at their watches throughout. Having seen Gypsy post opening night, and Redwood in previews, I'd also give Nicole the Tony.
I thought Audra was great. I thought the direction was terrible (my sixth time seeing Gypsy, BTW). The direction missed on important moments, like All I Need Is the Girl and "Mama, I'm a pretty girl). Herbie was great as well. But on wow, the direction just kept missing throughout the show.
In terms of Audra's abruptness, I would be curious to know how you compare it to Imelda Staunton's portrayal. My first experience of the musical was from the proshot with Imedla, and it is still my absolute favourite version of this musical, so it sounds like I may love Audra's version.
I really liked this production, but I left feeling like it was so good because it was Gypsy and Gypsy is always good, and not because this production in particular was the absolute best version of it. i've also been put off by some of the mega-fans who comment on every review that is anything less than 'this is the greatest production of all time' to argue that actually everything about it was perfect and you don't agree you are wrong. I have not seen any other show this season have fans attack other people for their reviews, but I see it in practically every Gypsy review. Even positive reviews are getting backlash for having even minor critiques and I find it bizarre.
One of my main issues was a lack of contrast. Making June's numbers screechy and obnoxious belies the idea that she's the talented one who impressed a producer. It gets cheap laughs but then you have to sit through 20 minutes of bad vaudeville before the "pay off" of the Toreadorables being... screechy and obnoxious. Louise was kept one note at the performance I saw, lacking the growth and humor that the character needs to develop in act two. Audra was trying something new in every scene but the rest of the production wasn't giving her anything to fight against.
Gypsy was based upon Gypsy Rose Lee's memoirs and minimizes the character of her sister June, who went on in real life to have a very successful Broadway and Hollywood career as June Havoc. June disagreed with how she and her mother were portrayed in the memoirs and in Gypsy and so June herself wrote her memoirs in 2 parts (Early Havoc, and More Havoc) and reveals the family dynamics from her perspective. She sees Mamma Rose and Gypsy Rose Lee as cut from the same cloth, both monsters to some degree. They are well written books and interesting reads, I would recommend to any fan of Gypsy. I remember both June and Gypsy as being talk show regulars (never together) when I was young. June outlived her older sister by 40 years and while both sisters were well known throughout their lives, June certainly had the bigger career.
everyone LOVES this show, your review is ON POINT. I found Audra miscast and found her lack of belting and shifting into soprano operatic voice distracting . Uncke Jocko was a stiff. Tulsa's dance seemingly lacked hetero virility. To change the choreography is a gamble which failed, the lack of the stobe light transformation was disappointing with what they did in its place. June and Louise were ok, we all love Herbie yet it seemed the chemistry between him and Audra's Rose was not flowing. As you state the show ought to be better , though it was not bad. I saw other versjions and in order of favorites...1 patti lupone, 2 tyne daly 3 bernadette peters 4 audra.
Thanks so much for the review. i'm def going to see gypsy over sunset boulvard because of audra mcdonald, but only will go see gypsy because of mandy gonzalez. gypsy got more outstanding reviews compared to sunset. i think gypsy will get best revival tony award win this season. Gypsy is soldout or close to it for months already.
I really appreciated you detailed synopsis of Gypsy. I've seen all of the NYC productions of the show, except Merman, and various filmed productions. Although I agree that there are some flaws, the current revival is the most emotionally impactful production I've ever seen (and now, 6 times) with Lansbury a close second (although this production is more complex). Every book scene is richer and deeper than it's ever been because of Audra MacDonald and George C. Wolfe's work. I disagree that the production has nothing to say, or that it's "half-backed." The changes in approach are subtle but significant. A moment such as that when Louise is forced to play the rear-end of a cow, which in previous productions was always a throw-away joke, becomes completely humiliating in this revival, as it happens after Rose shoos off the Black kids and replaces them with young white men.
For me, it was hard to get into this production, for many reasons. Before I saw it, I was skeptical to see a different show in the Majestic Theatre after seeing The Phantom of the Opera there many many many many many times. I also had a friend at work who wouldn't stop talking about Gypsy, so that was pretty annoying too. This was also my first time ever seeing the musical, so going in with these annoyances didn't help. Once I saw the show, I did enjoy some of the performances (especially from Audra), but everything else, yeah, what you said in your review is mostly how I feel too. And personally, I didn't care for the story or the music, or the visuals. Not the best musical revival I've seen.
My favorite musical is GYPSY. Ironically it’s because of the book, although I love the score. If you take all the music out, the book is so strong. Almost Shakespearean. You have such a great triangle - the Mom favoring one kid over the other, both kids competing for the mother’s attention and then their relationship with each other. I was friends with June Havoc and we had this conversation on the phone once. She loathed the show. She told me it glamorized her mother and that her mom was a psychopath. Had they ever had done a non musical version, Kathy Bates, would have made a great Rose. I have no issues with the Roz version, her acting was sublime but I wish in 1962 filmed version they had cast Judy Garland as Rose. Judy's mom was a Rose, in actual life. I also wish Liza had played Louise. Have no idea if Lorna could played been June ?... Then years later make a remake, when , Liza was in her 40's playing Rose. Zero desire to see Audra. Rose shouldn't be sung it should belted.
Great thorough review. It's unfortunate that this production has received mixed lukewarm reviews. They should have knocked it out of the park. Also, regarding Color Blind vs Color Conscious casting, I feel that they should have just simply made it an all Black production. It would not have been too far fetched since there is a history here in the United States of Black vaudeville performers as well as Black burlesque, Josephine Baker. Many reviewers mentioned how confused they were when it seemed like the young Black boys turned into White teens. It's too bad that this production didn't knock it out of the park. Loved your review.
It sounds like the director missed his mark with the vision. The exciting thing about Audra is her soprano voive and acting. Why would they not go with that and not a water3d down Lupone and Merman version? Incredible....
My favorite Rose was San Francisco cabaret legend Wesla Whitfield who, like Audra, was no traditional belter. Her wheelchair disappeared for the audience as the sheer force of her will caused her disability to vanish.
Your review is spot on. I have seen all the Broadway actresses except Merman. They’ve all been excellent. Lupone I saw twice it premiered at City Center in nycLupone with Laura Bernanti was my favorite Audra ist wonderful .agree it’s best with a bellter . This is a very goodproduction .its just not the best of the previous
I LOVE the detail you go into with your reviews. Your knowledge of the history of the show and other revivals adds another level of insight beyond your objective taste. Not that I would ever get to NYC to NY-see it... your take sums up what I would have anticipated. She is brilliant (saw her TWICE in the original production of RAGTIME) but she seemed miscast in this role. When I heard about it, my first thought was, "Do we need ANOTHER Gypsy revival!?" Evidently not! (BTW, the Imelda Staunton London production was excellent. It's out on video) Like you, I don't care what colour a performer is. Still, there's a reality about Black performers in Vaudeville that does not sync with the reality of the GYPSY story (in that it's inspired by a famous WHITE family and history). I would love to see an original show celebrating the outstanding Black performers of that era. But you can't ignore race at the start and suddenly allude to the extraordinary Josephine Baker as an afterthought! WFT? LOVE to see a musical based on her life.
It's rare I get to see a broadway show and I HAD to see Gypsy with Audra - And Mickey captures my feelings really well. It wasn't bad but it didn't live up to my expectations and the lack of arc for Rose and Louise really hurt it and made the ending feel unearned. I agree strongly on how great Tulsa was, but June sadly didn't work for me. I loved some of the staging and really felt for Louise - Joy Woods is one of my favorite young actresses, but the lack of graduality in Rose's villainy really hurts here.
I have seen this production as well as the LuPone version. The LuLone version from beginning to end was brilliant and her performance was pretty much everything. That’s another review lol. This production, as a whole, didn’t do or try anything new or even elevated the material. It was fine I guess. But such a missed opportunity. The casting and setting with black actors as Rose’s family could have brought an extra layer to explore. But there was no rhyme or reason. And then to cast a white actor as Herbie - well that would never have been reality in those days. So you have to accept it was color blind casting, but it wasn’t. It was like there was this spark of a brilliant idea that was forgotten. So I do agree with the review in that sense. But nothing could be farther from reality than the dissection of Audra McDonald’s performance. It was a master class in acting. All the subtly and craft she brings to this role was lost on this young reviewer and he seems to have not paid attention. Oh yes, she barrels through like a banshee - and is almost scary - and oh she is divine when she chews the scenery but there is so much more. Case in point, how she begins the Mr. Goldstein number was revelatory. It is always starts like a hammer - Audra took it in a totally different direction. Tentative. Unbelieving that finally her girls had the contract she dreamed of she halters her first lyrics. She explored what this powerhouse of a personality was like when actually surprising and, yes, speechless. It is an important performance in a forgettable production.
I thought Audra was exceptional- great acting and vocals. Audra is worth seeing in this production. I thought the Louise character never seemed to make the complete arc and take charge of her own persona. Towards the end in the “dressing room” scene I was hoping for something impactful and revelatory but even then I wasn’t convinced she could really stand up to Rose. I thought the other supporting roles (June, Tulsa and the strippers) were standouts.
The last weekend I spent in NYC right before Christmas, I won digital lottery for Gypsy's first matinee performance after their official opening night, which I entered because my wife is a huge fan of Audra McDonald. She was super excited but I was non-plussed because I think Gypsy is one of the more overrated Broadway shows. When I explained the premise to my wife who was not familiar at all with Gypsy except for the songs she had heard on Glee, she decided it was something she didn't want to see because it would trigger memories of her own complicated relationship with her mother so we passed on the lottery win but were successful in getting digital rush for Sunset Blvd across the street. It was a much lovelier way to spend a Saturday afternoon. Always appreciate your even-handed perspective and incredible poise in your presentation.
Yea not every rose sings in that “blow the roof off” belt but NONE of them switched into their head voice ever! I felt NO power from her. And fair there aren’t enough “head voice” characters that doesn’t mean she should have done this! it should have been Jennifer Hudson or Anika Noni Rose. It’s not about “it’s always a belt” it’s about not needing to switch into a head voice at all. It only leaves you wanting!!! And makes her sound weak! Fine we can stay home and listen to it 🙄🙄but that’s not seeing it! so NO that’s not enough! this was a thoroughly miscast show and she had no business here! And I agree that George is actually the biggest problem! His direction…or well lack of direction was the hardest thing to sit through! And the clothes(I don’t say costumes because it was just clothes) were just boring and yea it’s a show that really isn’t supposed to be a “costume spectacular” but they’re also not supposed to disappoint either. And the strip was just bad she didn’t become a better funnier entertainer she just became a “better dancer” in a terrible outfit
I agree with so much of your review. I saw this production a few days before Christmas. ( I saw Angela Lansbury when I was about 12 and I saw Patti Lupone. And of course the movie. I expected to be thrilled by this show. And I just wasn't. Ultimately I was moved by Audra's Rose. The vocal placement did bother me...but I she is a compelling actor. And I agree that Danny Burstein was great. Jordan Tyson was, as you said the best June I ever saw, and the Tulsa was also quite charming. And I saw Joy Woods who was charming through act One. It was really the last part that was a let down. The Strippers were not as entertaining/funny as they should have been. Leslie really was so over the top she killed all her own laughs. And the entire number seemed lazily staged. And the choice of turning Gypsy herself into a Josephine Baker-esque performer didn't work for me. I understand why they tried it.....but it didn't work. Gypsy Rose Lee is supposed to have become famous and successful despite having no talent. Not suddenly become a gifted performer. And Joy's acting in the confrontational dressing room scene with Rose was weak. Not sure how such a revered director could have made these choices. Angela was thrilling. Patti was great. Even Rosalind Russell had her moments. This was okay. With all the talent involved it should have soared.
I saw it back in December. I must say I liked it but didn't love it. For different reasons I preferred the production with Patti and Laura here in New York but especially the one with Imelda in London at the Savoy.
MickeyJo, i think this was one of your most thorough and thoughtful reviews. I've noticed that often, when you don't love a show you wanted to love, it brings out the best of you as a critic and a theater fan. Lovely, thoughtful review. 10 stars.
I really appreciate the respect and fairness you show even when outlining criticisms, and the fact that you give full credit where it's due while offering enough detail for us to understand specific weak points without condemning the whole thing. I also find your commentaries incredibly informative because your knowledge of all the elements that create a production allow us to see under the hood and grasp how those elements interact to produce the overall identity of the show. I'm not even that interested in musical theatre, but I love how much I learn from your insights, and how much wit and intelligence you bring. You're a great reviewer and advocate for theatre-makers. Thanks!
There's actually a wonderful Playbill interview video with Bill Berloni about the various animals that he's trained for the theater, he trained the dogs for Gypsy! He talks at length about how difficult it was to have a live lamb on stage during a production of Gypsy that he worked on in the 90s, they had to drive hours away and get a new one super frequently because they grow FAST! For this production he vowed, *no live lambs*. I highly recommend the video, it's a great watch.
What a terrific, well thought out review. Great analysis. So darned smart.
This is an excellent and very fair review. I saw it yesterday and while I loved it, it was flawed. However, Audra's arc absolutely broke my heart in a way that none of the other dozen productions or actresses I've seen have ever done. I was truly devastated by her final scene with Herbie and Rose's Turn. Also, shout out to my favorite lighting designers who came out of retirement for this show. That was a treat.
I was so hurt. I felt so bad for her. Her acting was far above anything I've seen.
@WPC8925 agreed! Do you think she'll get her 7th Tony?
Before seeing this version of Gypsy I expected Audra’s vocals would be magnificent. But I wasn’t prepared for her acting to be so incredible. She took my breath away. I understand your concerns, but I this is one of the best performances I have seen on Broadway. And I’ve been seeing Broadway shows for over 50 years. The rest of the performers were also excellent, and hearing a full orchestra was a real treat
With the exception of Merman I for one have seen literally everyone play Rose.From Lansbury to Lupone with Tyne Daley, Linda Lavin,Betty Buckley,Bernadette Peters...etc. Audra MacDonald is a revelation in the role. She makes the role her own because she doesn't try to fit in any of the steel cast molds that preceded her. I for one thought she was a great Momma Rose and can't wait to see it again.
the colorism conversation around June/Louise and the replacement of the black newsboys with white men was completely noticeable - and jarring! even in Act II around the conversations of hair with the blonde wig for Louise. and Audra's "too brash, too soon" is very much not the vibe I got, it is very much being a Black mother in America. there's so much nuance, cultural specificities that me as a non-POC that I can't even begin to unpack them all
HELLOOO SPEAK!!
There's one line near the end, where Gypsy is putting on makeup to go to the party and Rose comments that she doesn't need so much blush, because "You've always had good color," that took on so much more meaning.
@@callalily3994 YESSS! So many lines, lyrics, just small moments. THE DEPTH!
"we have to talk about the fact that within the musical theatre canon, there are not enough roles written for sopranos who aren't young ingenues." Yes! Speaking as a middle-aged soprano, thank you so much for saying this. Composers, take note: our voices don't all drop after 40.
I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS! I saw a late preview in December and was wondering if my disappointment was just me.
MickeyJo, I think you did a very fair job articulating what I felt after I saw this production in December. It was preview #3 so I chalked up some of my "meh" reaction to setting the bar too high and seeing it when the kinks were still being worked out. I adore Audra and was never able to see her perform on stage before this opportunity and I have to say I also felt the choices for her singing certain numbers to be... odd? I love her voice and I think they could have highlighted her strengths instead of trying to shoehorn her talent into a style that exposes her weaknesses more. While there were some great moments with the kid cast and I will ALWAYS come to anything Lesli Margarita shows up in, I don't think this show was greater than the sum of its parts. I also saw this show the same day that I saw Sunset BLVD. and Gypsy just can't hold a candle to what they are doing at the St. James across the street.
Great review, MJ!
I saw the show right after it closed for Xmas week. I don’t love the story of Gypsy, and I wouldn’t have bought tickets with another cast. But I am one of those aging lyric sopranos who longs for us to be given more roles, and I was absolutely dying to see what Audra brought. And for me, she ABSOLUTELY delivered, and the production delivered in giving her room to do so.
I must admit, I thought the sets were kind of cool, but you’re right that they were spare. (You didn’t mention the ridiculous car!)
I loved Tulsa‘s song and dance, and I’m so glad you pointed it out. He was AMAZING.
But in the end, I wonder how many people will simply love this production for the same 2 reasons I did, which are:
1: I love Audra’s voice and I’m **so tired** of brassy screaming belters. I *love* hearing her sing these songs. I cried at the end of everything‘s coming up roses and Rose’s Turn, because I thought the way she delivered her big numbers was extraordinarily beautiful, vocally nuanced, and moving.
But in addition, #2: I find Gypsy on paper to be a portrayal of, well, just a mean lady. (It’s interesting to me that you mentioned that this production doesn’t have her develop from being understandable to being horrible. I guess the other productions that I have seen over the years had the same problem, so I did didn’t realize there was any other way to do it ) When Patti LuPone or Ethel Merman played this one-dimensional awful person, I didn’t like listening to their voices, so there was nothing redeeming in Rose for me. But Audra has this gorgeous voice, and Audra is, of course, a black woman. So suddenly the narrative moved for me from “this crazy very unpleasant stage mom destroys her kids’ lives”, to a *heart-rending* portrait of what would happen if an incredible singer was born too early and wasn’t able to have the career that she deserved because of racism, and the pathos of that loss is enough to drive her crazy. THAT is an interesting story to me!
I feel that the casting of Audra brought both the vocal style *and* the social subtext that made this so much more meaningful to me than gypsy with all white people. I don’t disagree with the things that you said didn’t work; they just weren’t enough to stop me from absolutely basking in Audra’s performance, and the story it was telling.
I saw the second preview performance and gave it a solid B. I preferred the Patti Lupone version, especially the scene where the secretary asks June her age and she replies "nine" in a deadpan way that made it clear she was in on the farce. The humor came not only from her delivery but also from the secretary’s bemused reaction. In Audra's version, the humor leans more on the secretary's response, and it’s ambiguous whether June truly believes she’s still nine. Additionally, in Patti’s version, the actress playing June dropped the child voice when not in front of an audience in the show, effectively foreshadowing her eventual escape from pretending, whereas the June in Audra's version maintained the high-pitched voice even in private. Another great production was Imelda's in the West End, which did a better job conveying she was trying to convince herself maybe more so than Louise during Everything Coming Up Roses. It was a layered scene in Imelda's version as it felt like she was both coming up with a plan in real-time and convincing herself it was a good one. Louise was more of an afterthought versus a focus in that scene. In Audra's version, it came off more as it's time to sing that song everyone knows now.
We’ll agree to disagree. While there’s something I’d say is missing from this production in my opinion (I think it def has to do with sound design!) I didn’t hate the direction.
I think the fact that people aren’t grasping what’s happening when Rose replaces the young black news boys with white ones and then pushes Louise to the back and hides her with the flag is also commentary within itself lol how many white people are oblivious to the things black people have to do to be successful I think some people missing the point was expected. As a black woman I understood immediately and while that act itself is cruel it doesn’t need to be chilling to me to make that point I don’t think they were going to “chilling” it was heartbreakingly realistic
I like that this production didn’t hit us over the head about racism I like that George doesn’t treat the audience like we’re 5 it’s subtle in a you get it or you don’t and if you don’t maybe it’s a reason to self reflect.
Also re: Rose at the start mannn that lady is a black mother down hahaha like going into Uncle Jockos like that is exactly what I’d expect her to do what’s interesting is by the end when she cries in Louise arms that such a real experience at least to me who grew up with a mother that was tough and didn’t show emotion till later because as black women we are always taught to be “strong” and I think that moment of vulnerability at the end just added to the whole story of Rose which is while I didn’t agree with ALOT of her choices I did understand her.
Just my two cents.
PREACH!!!! We need more legit voices in the industry! As a legit/crossover singer myself, we need more of this. You hit the nail all the way on the head either we are Christine Daae or bust. What about the legit altos/true mezzos of the world?
I’m always impressed with your reviews!
I'm not on social media so assumed the show was a slam dunk, this is really fascinating!
it got rave reviews so you’re not wrong in your assumption. This just happens to be his thoughts.
@ It didn’t wow me. I was glad to see this review. It puts things together in a way I couldn’t have articulated, but overall, I was underwhelmed by most of it. Pacing was quite slow.
I have so much respect for you, forever and always. I appreciate the depth to which you took this show in and have so thoughtfully crafted this review, that said... I am stunned. Gagged even. I feel like many of the observations you have made about Audra's characterization of Rose were sticking points for me watching Imelda (who is my favorite modern actor, period, stop, etc.). I felt Imelda was too much too soon, and her arch was too small, she started too big. Of your complaints about Audra, I find this one to be most surprising and wholly disjointed from my viewing. Her performance was intricate to me, small in the right places, and thoughtful first. This is live theatre, so maybe she's performing more variably than we're accounting for, but I am stunned at this assessment of her and of this staging in general!!!! I found Audra wholly compelling, charming at times and terrifying; I liked her legit vocals, and was surprised by how much I found her vocal performance fit. The cast!!!! Woods was incredible. I am so lost in how you wound up where you did with this take, but still holding space for you. I don't agree with you on this one Mickey, I really don't agree. Xoxo.
Ahhh...a rare instance where I disagree with you! I've seen Tyne, Bernadette, Patti, Audra, and Imelda in this role (in addition to many other regional and community productions) and I have to say this production blew me away. The subtle shift of having a woman and children of color in the roles totally changed the perspective for me and I thought Wolfe's direction was spot-on. It's one of the few productions I've seen where there's real chemistry between Rose and Herbie - and with it being an interracial relationship at that time added another layer of complexity for the couple. Audra is giving a master class and left it all on the stage the night I saw it. The minimalist sets didn't bother me at all - I go for the story and the performances, not the sets, and I don't need fancy sets or gimmicks like projections to distract from a good book and music. All that said, one of the things I love about theater is that we all see things differently as we all come to it with our own perspectives...that's what makes it fun!
This was my first time seeing Gypsy and I was impressed with the material/show, but not as much the production. I loved Jordan Tyson! Maybe in 10-15 years, I would love to see Lindsay Mendez take on Rose!!
thats a bummer...i was so excited for you guys and happy you were getting to see it ;(
MickeyJo, I thought you were going to agree my review of the production, given the title of your review. I, too was disappointed, but my disappointment goes much further. I saw an early performance during previews and shared my opinion on social media:
Gypsy - looks like a lousy touring production. Audra is wrong for the role. Best Louise-transforming-into-Gypsy - that we've ever seen. Good orchestra. Terrible choreography. SAVE YOUR MONEY.
For me, Gypsy was a disappointment. Audra's singing just didn't cut it (that annoying vibrato), and her acting ranged from A to B. Supporting cast was good, especially Louise and her transformation into a Josephine Baker-like Gypsy Rose Lee. Until the "I'm beautiful" moment, you never imagined that she could possibly transform into a star. Production was just average - could have been a touring show. The new choreography was terrible, but the Orchestra was fantastic. I blame George Wolfe for the lack of focus and the general mediocrity.
I had heard rumors about how Wolfe would handle a black Rose, and I actually found the concept interesting and plausible:
- Rose had been married to both black and white men. While June was light-skinned with curly hair, Louise was dark-skinned with traditional black hair.
- Herbie got them gigs because he pushed pictures of June to the theater owners, who thought they were getting an all-white act.
- Grantziger wants June because he can pass her off as white.
- Tulsa rehearses with Louise because she's a good dancer, and there seems to be chemistry.
- Tulsa runs off with June because she can ultimately pass as a white and ensure success in the act.
- Louise transforms not into a traditional Gypsy Rose Lee but a Josephine Baker.
If true, Wolfe abandoned these ideas and went for blind color casting without explaining how a black/white act would have been in mainstream Vaudeville at the time. I would have loved to see the former.
I know many people are raving about Audra's performance, but I was not impressed. For some reason, she plays Rose as a hunchback old lady with a weird southern accent (Rose is from Seattle). If they had put a grey wig on her head and given her a walker, she could have been one of the old ladies from THE PRODUCERS. And the voice is all wrong - sounding more operatic than belty. I especially felt that way about EVERYTHING'S COMING UP ROSES. I know she is beloved in the community, and I wanted to like her...
Take another look at Imelda Staunton's performance as Rose in Gypsy. That continues to impress me.
IMHO
I totally agree. My expectations were high - too high perhaps. The sophistication inherent in the text is extraordinary but its brilliance and depth are not apparent in this production. The great Audra is miscast or misdirected - I’m not certain which. I wanted to like her but she just didn’t work for me. Yes the production was misguided - there was an opportunity to do something distinctive and it failed to manage that. Louise is a lost opportunity too. June did work though. The issue of “colour” could have been handled in the chilling way you indicated but wasn’t. And there were problems with that set. It did look cheap but not in the right way. Yes, it was a production unworthy of its cast! Your review was brilliant! Dazzling in fact!
I loved the 90s movie version of Gypsy and watched it a lot as a teenager, but I always felt the pacing at the end was weird -- it went through her rise to fame way too fast. I think it's just an inherent issue in the show -- my theory is that, in the fifties, it worked OK, because it was, "...and then she became the Gypsy Rose Lee we all know and love," since Gypsy was still a well-known figure at that point. Nowadays, we need a lot more exposition of what's happening there.
Thank you for this review, I think I’m going to hold off seeing this one for now (there are so many shows and so little time).
Thank you for this thoughtful review! I had the opportunity to see this production a few days ago and had a fabulous time, in large part because I was ecstatic to finally get to see Audra act on stage. (Had seen her in concert previously!) Although I'm familiar with previous cast recordings, I'd never seen Gypsy performed before and loved it, but I appreciate your perspective regarding some of the elements that didn't totally cohere for me, particularly regarding the pacing of Louise's development in the second act. Mostly I'm commenting just to echo your praise for Jordan Tyson, who I thought was astoundingly good as June. A dynamite comedic and vocal presence who absolutely inhabited her character!
I have been saying this about Audra’s Rose since the casting was announced and got bowled down for it, so it’s gratifying yo hear you say this. To be clear, none doubts her astounding talent. I just think she isn’t a scrappy junkyard dog, and Rose needs that imo.
Great review, spot on! My all time favorite (have seen all Broadway except Ethel Merman) was Angela Lansbury. This production did appear like it was headed on a bus and truck tour.
This is a superb break down of the production. Well done. I do wish you had mentioned Imelda Staunton's version. Even though it never made it to broadway (they tried) it is the only stage version that is available to see on streaming and dvd. I have seen a lot of Roses. Australia's Gloria Dawn (brilliant, even though she was dying at the time), Betty Buckley, Linda Lavin (also needed to be mentioned), Bernadette Peters, Patti (eat and tug the scenery) Lu Pone. yet Imelda Staunton who I saw on stage and have the version on blu ray etc constantly surprises me as the best "Rose" I have ever seen. Staunton came closer than the Broadway dames and it was more an actors performance (I imagine Lansbury would be the closest to it). The show has never found a successful film to give it what it should-yet !!!!(Cynthia Erivo under Lin Manuel Miranda's direction would be interesting). Again this is a terrific painting of a production I have never had much interest in coming across the world to see. Maybe a segment on all the productions and movies would be very good.
Imelda is fantastic in everything she does, so this doesn't surprise me.
Interesting review. It makes total sense to me that Audra's core characteristics get in the way of her playing a real down-and-dirty role. Audra has a natural class, dignity and integrity. That's partly who she is, and partly the persona generated by all the previous roles she's played. That's a lot to overcome.
Vocally, the role of Rose calls for a trumpet. Audra brought a cello. Unlike you, I loved her acting chops in the context of Wolfe's production. But musically, the Emperor is naked. I'll never listen to this cast recording.
I think a bassoon might be a more apt metaphor, but I hear you.
I saw Patti LuPone, who’s my favourite performer, 4 times so I don’t feel the need to see anyone else. I love Audra, but, she’s not that much of a draw to see her in this. I also find that the over praise from a lot of people who have seen her in Gypsy, seems forced to me. I feel they wanted to love her in this, but, ended up only liking her but don’t want to say it for the backlash they’d get.
Totally agree I did see Merman and IMHO she and Lupone were best
@ … I did see Bernadette and she always looked like she was going to pop a vein struggling to suck in enough breath to belt out a note.
My only regret was not seeing Tune Daly!
I'm glad you liked Danny in this production. I Thank You for your thoughtful and considered review that is NOT just a slam-dunk, knee-jerk reaction rave. It looks like this revival exhausted you. What I get from your review is that the direction and production elements don't mesh; are not cohesive; resulting in a "half-baked" production. Yes, "GYPSY" is one of the greatest musicals ever written, and Audra is BEYOND phenomenally talented. That does not mean that every production of "GYPSY" is going to HIT a home run out of the park; for a variety of different reasons; all of which you pointed out. Thank You.
You lost me almost entirely when you opened up saying that there was no perspective.
The perspective is that Rose in this production is a Black woman, she is a Black mother trying to break her children into entertainment at a time where she was not welcome in most places. Audra depends on code-switching pretty clearly in the early scenes. The way she speaks at Jocko's (a Black entertainment venue) is very different from how she speaks and behaves at the vaudeville houses. There is nothing naive about this Rose, she is world-weary and knows the pain that comes with being a Black woman trying to be an entertainer. I don't think Audra is playing the role brash from the beginning at all, she is playing the role as "I'm comfortable being demanding in this building" at Jocko's. But you immediately see her withdrawn and gentler when she goes to the vaudeville house and runs into Herbie. Because that is a place she is *not* comfortable. I don't see how you can say she's playing it too brash, but then saying she has a naivety. Those two things do not make sense together.
The way colorism has found its way into the production is a stroke of brilliance. Of course she would push her lighter-skinned daughter to the forefront and try to make her a star, she thinks that would be more acceptable. Even the delivery of the lines about the blonde wig make Louise "looks like...a star" take on new meaning. I don't see how you can say there is no perspective, when it is abundantly clear from the first scene that the entire perspective is seeing this show through a racial lens it has not been seen through before.
@@zachhhhhhhhhhh326 if you put in the work to see it through that lens, then sure! The production doesn't do *nearly* enough to articulate this I'm sorry to say.
@@MickeyJoTheatre I find this a baffling response. There are clear moments that you point out in your review that clarify this perspective. A production does not need to hit you over the head with it to make it clear. And as white people, I don't actually think it's up to us to say whether or not the production does enough to make it clear. The choices made are intentional and thoughtful, the casting and decisions made illuminate layers of the text heretofore not seen because they were not being delivered by actors of color. If anything, it's disappointing that *you* didn't put in the work to see it through that lens and instead seemingly expected someone to turn towards the audience and say "And THAT was a microaggression."
These were real people..WHITE CAUCASIAN AMERICAN WOMEN...It is not a black womens story..Its a sham
@@MickeyJoTheatreAgain, I agree with you. I appreciate and also instantly thought of some of the perspectives that zach326 expresses here, in real time, while I was in my seat. But I found that I was trying hard too justify certain choices instead of the more preferred feeling that I was intentionally being invited to consider a different perspective, through the creative team's choices.
To more simply reiterate, the perspectives of colorism, racism etc felt more like something I wanted to see instead of simply just being cruel reality of the world that Rose and her family were surviving in.
@@zachhhhhhhhhhh326 I appreciate your passion in articulating perspectives of colorism, segregation, microagressions, etc...
But I don't find Mickey Jo's perspective "baffling". As I've said in my previous reply, I also felt the nuances expressed in this production to be far too hazy, grey and politely presented for the impact that we are assuming onto the material. And I say this as a very proud, strong & resistant to racism Black man.
You are absolutely right: theater and art in general doesn't always have to be hit you over the head literal. I actually think that many Broadway shows still lack the courage to be more thoughtful. But the extreme opposite can also be true. If something is too subtle, then it can do a disservice to the important stakes that we as audience members should be forced to confront. "Gypsy" was created for audiences of a certain time. And it wasn't created for phenotypes or even voice types like Audra and Joy in mind. So without boldly tweaking the book, the perspectives or even the musical presentation, the subtle changes are way too quiet. It's like taking a brand new 2025 camera but still using old, incompatible lense from 1925. The picture is a little hazy.
I respect the entire team wanting to have a more purist approach to the material, but again, the material was written in a context where Audra and company were not the considered the accepted standard for "pure". Sunset Blvd is a great example of a revival of a classic show that elevated the material by embracing the obvious differences that exist about its current star and its current audience. I still enjoyed Gypsy though and think all who can, should experience it.
The performance was brilliant-best show revival of the year-a magical evening at theatre.
I don't think that the Mama Rose role in Gypsy, *necessarily* needs a "belt" tone, but I would argue that it requires an earthy, squalid, street-wise tone; this can be acidic, growly, bawling, or any other down-and-dirty vocal quality you can think of; my main problem with Audra in this role is that she's uptown in her manner and voice training, and it simply doesn't translate. Rose isn't a lead character, arguably - she's a 'character part' in a lead role - something that the afore-mentioned actresses who have taken the role could handle without making it look like they were struggling to fit the part.
I saw Gypsy at the majestic a couple weeks ago and I wasn’t blown away the way I thought I would have been. I’ve never seen any gypsy performance before in my life so I went in blind but I didn’t love it. Everything you said makes perfect sense.
The Electra in the Lupone production (drug addled and barely able to perform the choreography,) was hysterical, completely new, and award worthy.
Allow me to be a little bit controversial by mentioning the movie, and not any particular stage version. In my opinion, Rosalind Russell was number 1. No strong pyrotechnical singing virtuoso for which the role may have been created, but the fact that she couldn't sing at a high octane level made her the best of them all because it provides stronger insight into why Rose and her off key talent damned her to being a far better stage mother than a talented and believable performer herself. Great movie, and a great review MickeyJo!
I just saw Roz in Auntie Mame. I have to find her in Gypsy. I did see a filmed version of Gypsy with Bette Mider and all I liked was the strippers.
Very thoughtful. Your opinion is valid. I could not have had a more opposite experience.
@2:06 the last Gypsy revival was over 16 years ago in 2008 and I think it's ok to revive a musical the classic/original way without new messages since there's a new generation of theatergoers seeing GYPSY for the first time. This was the first production of GYPSY I had ever seen and simply hearing the original orchestrations and seeing a Broadway icon/legend perform live! :) I do, however, agree with you that if a revival is going to happen again in a short span of years (ie the 2003 and 2008 revivals) then there should be something different or perhaps a new message. I also think where you sit matters. I first watched this show from rear mezzanine aka cheap seats and then watched it again from side orchestra row M and boy what a difference! I think the upgrade is worth every penny.
Girl same. I feel so validated hearing you articulate what I felt. The show was ok, solid 6/10 which is far far faaaarrrrrr from what Gypsy deserves.
Audra did the bullish and charming parts of Rose amazingly but none of the threatening and unsettling elements (I saw it in previews, it might have changed). Joy Woods was ok, she felt like she went from A to D without passing through the rest of the arc. She just walks into the burlesque theater and she’s a different person.
And the sets, oh my who was the idiot who placed touring size sets into this massive theater. Most scenes felt empty, just a vacant stage with two or three cardboard walls on it. Just bad.
Don’t be discouraged, if this is your first time seeing Gypsy you’ll have a good time but if your expectations are high, your are not going to be satisfied.
Baby June was a piss . It was the first time I actually got thru the obnoxious Dainty June numbers without too much cringe. This review was exactly what I thought. The character Gypsy herself was kinda blah. I wish she slowly improved her strip routine , getting better and better with time. I never really believed she became the Star stripper. Audra's heart-felt acting floored me at times. Thankyou for such a well thought out and honest review!
I disagree. Audra in this role blew me away.
@@NFTProductions I have never seen her any less than sensational on stage, I wish she had a stronger production behind her.
@MickeyJoTheatre I agree with you. Audra was stellar as she always is. Even for the almost impossibly high (but well earned) expectations that audiences have for her, she always meets them.
But I too was a little underwhelmed by the production overall. I feel almost blasphemous even typing that because I have such PROFOUND respect and admiration for the legendary George C. Wolfe and his phenomal & brilliant approach to theater.
Maybe the intention was for this production to feel more like a raw bts peak into to decline of Vaudvevile and less like the well polished, more literally delivered spectacles that we've come to expect from today's musicals and ticket prices. If that's the case, I respect that intention.
It was a solid show. Not bad by any means. But with this casting and production team, I think I was hoping for a Gypsy that gave the story refreshing energy & a more thoughtful and bold perspective. Phenomenal cast. But the show came across as being more of a safe homage more than a necessary revival. Which again, feels wild to say considering that it was still very good!
I am an Audra STAN. It was a little distracting when she switched to head voice but hell, She's AUDRA! I accepted it and she acted her face off!!! There were things about the production I didn't love, but overall, LOVED seeing Audra in this iconic role!
I always enjoy your vlogs when you're in NY. But I see from the background that you're already back home. Did you really jet to NYC just to see one show?!
@@RaymondNYC1 5 days in New York, a Disney Cruise from Fort Lauderdale and now back home to start working through the reviews!!
@@MickeyJoTheatre Oh great, I look forward to the new content 😃
I thought Audra was excellent. Maybe it's because it's the first time I've seen a production of Gypsy, but there wasn't a second where I felt like she was miscast. I also thought her vocals were beautiful.
I think that's a big factor here. I'd only seen the movie version some 25 years ago, and came away hugely impressed by the performances (particularly Audra and Jordan) while either missing entirely many of the aspects Mickey Jo highlights as problems with this particular staging (because I didn't have anything to compare them to) or seeing them as inherent to the material.
Had never seen Gypsy before either. I left thinking, “That was Gypsy? What is all the fuss about this show?”
My only previous experience with Gypsy are the various cast albums and the pro-shot of Imelda Staunton (which I loved). I think I prefer Staunton's take on the character (have a hard time imagining anyone past or future measuring up to her) but Audra was still great and her singing was indeed beautiful. And I was thrilled just to see such a classic show live for the first time.
I thought Audra's performance was one of the best performances I have seen in years. Her vocals were excellent !!!!
Have you seen Sunset Blvd? Nicole is world class.
I agree! She just gets better and better!!
@@yankee04I saw Nicole in Sunset. She was very compelling but sounds like a singer from “Six”. I don’t think it was best actress great but I liked the production as a whole.
@ Hardly.
Articulate and intelligent, even insightful. A pleasant encounter. Thank you.
How you describe Rose's Turn absolutely oozes and drips passion. Recognizable.
I saw the original with Ethel Merman and there was no layering of energy and discovery. Merman just planted herself center stage and SANG! From the beginning the mother was the strongest character in a show named GYPSY. There was always an imbalance. If there isn’t a strong Gypsy actress you forget what the title is.
Totally agree with you. Although I thought Audra was amazing her performance didn’t fit into this production. I was also incredibly disappointed in Louise. She came across as a minor character in the show which totally leaves a giant whole in the production. And yes, I was blown away by Jordon Tyson’s portrayal of June. I’ve seen 3 Broadway productions of Gypsy but this is the first time I felt June’s fierce ambition to succeed as an entertainer by getting as far away from her mother as possible. It would have been more satisfying to have seen a show down between Rose and June at the end of the show.
Great review! I agree with all your points. Glad you made the trip across the pond to check out this production.
Just saw it today, loved it! Audra is so amazing. The only thing that felt underwhelming was the sets & customs, which both felt flat. Loved everything else.
Omg thank you for bringing up the role inequality in musical theater. It makes me want to tear my hair out on a weekly basis. Forget classical soprano roles. I'll settle for ANYTHING more than the one or two substantial female roles most shows offer. I do mostly community theater, and IMO that setting is even worse for women. Auditions are always cutthroat for those couple of female roles, while the director often has to struggle to fill the spread of male roles. A guy who can halfway act and sing gets to write his own ticket, at least in my region.
A quick correction: The Barrymore isn't next-door to the Majestic. The Barrymore is on 47th street.
@@grantcurry4839 did I say the Barrymore? Meant the Broadhurst!
Audra is in her own league. Comparing her to the others who have played this role is a disservice to them. She totally channels this character and makes it her own. A stellar and compelling interpretation.
Thank you for this! I had many similar feelings to yours. I was particularly disappointed in the lack of arc afforded to Louise, when there's so much to play within the material. I feel that she is done a great disservice with the new staging of "All I Need is the Girl". Normally she's down front alongside Tulsa, and we really see her emotional arc play out as she imagines being his dance partner. I think she's left in the shadows far too long in this version, only to really be seen at the tail end when she joins him for the last few bars. It really lessens the impact of the end of the act when, not only has her sister run away, but it's with her secret crush. The Strip segment is equally frustrating. I'm sorry to say that Joy being in when I saw the show didn't help any of this. I imagine her understudy is doing just as lovely of a job, but the direction she's been taken in just doesn't give her the build-up that the character needs for the end of the show.
I don't think that every revival needs to try and reinvent the wheel. Most of us were not around to see Ethel Merman do it and if (if) that's the ultimate version of Gypsy, its worthwhile to try in some ways to replicate that experience. Don't forget the members of the audience who aren't familiar with it.
I'm so glad I wasn't the only one disappointed by it, it felt dated and slow - I kept dissociating because I was so bored. The cast was great, I just couldn't get into the story at all.
I know the show so I’m watching this review. I’m seeing it on Wednesday(a $20 passport ticket) so I’m excited for this review. I saw Kevin Csolack in The Outsiders, so I’m excited to see him in this
To say this production looked cheap when Imelda's production was that is....a choice.
I felt her top was compromised and powered through when technically this could have been fixed.
As someone who largely agrees with your take on this production, I still had a WONDERFUL night at the theater. Worth every penny of the $195 I splurged on orchestra seats! So if you have tickets and might be discouraged by reviews, its still a very good show!
@@robotmary121 I concur - it is still a good show and a good night at the theatre!
I paid a lot of money to see it, and wanted to leave at intermission. I stuck it out - and regretted staying. lol. I would go as far as saying it was bad. So disappointing considering the hype.
The NY Times Critic’s Pick is absurd IMO. Why? Because she is Audra shouldn’t be the answer.
i am ancient enough to have see Bernadette as Rose ☠️😂
Wow! Was not expecting that rating!
Saw Gypsy in early previews. I was very underwhelmed. I feel like most people are raving because it’s Audra and giving the production a pass. NYT Critic’s Pick, which It doesn’t need to sell tickets. Thank you for delving into things.
I had never seen Gypsy before so had no preconceived notions. I thought Act 1 dragged. I looked at my watch a number of times, Don’t know if that was fixed by the end of previews. Some of the voice issues were distracting especially at the beginning. I had high expectations and they were not met. Definitely not exceeded.
She passed right in front of me with the dog since she entered left orchestra, break in mid orchestra and down to the stage. I enjoyed Danny Burstein and the solo tap sequence. Would not see this production again.
Not having seen Idina Menzel yet, so far I am hoping Nicole S wins the Tony. She is far more compelling. That, and Sunset over Gypsy for Best Revival.
I sat in pretty much the same spot, @yankee04, and noticed several people around me glancing at their watches throughout. Having seen Gypsy post opening night, and Redwood in previews, I'd also give Nicole the Tony.
I thought Audra was great. I thought the direction was terrible (my sixth time seeing Gypsy, BTW). The direction missed on important moments, like All I Need Is the Girl and "Mama, I'm a pretty girl). Herbie was great as well. But on wow, the direction just kept missing throughout the show.
The moment you said 'it's not dancing she's good at or she would have been doing that' gave me Showgirls vibes lol
DIFFERENT PLACES 😂
In terms of Audra's abruptness, I would be curious to know how you compare it to Imelda Staunton's portrayal. My first experience of the musical was from the proshot with Imedla, and it is still my absolute favourite version of this musical, so it sounds like I may love Audra's version.
It's been a while since I saw Imelda, but by all accounts she was backed by a stronger production.
@@MickeyJoTheatreThe 'ROSE' sign was definitely larger
I really liked this production, but I left feeling like it was so good because it was Gypsy and Gypsy is always good, and not because this production in particular was the absolute best version of it.
i've also been put off by some of the mega-fans who comment on every review that is anything less than 'this is the greatest production of all time' to argue that actually everything about it was perfect and you don't agree you are wrong. I have not seen any other show this season have fans attack other people for their reviews, but I see it in practically every Gypsy review. Even positive reviews are getting backlash for having even minor critiques and I find it bizarre.
One of my main issues was a lack of contrast. Making June's numbers screechy and obnoxious belies the idea that she's the talented one who impressed a producer. It gets cheap laughs but then you have to sit through 20 minutes of bad vaudeville before the "pay off" of the Toreadorables being... screechy and obnoxious. Louise was kept one note at the performance I saw, lacking the growth and humor that the character needs to develop in act two. Audra was trying something new in every scene but the rest of the production wasn't giving her anything to fight against.
An interesting point to bring up, wasn't it said that the 2008 production also wasn't great but the casting was on point?
Gypsy was based upon Gypsy Rose Lee's memoirs and minimizes the character of her sister June, who went on in real life to have a very successful Broadway and Hollywood career as June Havoc. June disagreed with how she and her mother were portrayed in the memoirs and in Gypsy and so June herself wrote her memoirs in 2 parts (Early Havoc, and More Havoc) and reveals the family dynamics from her perspective. She sees Mamma Rose and Gypsy Rose Lee as cut from the same cloth, both monsters to some degree. They are well written books and interesting reads, I would recommend to any fan of Gypsy.
I remember both June and Gypsy as being talk show regulars (never together) when I was young. June outlived her older sister by 40 years and while both sisters were well known throughout their lives, June certainly had the bigger career.
everyone LOVES this show, your review is ON POINT. I found Audra miscast and found her lack of belting and shifting into soprano operatic voice distracting . Uncke Jocko was a stiff. Tulsa's dance seemingly lacked hetero virility. To change the choreography is a gamble which failed, the lack of the stobe light transformation was disappointing with what they did in its place. June and Louise were ok, we all love Herbie yet it seemed the chemistry between him and Audra's Rose was not flowing. As you state the show ought to be better , though it was not bad. I saw other versjions and in order of favorites...1 patti lupone, 2 tyne daly 3 bernadette peters 4 audra.
Thanks so much for the review. i'm def going to see gypsy over sunset boulvard because of audra mcdonald, but only will go see gypsy because of mandy gonzalez. gypsy got more outstanding reviews compared to sunset. i think gypsy will get best revival tony award win this season. Gypsy is soldout or close to it for months already.
SPOT. ON.
Dude I totally thought the same thing about the house lights. So annoying I assumed it was a a mistake because I saw it during previews.
I really appreciated you detailed synopsis of Gypsy. I've seen all of the NYC productions of the show, except Merman, and various filmed productions. Although I agree that there are some flaws, the current revival is the most emotionally impactful production I've ever seen (and now, 6 times) with Lansbury a close second (although this production is more complex). Every book scene is richer and deeper than it's ever been because of Audra MacDonald and George C. Wolfe's work. I disagree that the production has nothing to say, or that it's "half-backed." The changes in approach are subtle but significant. A moment such as that when Louise is forced to play the rear-end of a cow, which in previous productions was always a throw-away joke, becomes completely humiliating in this revival, as it happens after Rose shoos off the Black kids and replaces them with young white men.
For me, it was hard to get into this production, for many reasons. Before I saw it, I was skeptical to see a different show in the Majestic Theatre after seeing The Phantom of the Opera there many many many many many times. I also had a friend at work who wouldn't stop talking about Gypsy, so that was pretty annoying too.
This was also my first time ever seeing the musical, so going in with these annoyances didn't help.
Once I saw the show, I did enjoy some of the performances (especially from Audra), but everything else, yeah, what you said in your review is mostly how I feel too. And personally, I didn't care for the story or the music, or the visuals. Not the best musical revival I've seen.
My favorite musical is GYPSY.
Ironically it’s because of the book, although I love the score.
If you take all the music out, the book is so strong. Almost Shakespearean. You have such a great triangle - the Mom favoring one kid over the other, both kids competing for the mother’s attention and then their relationship with each other.
I was friends with June Havoc and we had this conversation on the phone once.
She loathed the show.
She told me it glamorized her mother and that her mom was a psychopath.
Had they ever had done a non musical version, Kathy Bates, would have made a great Rose.
I have no issues with the Roz version, her acting was sublime but I wish in 1962 filmed version they had cast Judy Garland as Rose.
Judy's mom was a Rose, in actual life.
I also wish Liza had played Louise.
Have no idea if Lorna could played been June ?... Then years later make a remake, when , Liza was in her 40's playing Rose.
Zero desire to see Audra. Rose shouldn't be sung it should belted.
Great thorough review. It's unfortunate that this production has received mixed lukewarm reviews. They should have knocked it out of the park. Also, regarding Color Blind vs Color Conscious casting, I feel that they should have just simply made it an all Black production. It would not have been too far fetched since there is a history here in the United States of Black vaudeville performers as well as Black burlesque, Josephine Baker.
Many reviewers mentioned how confused they were when it seemed like the young Black boys turned into White teens.
It's too bad that this production didn't knock it out of the park.
Loved your review.
It sounds like the director missed his mark with the vision. The exciting thing about Audra is her soprano voive and acting. Why would they not go with that and not a water3d down Lupone and Merman version? Incredible....
My favorite Rose was San Francisco cabaret legend Wesla Whitfield who, like Audra, was no traditional belter. Her wheelchair disappeared for the audience as the sheer force of her will caused her disability to vanish.
totally agree, I was disappointed, weak orchestration and again, perhaps I had expected too much, so I should at $200 a ticket!
I'm going to experience it on February 26th, 2025.
Your review is spot on. I have seen all the Broadway actresses except Merman. They’ve all been excellent. Lupone I saw twice it premiered at City Center in nycLupone with Laura Bernanti was my favorite Audra ist wonderful .agree it’s best with a bellter . This is a very goodproduction .its just not the best of the previous
I LOVE the detail you go into with your reviews. Your knowledge of the history of the show and other revivals adds another level of insight beyond your objective taste. Not that I would ever get to NYC to NY-see it... your take sums up what I would have anticipated. She is brilliant (saw her TWICE in the original production of RAGTIME) but she seemed miscast in this role. When I heard about it, my first thought was, "Do we need ANOTHER Gypsy revival!?" Evidently not!
(BTW, the Imelda Staunton London production was excellent. It's out on video)
Like you, I don't care what colour a performer is. Still, there's a reality about Black performers in Vaudeville that does not sync with the reality of the GYPSY story (in that it's inspired by a famous WHITE family and history). I would love to see an original show celebrating the outstanding Black performers of that era. But you can't ignore race at the start and suddenly allude to the extraordinary Josephine Baker as an afterthought! WFT? LOVE to see a musical based on her life.
It's rare I get to see a broadway show and I HAD to see Gypsy with Audra - And Mickey captures my feelings really well. It wasn't bad but it didn't live up to my expectations and the lack of arc for Rose and Louise really hurt it and made the ending feel unearned. I agree strongly on how great Tulsa was, but June sadly didn't work for me. I loved some of the staging and really felt for Louise - Joy Woods is one of my favorite young actresses, but the lack of graduality in Rose's villainy really hurts here.
Great review!!
Angela was the BEST!!!
I have seen this production as well as the LuPone version. The LuLone version from beginning to end was brilliant and her performance was pretty much everything. That’s another review lol. This production, as a whole, didn’t do or try anything new or even elevated the material. It was fine I guess. But such a missed opportunity. The casting and setting with black actors as Rose’s family could have brought an extra layer to explore. But there was no rhyme or reason. And then to cast a white actor as Herbie - well that would never have been reality in those days. So you have to accept it was color blind casting, but it wasn’t. It was like there was this spark of a brilliant idea that was forgotten. So I do agree with the review in that sense. But nothing could be farther from reality than the dissection of Audra McDonald’s performance. It was a master class in acting. All the subtly and craft she brings to this role was lost on this young reviewer and he seems to have not paid attention. Oh yes, she barrels through like a banshee - and is almost scary - and oh she is divine when she chews the scenery but there is so much more. Case in point, how she begins the Mr. Goldstein number was revelatory. It is always starts like a hammer - Audra took it in a totally different direction. Tentative. Unbelieving that finally her girls had the contract she dreamed of she halters her first lyrics. She explored what this powerhouse of a personality was like when actually surprising and, yes, speechless. It is an important performance in a forgettable production.
I thought Audra was exceptional- great acting and vocals. Audra is worth seeing in this production. I thought the Louise character never seemed to make the complete arc and take charge of her own persona. Towards the end in the “dressing room” scene I was hoping for something impactful and revelatory but even then I wasn’t convinced she could really stand up to Rose. I thought the other supporting roles (June, Tulsa and the strippers) were standouts.
Totally agree. I love Joy Woods but I thought she was the weakest link. But maybe it was the direction as well.
The last weekend I spent in NYC right before Christmas, I won digital lottery for Gypsy's first matinee performance after their official opening night, which I entered because my wife is a huge fan of Audra McDonald. She was super excited but I was non-plussed because I think Gypsy is one of the more overrated Broadway shows. When I explained the premise to my wife who was not familiar at all with Gypsy except for the songs she had heard on Glee, she decided it was something she didn't want to see because it would trigger memories of her own complicated relationship with her mother so we passed on the lottery win but were successful in getting digital rush for Sunset Blvd across the street. It was a much lovelier way to spend a Saturday afternoon.
Always appreciate your even-handed perspective and incredible poise in your presentation.
Yea not every rose sings in that “blow the roof off” belt but NONE of them switched into their head voice ever! I felt NO power from her. And fair there aren’t enough “head voice” characters that doesn’t mean she should have done this! it should have been Jennifer Hudson or Anika Noni Rose. It’s not about “it’s always a belt” it’s about not needing to switch into a head voice at all. It only leaves you wanting!!! And makes her sound weak! Fine we can stay home and listen to it 🙄🙄but that’s not seeing it! so NO that’s not enough! this was a thoroughly miscast show and she had no business here! And I agree that George is actually the biggest problem! His direction…or well lack of direction was the hardest thing to sit through! And the clothes(I don’t say costumes because it was just clothes) were just boring and yea it’s a show that really isn’t supposed to be a “costume spectacular” but they’re also not supposed to disappoint either. And the strip was just bad she didn’t become a better funnier entertainer she just became a “better dancer” in a terrible outfit
I agree with so much of your review. I saw this production a few days before Christmas. ( I saw Angela Lansbury when I was about 12 and I saw Patti Lupone. And of course the movie. I expected to be thrilled by this show. And I just wasn't. Ultimately I was moved by Audra's Rose. The vocal placement did bother me...but I she is a compelling actor. And I agree that Danny Burstein was great. Jordan Tyson was, as you said the best June I ever saw, and the Tulsa was also quite charming. And I saw Joy Woods who was charming through act One.
It was really the last part that was a let down. The Strippers were not as entertaining/funny as they should have been. Leslie really was so over the top she killed all her own laughs. And the entire number seemed lazily staged. And the choice of turning Gypsy herself into a Josephine Baker-esque performer didn't work for me. I understand why they tried it.....but it didn't work. Gypsy Rose Lee is supposed to have become famous and successful despite having no talent. Not suddenly become a gifted performer. And Joy's acting in the confrontational dressing room scene with Rose was weak.
Not sure how such a revered director could have made these choices.
Angela was thrilling. Patti was great. Even Rosalind Russell had her moments. This was okay. With all the talent involved it should have soared.
I saw it back in December. I must say I liked it but didn't love it. For different reasons I preferred the production with Patti and Laura here in New York but especially the one with Imelda in London at the Savoy.
Wow, amazing, far reaching review! Well done!
Couldn't agree more, and I think Louise's strip sequence was the worst segment for me due to the direction and design. This was an amazing video, sir!
I’m assuming that by the end of the intro a hole opens up and MickeyJo is shallowed up to Gay Hell & the rest of the episode is blank space.
Who hurt you, Ben?
You responding to my hyperbole has healed me!
Also, I wish Barbra had completed the movie remake.