the way she exits the stage is such a nice touch. ik it’s based on pygmalion but this decision really solidifies / embodies it. like she’s stepping out of the stage to be with the the real people (the audience) as a real person. the way higgins says “where the devil are my slippers” here is also better than in the film imo. in the film, his cocky / nonchalant delivery makes it seem like he hasnt changed at all since eliza returns. here, it reads as a man who isnt good at expressing his love or any kindness verbally, who’s surprised and speechless at her kindness to return more than anything. love this revival sm!!
Lady Hightower's take: This ending is possibly the better way to tie up all ends of the show. Some are confused why Eliza returns if not to stay. The reason that I believe is that after the scene at Mother Higgins' place, things were tense between Eliza and Higgins. She returned to give a proper goodbye as I see it. And his corresponding line I interpret as bafflement that being the first thing that came to mind. As she walks away, she walks into her future. Flash takes: Notice how there are no changes in the script as far as lines go, but the blocking changes the story entirely. Even though she leaves him. Eliza still has place in her heart for Higgins, just not romantically. I honestly don't think that Eliza and Higgins are "shippable", their dynamic just doesn't embody that for me.
Yes, this is far more satisfying than the original framing. Also, regarding their relationship, during their argument at the end, she explicitly says that she wants him as a friend and not as a lover.
@@miriam5047 RUBBISH. Did you see this awful production? There is no reason for this scene in this misguided, confused ending. If she is leaving,, why does she walk into the house instead of from where she entered? Why is the scene needed after she sings Without You? Or where you not paying attention? This ending was just stupid. It's My Fair Lady NOT Pygmalion.
Ambrose got some hate from some Broadway diehards who seem to only like the same circle of names, but I saw her twice in MFL and I felt she was astonishing. She really brought the nuance and emotion to the role. I thought she gave one of the best performances of the season that I saw. There's a reason she received a rave review from the NYTimes. I love Tony Shalhoub so much, but the Tony should have went to Harry Hadden-Paton.
I concur with all of this. I saw Lauren and Harry’s final performance together before he left to film Downton Abbey and both were fantastic. They both should have gotten the Tony
She was so horrid I wanted to wait at the stage door and tell her so. She was charmless and had NO idea what the lyrics meant. I NEVER believed for one second that he would find her remotely appealing. Despite the lovely costumes for the rest of the cast, she was dressed in such a frumpy manner which did not help. Her I Could Have Danced All Night was like a funeral dirge and I enjoyed my mother's funeral more than Ambrose singing Wouldn't It Be Loverly. I was so elated at the way this all played out. In a half century of theater going I have never known audiences to so crave a replacement, although I will say that Benanti was disappointing. Sierra Boggess was one of the final four and based upon her I Could Have Danced All Night, she should have been Eliza hands down. Ambrose is a very talented actress but this was not the role for her and Bartlett Sher is such an ass for even thinking she could play this role, or worse, Fanny in Funny Girl. I almost wish that disaster had happened to prevent this one. Hadden-Paton was superb and should have won the Tony.
But this is NOT Shaw's musical. I am so sick of the comparisons. Lerner and Lowe fashioned their own show. Period. And this ending is the stupidest thing I have seen in the theater in nearly 50 years of seeing Broadway shows. This stupid ending makes NO sense because she would have left after singing Without You if she had been inclined to leave. The show should have ended there. My Fair Lady is far more feminist than Pygmalion because in Act Two Eliza basically tells the two men to go fuck themselves. The mature ending of the original makes more sense with it's ambiguity. This production was a mess, mostly because Ambrose had the appeal of a rusty hammer.
@@richardmayora1289 So you do have a point that Lerner and Lowe were under no obligation to make their story exactly like Shaw's. But Shaw's ending was better. Higgins is an abuser, no other word for it. He's demeaning, he's humiliating, he's textbook abusive. Which is not a problem at all, plenty of stories are about horrible people. And it's absolutely not uncommon for people to fall in love with their abusers, so I completely understand where Eliza's admiration's coming from. But I don't understand how anyone could pretend that Eliza returning to Higgins is a happy ending. And yeah, it would absolutely make more sense if she left after Without You (like in Pygmalion). But with a classic like My Fair Lady, the script is pretty much set in stone. That final exhange of lines would have to have been exactly the same, so they had to make do with what they had. It does look a bit messy, that's true, but I applaud them for recognising that Shaw's ending holds up much better than Lerner and Lowe's.
@@axelcarlsson6795 If you like Shaw's ending that much, then go see a production of "Pygmalion." But good God, leave the greatest of musicals ALONE! Hell, if we want to make musicals more like their source material, then how about henceforth all revivals of "Carousel" end with Billy Bigelow going to Hell since that's what happens in the source material it's based on!
@@epaddon No no, you misunderstand. I’m not saying we should change it to Shaw’s ending because that’s what it was like in the original. We should change the ending because it shows a woman returning to the man who abused her, portrayed in a positive light. My Fair Lady is one of the greatest musicals ever, you’re right, but it’s ending shows is a complete reversal of the progressive and frankly profoundly feminist message the rest of the piece has communicated. It shows a woman enduring horrific verbal and psychological abuse, then shows her break free of it, and finally says lol NOPE, have her stay with the bully. That’s not a message that has any place in the modern world. Therefore the choice comes down to two options. Produce My Fair Lady with an altered ending, or not produce My Fair Lady at all. I like the former.
The problem isn't whether Eliza should fall in love with Higgins or not - the problem is that Higgins' character arc just never feels complete. It never feels fair that Eliza has blossomed into an independent young woman but Higgins remains mostly unchanged as a person. The audience by that point has gotten to care for him as much as Eliza, and they're all craving some sign that he's also grown in some way from the experience, however small. That's what Shaw failed to give us.
Much prefer this version of the end. Always hated that Eliza stayed with Higgins in the film, as if her growth only meant she was now desirable to him. He could continue to appear be unchanging and verbally abusive towards her to his peers and she would accept it because “Love”. Utter bull that.
I was supposed to go see the touring version on Saturday but got canceled due to COVID cases. Now I’ll never see My Fair Lady like this. And this is how I wish the movie adaptation ended.
I guess I don’t understand the point of this ending. Why would she come back only to immediately leave again? Or is this supposed to be some fantasy of Higgins’?
The way I see it, she returns to get closure. She looks around the room remembering things and events that once were important to her. Then says goodbye to Higgins and walks out of the set to make a future for herself without him. Letting go of the past to create a future. I don't know if that was what was intended. It is just what I see.
To me, was pretty obvious. The last time they had seen each other, she had walked out on him and there was some animosity there. She came back to get closure and noticed that he appeared to be missing her. Then she looked around and realized how grateful she was to what Higgins had taught her and helped to make a lady of her. Then she left as an independent woman.
Thank you for being one of the few adults posting on this page. Idiots like this ending. It made no sense that she walked through the house instead of leaving where she entered but in the bigger scheme, this scene had no purpose after Without You. This was pure stupidity but little mattered as Ambrose was just awful.
It's easy. She's outgrown him, he might have had a chance to make her stay, but not with that question. So she leaves for good (into the audience which is symbolic for out into the world). Which is sort of what Shaw wrote in the first place. Good ending.
@@jaspersonne2223 Yeah, its much closer to what Shaw originally intended for the ending. The original musical stayed closer to the 1938 film ending which eliza comes back and Higgins says where the devil are my slippers eliza and then boom shows over. Even though you dont like them together the public didnt want them to just go out of each other's lives. I do like this ending as well though as it stays true to what the original writer wanted.
Higgins had a chance to redeem himself, but with that question: "Eliza, where the devil are my slippers?", he's shown that he's hardly changed at all. Eliza realizes this, and leaves him for a man who truly loves her: Freddy.
This ending was downright stupid. People need to STOP comparing this musical to Pygmalion. Lerner and Lowe fashioned their own show and it should be respected for the great, romantic piece of art that it is. That being said, this idiotic ending made NO sense. The musical is more feminist than the play as she has two numbers in Act Two which basically tells them men in her life to go screw themselves. The mature ending of the original has some ambiguity and the idea that a feminist's only choice was to leave is juvenile. Given that stupid premise, the show should have ended with Without You. There was NO reason for her to come back. The ending was jarring and a genuine letdown as the reason that they cast actors much closer in age was because they wanted audiences to feel the greater likelihood of a romance. Eliza has already won by showing Higgins that she can stand on her own and he has come down a few pegs by realizing that she has broken through his armor. They were equals at the end and that is why the original ending worked. Of course the miscasting of Ambrose complicated the problem as she was as appealing as rain on your wedding day. This production had many flaws, including casting an actor too young to play her father and the chorus boys in drag in Get Me To the Church On Time with their modern tattoos showing. The color blind casting was also a miss, not only not appropriate for this musical but it was a distraction The night I saw it, I would say that 1000 of the 1100 people in the Beaumont GASPED with an African-American entered as Freddy's mum.
The ending here is very unsatisfactory. And I'm not looking for a 'happy ending' Cinderella variety either. Compare this to the ending of Cameron Mackintosh's London revival with Jonothan Price which is superb!
I hate that ending. I think it’s a weak compromise and left me wondering what the heck they were laughing about considering how these two shouldn’t end up together. The way this production handled it was way more satisfying.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
the way she exits the stage is such a nice touch. ik it’s based on pygmalion but this decision really solidifies / embodies it. like she’s stepping out of the stage to be with the the real people (the audience) as a real person.
the way higgins says “where the devil are my slippers” here is also better than in the film imo. in the film, his cocky / nonchalant delivery makes it seem like he hasnt changed at all since eliza returns. here, it reads as a man who isnt good at expressing his love or any kindness verbally, who’s surprised and speechless at her kindness to return more than anything. love this revival sm!!
In the libretto, it states "There are tears in HER EYES. SHE UNDERSTANDS". PERHAPS SHE KNOWS HE WILL NEVER CHANGE AND THAT SADDENS HER.
Lady Hightower's take:
This ending is possibly the better way to tie up all ends of the show. Some are confused why Eliza returns if not to stay. The reason that I believe is that after the scene at Mother Higgins' place, things were tense between Eliza and Higgins. She returned to give a proper goodbye as I see it. And his corresponding line I interpret as bafflement that being the first thing that came to mind. As she walks away, she walks into her future.
Flash takes:
Notice how there are no changes in the script as far as lines go, but the blocking changes the story entirely.
Even though she leaves him. Eliza still has place in her heart for Higgins, just not romantically.
I honestly don't think that Eliza and Higgins are "shippable", their dynamic just doesn't embody that for me.
Yes, this is far more satisfying than the original framing. Also, regarding their relationship, during their argument at the end, she explicitly says that she wants him as a friend and not as a lover.
@@miriam5047 RUBBISH. Did you see this awful production? There is no reason for this scene in this misguided, confused ending. If she is leaving,, why does she walk into the house instead of from where she entered? Why is the scene needed after she sings Without You? Or where you not paying attention? This ending was just stupid. It's My Fair Lady NOT Pygmalion.
Ambrose got some hate from some Broadway diehards who seem to only like the same circle of names, but I saw her twice in MFL and I felt she was astonishing. She really brought the nuance and emotion to the role. I thought she gave one of the best performances of the season that I saw. There's a reason she received a rave review from the NYTimes. I love Tony Shalhoub so much, but the Tony should have went to Harry Hadden-Paton.
I concur with all of this. I saw Lauren and Harry’s final performance together before he left to film Downton Abbey and both were fantastic. They both should have gotten the Tony
She was so horrid I wanted to wait at the stage door and tell her so. She was charmless and had NO idea what the lyrics meant. I NEVER believed for one second that he would find her remotely appealing. Despite the lovely costumes for the rest of the cast, she was dressed in such a frumpy manner which did not help. Her I Could Have Danced All Night was like a funeral dirge and I enjoyed my mother's funeral more than Ambrose singing Wouldn't It Be Loverly. I was so elated at the way this all played out. In a half century of theater going I have never known audiences to so crave a replacement, although I will say that Benanti was disappointing. Sierra Boggess was one of the final four and based upon her I Could Have Danced All Night, she should have been Eliza hands down. Ambrose is a very talented actress but this was not the role for her and Bartlett Sher is such an ass for even thinking she could play this role, or worse, Fanny in Funny Girl. I almost wish that disaster had happened to prevent this one. Hadden-Paton was superb and should have won the Tony.
....well don’t hold back now. Tell us how you really feel
@@richardmayora1289 Sierra Bogges couldn't act her way out of a paper bag lmfao
@@emilynicole1234 Go away
I love this rendition! Much more closer to Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion, the play it is based on!
But this is NOT Shaw's musical. I am so sick of the comparisons. Lerner and Lowe fashioned their own show. Period. And this ending is the stupidest thing I have seen in the theater in nearly 50 years of seeing Broadway shows. This stupid ending makes NO sense because she would have left after singing Without You if she had been inclined to leave. The show should have ended there. My Fair Lady is far more feminist than Pygmalion because in Act Two Eliza basically tells the two men to go fuck themselves. The mature ending of the original makes more sense with it's ambiguity. This production was a mess, mostly because Ambrose had the appeal of a rusty hammer.
@@richardmayora1289 So you do have a point that Lerner and Lowe were under no obligation to make their story exactly like Shaw's. But Shaw's ending was better. Higgins is an abuser, no other word for it. He's demeaning, he's humiliating, he's textbook abusive. Which is not a problem at all, plenty of stories are about horrible people. And it's absolutely not uncommon for people to fall in love with their abusers, so I completely understand where Eliza's admiration's coming from. But I don't understand how anyone could pretend that Eliza returning to Higgins is a happy ending.
And yeah, it would absolutely make more sense if she left after Without You (like in Pygmalion). But with a classic like My Fair Lady, the script is pretty much set in stone. That final exhange of lines would have to have been exactly the same, so they had to make do with what they had. It does look a bit messy, that's true, but I applaud them for recognising that Shaw's ending holds up much better than Lerner and Lowe's.
@@axelcarlsson6795 If you like Shaw's ending that much, then go see a production of "Pygmalion." But good God, leave the greatest of musicals ALONE! Hell, if we want to make musicals more like their source material, then how about henceforth all revivals of "Carousel" end with Billy Bigelow going to Hell since that's what happens in the source material it's based on!
@@epaddon No no, you misunderstand. I’m not saying we should change it to Shaw’s ending because that’s what it was like in the original. We should change the ending because it shows a woman returning to the man who abused her, portrayed in a positive light.
My Fair Lady is one of the greatest musicals ever, you’re right, but it’s ending shows is a complete reversal of the progressive and frankly profoundly feminist message the rest of the piece has communicated. It shows a woman enduring horrific verbal and psychological abuse, then shows her break free of it, and finally says lol NOPE, have her stay with the bully. That’s not a message that has any place in the modern world.
Therefore the choice comes down to two options. Produce My Fair Lady with an altered ending, or not produce My Fair Lady at all.
I like the former.
@@axelcarlsson6795 Thank you. Well stated!
The problem isn't whether Eliza should fall in love with Higgins or not - the problem is that Higgins' character arc just never feels complete. It never feels fair that Eliza has blossomed into an independent young woman but Higgins remains mostly unchanged as a person. The audience by that point has gotten to care for him as much as Eliza, and they're all craving some sign that he's also grown in some way from the experience, however small. That's what Shaw failed to give us.
Much prefer this version of the end. Always hated that Eliza stayed with Higgins in the film, as if her growth only meant she was now desirable to him. He could continue to appear be unchanging and verbally abusive towards her to his peers and she would accept it because “Love”. Utter bull that.
The ambiguous ending was far better. When the curtain comes down, we did not know was going to happen. This ending is for idiots.
So much more emotion and nuance here than with Benanti.
And a better English accent as well...both in cockney and proper.
@@SDoesNotKnow Ambrose sucked.
I was supposed to go see the touring version on Saturday but got canceled due to COVID cases. Now I’ll never see My Fair Lady like this. And this is how I wish the movie adaptation ended.
I guess I don’t understand the point of this ending. Why would she come back only to immediately leave again? Or is this supposed to be some fantasy of Higgins’?
The way I see it, she returns to get closure. She looks around the room remembering things and events that once were important to her. Then says goodbye to Higgins and walks out of the set to make a future for herself without him. Letting go of the past to create a future. I don't know if that was what was intended. It is just what I see.
To me, was pretty obvious. The last time they had seen each other, she had walked out on him and there was some animosity there. She came back to get closure and noticed that he appeared to be missing her. Then she looked around and realized how grateful she was to what Higgins had taught her and helped to make a lady of her. Then she left as an independent woman.
Also, if you noticed, Higgins had a smile on his face as she was leaving, realizing that the had become exactly what he wanted, but on her own terms!
Thank you for being one of the few adults posting on this page. Idiots like this ending. It made no sense that she walked through the house instead of leaving where she entered but in the bigger scheme, this scene had no purpose after Without You. This was pure stupidity but little mattered as Ambrose was just awful.
is there any way to access the full copy?
If you find anything please let me know :)
ua-cam.com/video/HOucKwya-8c/v-deo.html
This is absolutely brilliant!
The original ending was ass, glad they changed it
I didn’t care how the movie left us to imagine the ending anyway.
The original ending made sense to the adults in the audience. It is musical theater's most acclaimed show.
I'm sorry, but I really do not understand the logic underneath this ending.
I as well
It's easy. She's outgrown him, he might have had a chance to make her stay, but not with that question. So she leaves for good (into the audience which is symbolic for out into the world). Which is sort of what Shaw wrote in the first place. Good ending.
@@jaspersonne2223 Yeah, its much closer to what Shaw originally intended for the ending. The original musical stayed closer to the 1938 film ending which eliza comes back and Higgins says where the devil are my slippers eliza and then boom shows over. Even though you dont like them together the public didnt want them to just go out of each other's lives. I do like this ending as well though as it stays true to what the original writer wanted.
Higgins had a chance to redeem himself, but with that question: "Eliza, where the devil are my slippers?", he's shown that he's hardly changed at all. Eliza realizes this, and leaves him for a man who truly loves her: Freddy.
This ending was downright stupid. People need to STOP comparing this musical to Pygmalion. Lerner and Lowe fashioned their own show and it should be respected for the great, romantic piece of art that it is. That being said, this idiotic ending made NO sense. The musical is more feminist than the play as she has two numbers in Act Two which basically tells them men in her life to go screw themselves. The mature ending of the original has some ambiguity and the idea that a feminist's only choice was to leave is juvenile. Given that stupid premise, the show should have ended with Without You. There was NO reason for her to come back. The ending was jarring and a genuine letdown as the reason that they cast actors much closer in age was because they wanted audiences to feel the greater likelihood of a romance. Eliza has already won by showing Higgins that she can stand on her own and he has come down a few pegs by realizing that she has broken through his armor. They were equals at the end and that is why the original ending worked. Of course the miscasting of Ambrose complicated the problem as she was as appealing as rain on your wedding day. This production had many flaws, including casting an actor too young to play her father and the chorus boys in drag in Get Me To the Church On Time with their modern tattoos showing. The color blind casting was also a miss, not only not appropriate for this musical but it was a distraction The night I saw it, I would say that 1000 of the 1100 people in the Beaumont GASPED with an African-American entered as Freddy's mum.
The ending here is very unsatisfactory. And I'm not looking for a 'happy ending' Cinderella variety either. Compare this to the ending of Cameron Mackintosh's London revival with Jonothan Price which is superb!
I hate that ending. I think it’s a weak compromise and left me wondering what the heck they were laughing about considering how these two shouldn’t end up together. The way this production handled it was way more satisfying.
The Original Ending used in the Movie was Beautiful and nuanced this is a confusing mess, don’t fix it it’s ain’t broke
Great:D