Looks better today


Just caught the show quite by chance tonight, and glad I did. Looks much better than it did two years ago. I think that too many people(including me) were too critical at the time, remembering the movie, looking for perfection, and got lost somewhere along the way. Tonight it all looked just fine, good production values, a worthy rendition very close to the original play. Really made my evening...the play is corny, sentimental and beautiful as ever ! More thoughts: my advice to everyone, take a second look. Okay, maybe the casting of Mother Abyss was PC (but she did great job), and too many swastikas at the end (IMDB notes indicate that most would not have been worn them), but overall, a good production. One more thing: there is a big difference between a stage version and a film. You have to get used to the pace, which takes a while, again, a second viewing helps a lot !

RSGRE

reply

I have seen the British 2015 version like 10 days ago. And I liked it and now I did have a look at the American 2013 version.

Sorry to say the British version is like 10 times better. Better acting,better setting and also the clothes actors use are 10 times better in the British version.
You can find the Bristish version on Youtube and have a look for yourself.

reply

Sorry to say the British version is like 10 times better. Better acting,better setting and also the clothes actors use are 10 times better in the British version.


I have seen both versions and I don't really agree. Let's see:

Better acting: yes, when it comes to acting I prefer the British version.

Better setting: well... the ITV British production was a television drama and the NBC American production was musical theater. Which means that the American version was obviously on theater-like stages, while the British version was more like a movie. Perhaps most people would prefer the movie version, but I really enjoyed the stage in the American version. I appreciated it a lot, and it felt like watching the musical in a theater. For a movie we have the Julie Andrews film from the 60s, and you are always going to fall short if you try to compete with that, so why try? Embrace the theatrical aspect.

The clothes: I agree here, the British version was better.

But you forgot to mention the singing, which is better in the American version. Excellent singing all around. People love to hate on Carrie Underwood's performance, but watching it without prejudices, I think she did very well. It's true she has dramatic limitations, but this is not exactly Shakespeare, and she did decently enough. Her singing clearly outshines the Maria from the British version.

reply

I think that too many people(including me) were too critical at the time, remembering the movie, looking for perfection, and got lost somewhere along the way.


I'm sure there is a great deal of truth in that. I have been to live stage versions of TSOM multiple times, in community amateur theatre and professional musical theatre. Some of my companions have not cared for the stage version (imo because they were huge fans of the Andrews film and had never attended live musical theatre).

That said, I don't think all the negative responses can be attributed to viewers' reaction to the medium; this production has some serious problems. The biggest one is that Carrie Underwood is very much out of her depth. That's not an insult-- it takes a unique combination of talents to make it in musical theatre, and very few people posses that combination. It also takes a great deal of experience and "musical theatre stage presence" to carry off a lead female role such as this one.

I'm sure many viewers (particularly fans of CU's recording career) will have the attitude that "Carrie was so brave to step out of her comfort zone and deserves a lot of credit. She did great for someone who has never performed musical theatre before."

My answer to that is:
I adopt that approach when I'm watching amateur community theatre, or high school stage productions. I don't expect to have to adjust my expectations for professional productions. Not only is this a professional production, but one performed live on tv, with the camera zooming in to expose every nuance (or lack thereof) in the performance. An important role like this is not the time/place for novelty casting. A strong veteran is needed. Barring that, a solid actor with lots of tv experience, live theatre experience and theatrical vocal training.

I think it was a wise decision for ITV to produce their The Sound of Music Live (2015) version as a television drama rather than a musical theatre production. The acting is more subtle, and less jarring to the uninitiated audience -- esp when an iconic actress such as Julie Andrews has been most viewers' only exposure to the role.

The Maria in the ITV version is not of the Broadway or East End variety, and she wasn't quite as strong as I would have liked, but she grew on me. I found very little to criticize in her performance.

I liked the nuns in this US version, but then, they're all veterans of musical theatre and this is their forte. I did not find the casting of Audra McDonald as Mother Abbess the least bit off-putting. Multi-ethnic production has long been a staple of professional theatre. People who regularly attend don't even notice it. However, I like the ITV Mother Abbess better simply because I think the lighter soprano and more cheerful/positive mother superior is a better approach -- esp on film/tv. (I never "loved" Peggy Wood in the 1965 film.)

Christian Borle was terrific as Max. I always enjoy him. He's another veteran of Broadway musical theatre. Ditto Laura Benanti as Frau Schrader (she should have played Maria!).

The actor playing Georg (I forget his name) I have liked in various UK programs (esp The Grand). But he and CU had ZERO chemistry. (To be fair, I doubt she could have managed chemistry with anyone, and again, that's not an insult; she is simply not cut out for this medium.)

CU wasn't helped by the hair and makeup depts either. Her streaky, bleachy-blond teased out wig; sculpted eyebrows; and 2013 eye makeup are just too "Swiss Barbie" and took me right out of the production with every close-up.

reply

To me, the best things in the NBC SOM were Audra M. (agreed about her casting; those who object to her ethnicity are being idiotic), Laura B. (who did, of course, play Maria on Broadway when she was barely out of high school), Christian Borle (it's not an ideal role for him, but he did a great job, as I'd expect), and the other nuns. It's been awhile since I've watched this one, but I think the kids were pretty good. I wasn't thrilled with "16 Going on 17," due to direction, and I think the Rolf was maybe a little old and slightly creepy in it.

Is the ITV production not a musical? Your comment about that makes me confused on that. Did you mean the Maria in it is not of Broadway or West End caliber? Anyway, I'll have to check it out, if that's possible. Thanks for your interesting, thoughtful post.






Just make a movie that makes me care, one way or another. I'm open.

reply

Is the ITV production not a musical? Your comment about that makes me confused on that. Did you mean the Maria in it is not of Broadway or West End caliber?



I'm very sorry that I never responded to you. I must not have received an email notification about your reply. Sorry!

What I meant is that ITV's TSOM Live was not performed using stage acting techniques -- over-acting, shouting to the rafters, exaggerated gestures, etc. Such techniques are very important in stage performance because the audience does not have the benefit of camera close-ups.

Film and television acting is much more subtle. The camera comes right in, super close; over-acting and exaggerated gesturing are not needed and become off-putting on film.

IMO the 2013 version of TSOM Live is a stage version performed live on broadcast television.

ITV's TSOM Live is more like a television drama performed live on TV. It was cast with experienced TV actors, many of whom also have a great deal of professional musical theatre experience. Win-win.

reply