Schmerg The Impaler's Secret Laboratory

High-profile British theatre productions that transfer to Broadway are so funny because they're always in one of two camps with no middle ground:

* Explosive mega-musical. Cast of 75 with several live horses. We had to take apart the entire theatre to load in the set, and then we removed all of the seats and replaced them with rocking horses in a 360 degree immersive configuration, also we moved a real waterfall from Yellowstone National Park into the theatre and the orchestra is encased in a polystyrene cube hanging above it. We've trained real salmon to spawn in this theatre. The score is variations of the Jurassic Park theme tune sung 21 times with different words. This show will either run for 20 years or 2 weeks.

* All-celebrity cast play by a celebrity director. The set is made of two folding chairs, a plastic tablecloth, and three popsicle sticks. There is one spotlight and no microphones. They whisper all of their lines. There are video cameras on stage doing close-ups of the actors while they act and none of them are wearing makeup and one of them has an ingrown eyelash that you stare at for the entire play. At the end of each show, a multiple Oscar-nominated darling of stage and screen leaves the theatre and climbs into a dumpster outside (broadcast by live feed into the theatre) and falls asleep there. Tickets cost $800.

Time for one of my long, rambling informal reviews! This one is for RAGTIME at Signature Theatre and unlike some of the other reviews I've written, this show is still running for 3 more weeks, but tickets are selling EXTREMELY fast, so I'd recommend you snap some up if you haven't already! I will add that Signature's discounted 'partial view' seats are extremely good value and actually not a bad view at all, so don't sleep on those.

TLDR: This show is absolutely amazing and totally does the material of one of my favorite musicals justice in an intimate, innovative staging.

Ragtime is one of those musicals with a name that belies the complexity and darkness of the subject matter (along with Parade and Carousel), and yet there's no other simple name that could tie together such a dense and varied piece of musical theatre. If you're not familiar with it, this musical set in the early 20th century follows three different groups in New York: a white suburban upper class family, a family of new Jewish immigrants, and a star-crossed young family in the emerging Black middle class of Harlem-- plus a half dozen real historical figures of the period. Their paths intersect and intertwine in many unexpected ways, changing all of their lives forever. Expect some very intense themes like racism, sexism, gun violence, and exploitation of the working class, but also moments of surprising levity and loveliness.

It's one of my favorite musicals of all time, but it's also so complex and such an example of the '80's-'90's megamusical' that it's expensive and tricky to stage. So you might not think of the intimate blackbox venue of Shirlington's Signature Theatre as a prime candidate for this piece. But I can report that director Matthew Gardiner and the whole cast and crew knocked this piece out of the park (teehee, yes, this musical has a song about a baseball game). It was a spellbinding night of theatre and there wasn't a dry eye in the house at the end of the show.

I've seen some other shows at Signature-- including Sweeney Todd earlier this season-- where the goal of 'get creative with the intimate space' actually distracted from the material, but the biggest sign that this staging worked was that I barely noticed it at all or thought 'ooh, what a creative idea'. It just... worked. Fitting 33 performers and a 16-piece orchestra onto a small stage, plus massive set pieces like a WORKING REPLICA MODEL T FORD (absolutely show-stopping when it drove out) without feeling cramped or sacrificing audience sightlines shouldn't have been possible, but it all flowed seamlessly. Actors hung around on the sidelines when not part of the action, observing and serving as a backing chorus. This was the first Signature show I've seen with a turntable stage and it helped the show glide from scene to scene without being overused or feeling gimmicky. The use of the aisle space, staircases, and sharing the upper balcony with the fully visible orchestra also served the piece well.

The arched industrial-chic design of the set feels gritty and elegant at the same time, easily standing in for a factory, seaside pier, tenement, ocean liner, or train station, with gorgeous lighting design by Tyler Micoleau adding to the seamless transitions between scenes. Sumptuous costumes by Erik Teague set the tone from the moment the show started. (Mother's dreamy outfits give her an extra shimmer while also giving the impression of extreme restraint; there are outfits for a person whose job is to be decorative rather than effective.) My only true complaint was the sound balance: at times, the orchestra and the backing vocals drowned out soloists. I'm sure it can be difficult to fine-tune this when you have a fairly large band in a small space where natural acoustics battle with amplification.

The theatre is so intimate that you can see the subtlest expressions in the characters' eyes and that makes Signature stand out among other local theatres as a place where musical theatre truly feels led by actors and not just spectacle. In a mega musical like Ragtime, that human element is desperately needed, and it's why this production and the one Ford's Theatre presented several years ago stand out to me as the best I've seen rather than the Kennedy Center production that transferred to Broadway.

Almost every single member of this cast was a standout, even the hardworking ensemble members. This is where I simply have to ramble on about everyone and how beautifully they acted and sounded. My personal favorite performer of the night, in a show more crowded with stars than a planetarium, was Awa Sal Secka as the desperate young mother Sarah. The challenging score sounded like it was written for her, which is saying something because her role was originated by Audra McDonald. Her powerful but sweet voice pours effortlessly from her mouth as though raw feelings have been distilled into pure music. Sal Secka’s simple, earnest characterization of the young woman is utterly heartbreaking. I won't spoil her character's trajectory, but expect to feel every possible emotion in the spectrum. She's incredible.

As her love interest and the show’s anti-hero, Coalhouse Walker Jr., Nkrumah Gatling is perfectly cast. I’ve rarely seen someone in a stage musical act so effectively with just his eyes, flitting from mischievously charming to stone cold in mere seconds. There’s an edge to his rich baritone that might remind you of Brian Stokes Mitchell, who originated the part, but he puts his own spin on the music and gives it a new texture. I’d have loved to have seen Gatling’s take on Sweeney Todd earlier this season. Still, I didn’t get the ‘main character energy’ from this character that I typically have in past productions. Rather than feeling like the show’s central figure, he blended into the rest of the cast—which may say more about how wonderful his co-stars were than any fault of his.

Teal Wicks did exude star quality as Mother, a disaffected housewife who awakes to the world’s injustices and starts to see her life through new eyes. She conveyed every turning point in her character’s life with clarity. Her mellifluous, creamy voice soars on big ballad numbers and her relationships with the show’s many characters feel fully realized. One of the only things I knew about her before seeing this show was that she had played Elphaba on Broadway in Wicked. But here she uses more of a classical-sounding mix voice that fits right into this antique setting.

Matthew Scott plays her stuffy husband, Father, as more sympathetic than I’ve seen before. He seems younger than most actors who’ve played this role (he and Wicks are both in their early 40’s, while I’ve often seen Father cast as significantly older than Mother), and as we see him try to fulfill his role as ‘patriarch,’ we can tell he’s insecure and uncomfortable there.

We had an understudy for the other major role, Tateh, a Jewish immigrant with big dreams and artistic gifts who wants above all else to give his daughter a better life. I was disappointed to see this because Bobby Smith, who usually plays the role, is one of my favorite local actors, but his understudy Edward L. Simon did an absolutely charming job. He imbues Tateh with an impish lightness at times that only make the dark moments more heartbreaking and nimbly navigates musical numbers with a lovely voice. Like many understudies, you could tell he was giving 110% at all times and his energy sparkled. Still, there were a few dramatic moments that I’d have loved to have seen given more power and the orchestra drowned him out more than any other character. I’m guessing that sound levels may have been calibrated to a performer with a bigger voice.

Simon is also by far the youngest-seeming Tateh I’ve seen. This works, adding to the earnest naivety his character shows when he first arrives in America, but I’d be so curious to see how the dynamic works with the usual actor, Bobby Smith, who seems to be about 30 years older than Simon. I’m so tempted to go see the show again with Smith and compare the two performances, but rest assured that if Simon is the understudy at your performance, the role is in deftly capable hands.

I loved Jake Loewenthal as Mother’s Younger Brother, an awkward young man in search for meaning in life. I previously enjoyed him as the Baker in Signature’s Into the Woods but thought, “This guy was born to play the Baker, but I can’t picture him in any other roles. He’s just TOO specific and TOO good as the Baker to play anyone else well.” I was wrong. He’s perfect here, filled with a tightly coiled intensity that is, in his character’s own words, ‘like a firework, unexploded.’ There’s a quirky piercing nasality to his voice, but it shines out in Younger Brother’s effusive self-discovery. Among other family members, Declan Fennell is adorable and NOT annoying as the family’s weird (and slightly psychic) little son Edgar and Lawrence Redmond is a hoot as the drily snarky Grandfather.

Among the smaller roles, standouts include Dani Stoller’s impassioned firebrand Emma Goldman, Jordyn Taylor as show-stopping soloist “Sarah’s Friend,” and Tobias Young’s Booker T. Washington, more memorable than I’ve ever seen this character portrayed. But more than any of these, Maria Rizzo stole her scenes as vaudeville sensation Evelyn Nesbit. She seemed to be having an absolute blast up there and gave the character both more depth (hints of trauma!) and risqué sultriness than I’ve seen before. If sometimes she verged into showboating, I couldn’t possibly complain. She was just too much fun to watch.

This is a score full of HARD-HITTING ballads and intense big production numbers, with almost every number including dramatic swells of the orchestra and singing to the rafters. Every time you think you've seen the showstopping number of the night, another one comes along to blow you away. Some of the standout songs in this piece include Sal Secka's haunting lament "Your Daddy's Son," Wicks' journey of self-discovery in "Back to Before," Gatling's anthem "Make Them Hear You" and the adrenaline-pumping duet "Wheels of a Dream," but you will find that some of the smaller numbers between them will also send chills down your spine and bring tears to your eyes. One of my personal favorites was the sweet duet "Our Children," which sees the spark of a potential relationship forming as two parents watch their children play together.

What does this show say about America? Basically everything up to and including the kitchen sink. Is it a land where people can triumph against adversity and succeed? Yes! Is it is a place where dreams are broken and crushed by reality? That, too! Is it a place where understanding can win out over hate and people find they’re more alike than different? Yes! But is it a place where hatred and bigotry can tear lives and families apart in the blink of an eye? Yes! Is there a hope of a brighter future for the country? Yes! But do we see the struggles of present day reflected in these characters from over a century ago? A resounding yes. Every audience member will come away with different moments resonating in their minds, but the rich tapestry of humanity in all its strengths and flaws showcased in this production is a marvel to behold.

I’m attaching a few clips from the show in the comments so you can see some of what it was like for yourself! Please consider seeing this show if you can. It’s the most powerfully affecting piece of musical theatre I’ve seen in the DC area since before the pandemic and will no doubt stick with you long after the cast takes its last bow.

Reading headlines about professional theatre these past few years is an absolute wild ride. Maybe all this stuff was happening before the pandemic, but I never heard about it. Now every two seconds, it's something like this:

"Inspiring! 'Retired' Broadway actress stars as Elphaba in Broadway with no rehearsal after 8 years away from the theatre working as a biologist in Antarctica... and she's never even SEEN Wicked before!"

"The Show Must Go On! Tony-winning actor announces that he performed at the Tony awards on a broken leg, will be taking two days off to have it treated"

"The Zodiac Killer to join the cast of Chicago as Roxie Hart! He will be wearing a bag over his head at all performances to hide his identity, but we are training AI to recognize his voice patterns"

"Audience wowed by all-understudy performance of Sweeney Todd with the role of the Beadle eliminated entirely and Johanna played by the French horn player from the pit"

"Previously announced production of NAPOLEON! THE MUSICAL to be canceled two days before scheduled opening after playwright pulled rights due to 'unauthorized changes' and 'offensive casting.' Director defends choice to have a chimpanzee play the title role."

"After 147 years, beloved local theatre company announces closure due to ongoing poison-resistant ant infestation. Site to become a research lab about these spectacular ants!"

"5 billion dollar new AI-written Broadway musical BABY SHARK to close after 2 performances, both of which took place on a partial set because it wasn't finished yet"

"After 109 years, beloved local theatre company canceling their 2023-2024 season because they only got 2 sales and that was from the artistic director's mom and her next-door neighbor Debra (who drives)."

"Shocking! Artistic director of beloved local theatre exposed! Actors report seeing multiple interns and swings sacrificed to a minotaur living in the boiler room during his time at the theatre.'

"Beloved local theatre company announces new membership structure! Top membership tier (names engraved on lobby wall, premium seats for whole season, free admission to exclusive parties and events) will consist of donors who gave full or partial organs to our uninsured non-union actors!"

"Onward and upward! Phantom of the Opera now spotted living under Shake Shack!"

I really loved seeing the West End production of The Lion King last month and was especially intrigued by the costuming and puppetry. In honor of the tour coming to DC, I wanted to share some cool info about Mufasa and Scar’s costumes from the stage production!

Mufasa’s costume was designed to represent wisdom, strength, and above all else, balance. His mask and mane are rounded and symmetrical in a design reminiscent of the sun and its rays as well as the “Circle of Life.” The golden tones of his costume represent sunlight and also tie him to the other lions. He uses two swords in moments of action and animal instinct throughout the play, representing the lion’s forelegs. Many elements of his costume are inspired by the Maasai people.

Scar’s costuming achieves opposite goals from Mufasa’s. His entire look is one of assymetry and imbalance, as he threw off the legitimate circle of life, line of succession, and even the local ecosystem in the course of his story. His mask is angular with a spiky mane that only sticks straight up. The actor’s makeup is painted on as a disdainful sneer- one eyebrow raised, one lip higher than the other- that makes him look snarky but also asymmetrical. The same goes for his lounging postures, leaning on one hip.

The actor leans on a cane throughout the show, which he also uses as a weapon. It reads as a foppish, aristocratic affectation, but also perhaps a sign of a physical injury in addition to his facial scar. If Mufasa’s two swords represent his forelegs, Scar’s single cane may represent an injured or even partly missing foreleg.

Every actor who plays a lion in the musical wears a corset, and each one is unique, but Scar’s is the most different of all. The “boning” of his corset actually looks like exposed bones, emphasizing his character’s gaunt, angular frame as seen in the movie. Even his pants come to sharp points, representing his haunches. There are more exposed bones on his elbows and a ruff of bones that looks like a bony hunched back attached to his back as opposed to Mufasa’s flowing fabric cape. This definitely amped up the Richard III vibes in a show already full of Shakespearean echos— and all those bones also clearly tie him in with themes of death!

Both Scar’s and Mufasa’s “lion heads” are used interchangeably as headpieces and masks at different times in the show. The actors “puppeteer” the position of the mask with a mechanism controlled by a switch in the palm of their hands.

What are some of your favorite musical theatre costumes?

Help, I can’t stop referring to Patrick Page as Patty P. It was a joke at first but now I keep doing it and he’s coming to my town to do a play and I’m worried I’ll run into him and call him that

My informal review of Beauty and the Beast at Olney Theatre in Maryland!

I had to write a casual, rambling review of Beauty and the Beast at Olney Theatre Center for you because that was a fun and memorable theatre experience if there ever was one, and certainly the most maximalist show I've seen since the world shut down in 2020! The production runs through January 1, so there are still plenty of chances to catch it! This production is best known for its inclusive casting of the title characters, and it's so enjoyable in every other possible way, too.

Full disclosure: I love Beauty and the Beast. I've also seen at least 8 different live productions of it, half of them professional. I can be equally overly critical and overly effusive when it comes to this show. It's one of those movies that feels like it's made for theatre (that score!), but translating living household objects, an enchanted castle, and a monstrous but strangely appealing Beast from cartoon format to live action is much easier said than done. Because of that, I've never NOT enjoyed a production of Beauty and the Beast before, but I've also never seen one that felt like they got it perfectly right. (And there's always at least one super distractingly janky costume!) This production was not totally perfect, but it was certainly my favorite mounting of Beauty and the Beast I've seen so far!

I think a lot of girls in my demographic grew up seeing themselves in Belle, but I actually always related more to the Beast. I guess I felt like Belle was always a little too perfect to be especially interesting-- beautiful, kind, elegant, graceful, brave, AND smart?-- and the Beast was the character with the real arc. Despite Belle's big solo in the second act, "A Change in Me," I never felt like Belle changes very much as a character at all, nor does she have anywhere to grow. Jade Jones and director Marcia Milgrom Dodge gave Belle more of a complete journey than I've previously seen. I also appreciated that this production proved there’s no one way a beautiful Princess has to look. Jade Jones is a plus-size, Black, LGBTQ+ performer and she killed it as Belle.

Why do the villagers see Belle as 'odd?' The script implies that it's simply because she... READS. (Gasp!) But in this production, I felt like Belle had a charming, refreshing awkwardness to her in the first half. When she rambles about how much she loves her books, she starts obliviously gushing. When she tries to turn down the ridiculous Gaston, she looks uncomfortable and frozen, unable to clearly communicate with him. And when she's with her eccentric father, Maurice, we see her goofy inner child come out. Oh yes-- and unlike the other women in the village, she wears PANTS!

This slight unconventionality turns out to serve her well in the unfamiliar milieu of the Beast's castle. The Beast, too, does not navigate social norms well. But where Belle's slight awkwardness is adorable, the Beast's lack of social skills is dangerous. But Belle's not afraid of him, and she doesn't even mind when he's rude-- putting his leg up on the table and slurping his soup (heck, she slurps her soup alongside him!)-- as long as he's being respectful to her. When he's not, she calls him out. And when he gushes over the story they're reading together just as much as she does, her eyes light up. That felt very familiar to me. I think some versions of this story feel like, “Belle teaches the Beast how to act normal,” dwelling on finer points of etiquette, but this one felt like, “Two people find someone they can be a little weird with.”

Jade Jones approaches Belle with a commendable playfulness and a groundedness and has the most raw, powerful voice I’ve heard in this role. The song "A Change in Me" has never hit me so hard before. I did feel like some of the impressive vocal gymnastics she displayed detracted a tiny bit from the character's sincerity, but really enjoyed them nonetheless. I'd previously enjoyed Jones as Little Red in Into the Woods at Ford's Theatre, but was even more impressed by her nuanced work here.

Evan Ruggiero made a wonderfully versatile Beast and a fantastic match for Jade Jones' Belle. Their dynamic was a joy to behold-- 'joy' really is the word, because watching the depressed and self-destructive Beast discover a new sense of joy in life was beautiful. I knew he is an acclaimed dancer, but Ruggiero's vocal work shocked me. I don't know how he sustained the Beast's incredibly deep, growly, harsh voice (I wonder if he was speaking through a voice modulator?) when his own natural voice, heard in interviews, has a much lighter timbre.

His singing voice is beautiful, both rich and delicate. I saw a mixed review disparage that he sounds scary when he speaks but sings "like someone from Les Miserables," but that cracked me up-- the role of the Beast on Broadway was originally played by Terrence Mann, indeed "someone from Les Miserables" (the original Broadway Javert). I personally think a Beast with a lovely singing voice isn't incongruous; the songs express his inner feelings with an elegance he cannot convey out loud.

If there's one slight downside to his performance, it's that his animalistic portrayal of the Beast meant he was always hiding his face with his hunched posture in the first act. While his body language ably communicated his character's growth, it meant that those of us in the mezzanine could hardly see his face before his big act one finale song. Then again, this was probably intentional-- we don't really get to know the Beast until Belle does.

I've discovered from the MANY performances of Beauty and the Beast I've seen that I like the Beast's costumes best when they're not attempting to replicate the character's look in the movie or going for extremely elaborate muscle suits and facial prostheses but are more impressionistic. Ruggiero's Beast simply wears a super shabby outfit, a long greasy wig, impressive curling ram's horns on his head, a bit of dark eye makeup, and furry gloves and matching boot. The rest is all his body language and voice.

Ruggiero lost a leg to cancer 10 years ago and now performs with a prosthesis-- in this production, a cool-looking, time-period-appropriate peg leg. (A post on his instagram applauds the skill of the makers of the peg leg: the fit and suction is so good that at one point, Gaston drags him across the stage by it, a gasp-inducing moment and certainly one that shows the extent of his villainy). He uses his prosthesis to creative effect in several scenes, especially when fighting off wolves. He also climbs up and down a super long curvy staircase while belting out high notes with ease, which surprised and impressed me while also making me confront my own ignorant assumption about his ability.

The actor's disability also helps put a different spin on the character's backstory. When we see the young prince at the beginning of the show, he's portrayed as a child and pushed around in a wheelchair by Cogsworth. His servants physically push him anywhere he wants them to, and when they offer him food, drinks, or the enchantress' rose, he brattily throws them to the ground. There's a Colin Craven vibe to the young prince. By portraying the prince as an actual child, we get the sense that he's both spoiled and neglected. The script bears hints of this, telling us the curse has been in effect for 'ten years' (but isn't he almost 21?) and the Beast mentions that he only learned to read "a little" and long ago. Did an illness or accident mean the young prince's formal education or etiquette training was interrupted? Is he babied because of this? Was he shut away from the world because of his disability before he was shut away due to the curse? Where are his royal parents anyway?

This sense of arrested development comes through very well in Ruggiero's portrayal. There is an innocent boyishness to the Beast that comes out in the second act, and his rages seem more like tantrums than genuinely scary. He even wears the tattered remains of his childhood velvet suit. No wonder this poor guy's messed up-- he went through puberty in a Beast's body. When he transforms into a handsome prince at the end, it's a version of himself he's never gotten to see before. While the physical transformation itself isn't anything major visually, he sells it with his character's utter delight. (And yes, he still has a peg leg as the Prince. He spins around on it. It’s neat!) I was so charmed by this version of the Beast/ Prince.

Beauty and the Beast has a third lead role that is not a title character... or, perhaps, is a little of both. That's Gaston, who has a MUCH larger role than almost any other villain I can think of, sharing fairly equal stage time with the Beast and with more to sing. Michael Burrell was an absolute delight to watch as Gaston and was both my husband’s and my favorite part of the show-- which is saying something, because all of the leads were great. He's portrayed less, er, 'rapey?' than many other Gastons I've seen, instead an utterly self-absorbed jock who does hilarious nonstop calisthenics to try to impress Belle in his solo number, "Me." His physical comedy skills are top-notch, his powerful voice rumbles through the score with agility, and he has impeccable timing and chemistry with John Sygar's funny and energetic LeFou.

He doesn't have the looming physical presence you might expect of Gaston, but I liked that for this particular production. Gaston solely defines himself by his peak physical ability. No wonder he is so appallingly ableist toward the Beast (and, in a different sense, Maurice). LeFou plays a sort of coach for him, and the big production number "Gaston" turns into a series of athletic drills that Gaston and LeFou lead. This takes on a more menacing vibe in "The Mob Song" when it seems he was unknowingly training his own personal militia all along.

Despite being extremely funny in the first half of the show, we see the clear moment when Gaston goes fully to the dark side-- it's when Belle slaps him in the face in front of all of the villagers after he offers to release her father if she marries him. We saw him earlier ranting about how being "dismissed, rejected, and publicly humiliated" is more than he can bear, meltdown averted only by LeFou and company cheering him up with a song about how great he is. Now there's no cheerful song to stop him and we see him go past a point of no return into sheer ice-cold villainy. When he's dragged off the stage by wolves after a dirty fight with the Beast-- a new death for the character-- it feels fitting.

It's worth noting that Burrell not only plays Gaston, he also understudies the Beast. He's played both roles before. Now that's duality! Before watching this show, I mentioned that I've seen some disappointing Gastons in past productions. They almost never strike the right balance of humor and villainy. He did it better than any I've ever seen!

The other lead actors in this show were quite enjoyable, too. Bobby Smith (a longtime favorite actor of mine) and Dylan Arredondo were side-splittingly funny and played off each other super well as Lumiere and Cogsworth. Despite their bickering, the two seemed like the best of chums and seemed to be having the time of their lives together. (I wished we could hear both of them sing more-- both have very pleasant voices and Bobby Smith is a talented dancer!)

Their scenes were always highlights, while they drag in some other productions. Like this production's Gaston, Smith didn't come across as inappropriately sexual or gross like Lumiere sometimes does, mostly just goofy. Not all of the silly comic bits blocked into these scenes worked, but enough did to make the audience laugh uproariously. And they gave a lightness to the potentially existential scenes in which the household objects contemplate their fates-- this version of the show felt more warm and light than those I've seen in the past.

Kelli Blackwell had a warm maternal presence as Mrs. Potts (and also played the ghostly figure of Belle's mother in the beginning of the show, too?) and sounded wonderful on the title song. Some of the other numbers seemed a little outside her alto range, though, and I wondered if she may have been losing her voice and had an off-night or if she usually struggled with those parts. I had an understudy for the role of Madame de la Grande Bouche, a bit disappointing at first because she's normally played by another one of my favorite local actors (Tracy Lynn Olivera), but understudy Erica Leigh Hansen sounded absolutely gorgeous on those operatic high notes!

The whole ensemble seemed to be having a blast, interacting with each other in fun and creative ways. One highlight of the show was when the baker was chased offstage during the castle fight by cutlery wielding a giant baguette (a set piece previously used in "Be Our Guest") and screamed, "MARIE! THE BAGUETTE!" The cast had a LOT to do. It's a much smaller ensemble than I'm used to for this show, and many not only doubled as townspeople and household objects, they actually played multiple different household objects in one song.

Ensemble member Connor James Reilly stood out as the Enchantress, dancing gracefully on pointe. I do not know what pronouns Reilly uses, but I have never seen such a tall dancer on pointe before and the effect was cool. As a villager, Reilly appears to be selling puppets of the Beast. That raises an intriguing question: is the Beast a local urban legend? Is he the village's own version of the Bunnyman?

Unfortunately, the choreography in the show seemed a little simplistic and uneven, which is a shame because many of the cast members can DANCE! I would have liked a little more 'oomph!' from the long dance breaks built into this score. Another uneven theatrical element was the costumes. Some of them, like Belle's ballgown (which looks much better in person than in pictures) and the main household objects' baroque costumes, look fantastic. Some work in a simple but effective way, like Gaston and the villager's warm-toned color coding and the Beast's minimalist get-up. But the more minor household objects, which require very quick changes as they switch from costume to costume, have an amateurish and unfinished look to them.

I wrote another long, obsessive review of Creative Cauldron's Beauty and the Beast back in 2019, an even lower-budget production, and noted that despite awesome creative elements, they just had too many people and costumes for the very small performance space. I almost felt the opposite with this one: they sometimes didn't seem to have enough people to fill the stage. In some scenes, the emptiness seems to reinforce the loneliness that the Beast and sometimes Belle feel. In others, it just feels... unfinished. In both productions, the low budget sometimes showed, but so did the heart.

I did very much enjoy the simple set here, though. We're surrounded by the cavernous walls that represent the Beast's castle. In the castle scenes, a big staircase pops out of the wall and cobweb-covered chandeliers fall from the ceiling. (I guess Babette's not a very good feather duster.) In the village scenes, they retreat back into the set. The real crowning glory of the show was their imaginative take on the rose: a stained glass rose WINDOW. This worked beautifully-- because after all, how the heck is an audience going to be able to see a single rose petal fall from the mezzanine? The rose window lost panes as the show went on, like an ominously ticking countdown.

Although it didn't feel as big as a Broadway production, this show is imbued with the pure magic of theatre. Audiences young and old were clearly enjoying every minute while I was there. You will leave it feeling enchanted, invigorated, and maybe even empowered.

I mentioned before that I've always related more to the Beast than Belle. Heck, I even dressed up as a woman version of the Beast for AwesomeCon several years ago and posed for photos with every Belle I found. This was the first time I found myself putting myself in Belle's shoes, too. In this production, I felt like anyone can walk away feeling like they can be Belle, they can be the Beast, they can be anyone. Just don't be Gaston. That guy's a doofus. This tale as old as time has taken on new life and feels more universal and more magical than ever!

If I were an extremely talented composer, I'd write a musical so dazzling, so emotionally moving, so technically beautiful that the industry would have no choice but to produce it. BUT I'd put in one song that's really bad as a joke. And I'd make it a song that's so essential to the plot and character development that you can't cut it. And it would be led by the show's least interesting and relevant supporting character (think, like, the love interest's mom or something), but it would be all about and sung to a MAIN character, who has to be onstage the entire time without singing anything. But it wouldn't be one of those songs you walk out of the theatre remembering, like an opening number, an act one finale, act 2 starter, 11'o clock number, or grand finale. It'd just be innocuously wedged midway through one of the acts and take WAY too long. After the show, audience members would kinda remember one part of the show dragged, but not really recall the details. But creative team members would AGONIZE over it! It'd be a totally different musical style from the rest of the score and require strange instruments. It would be difficult to sing, but not in a way that actually sounds technically impressive to an untrained ear, and written for a character who is otherwise an 'actor who sings' type. It would be extremely wordy and full of tongue twisters, making it easy to mess up. It would be written as a dance number with a long dance break, but keep changing tempos in a way that's hard to choreograph to. There would be a big costume and set change written into the dance break to keep them from cutting the dance break. The dance break music would sound nothing like the melody of the song. The repeated chorus would change a little in tune and lyrics each time. Each verse would have a different number of lines. I'd write orchestrations for brass instruments that keep clashing with the vocal harmonies, but only SLIGHTLY, and there would be an incongruous 'oompah' tuba throughout regardless of the tempo changes. The repeated chorus would be built around a figure of speech that sounds like it COULD be euphemism for something gross, but not necessarily. Oh, and the song would center around a character with a name that doesn't rhyme with anything (say, "Henry,") so the song would keep rhyming with itself or reaching for slant rhymes and forced nicknames not used elsewhere in the show. And I'd REALLY twist the knife in by using motifs from that number in the show's finale, but make them WORK somehow. Transform it into something beautiful, giving false hope that the song itself could be beautiful, too. (It cannot.) And through it all, I'd aim for a single goal: making members of every creative team to produce the show stand there with their hands on their hips and saying, "The number doesn't work." They'd gather together and try to figure out how to fix it. But I made it unfixable. I took every single loose end and tangled it into a Gordian knot, and there's no way to take it apart without taking apart the whole show! My cursed gift to the art world! My poisonous confection! My decadently stained masterpiece! Unfortunately, I cannot compose at all, so this would never happen.

I absolutely believe it’s not only good but necessary to cast actors of all “types” as leading or romantic roles, but what I don’t necessarily like is when theatres make a big hullaballoo of being like, “She’s a real UNCONVENTIONAL leading lady” or “For this production, we didn’t want her to be a TYPICAL INGENUE” or “This version of the character is FUNNY and SASSY, she’s not just this DELICATE ROMANTIC LITTLE FLOWER!” paired with, “We’re used to seeing this character in a beautiful fancy gown, but this character is a Modern Woman, so we put her in a pants suit!”

Like, I am always waiting for people to ask, “So, uh, what makes her an unconventional leading lady? Why isn’t she a typical ingenue?” Because the answer is invariably just that she’s not white, she’s above a size 8, or both.

And I have no problem with modernizing roles by focusing on the humor and strength/ feistiness of the female leads, or putting romantic roles in pants or other more traditionally ‘masculine’ attire, but when I ONLY see this done with actors who are people of color or plus size/ mid-size, it starts to feel a little hmmmm. 

I am super excited about the Tony Awards tonight, so I made a special celebratory dessert. You may not realize it, but it’s based on the three Best Revival of a Musical nominees!

COMPANY: Prominently features Bobbie’s birthday cake (and also Jamie and Paul’s wedding cake in this production)

THE MUSIC MAN: The town has an ice cream social and Harold Hill turns the school board into a barbershop quartet by getting them to sing the phrase “ice cream”

CAROLINE, OR CHANGE: Caroline makes applesauce for Noah’s family’s Hanukkah party

So I made an applesauce spice cake with a cinnamon cream cheese glaze, warm homemade apple compote, and served with caramel ice cream on top!

If you’ve ever looked at me and thought, “I wonder what on earth is going on inside her head?” I can tell you that approximately 18 hours a day, it’s just a constant loop of Amber Gray in Hadestown growling, “I don’t know about you, BOOOOOOOYYYYYS.”

Good afternoon, everyone, I find it imperative to tell you that the current professional open-air London production of Legally Blonde stars a 22-year-old man in a dog suit as Bruiser, Elle's pet chihuahua.

The musical categories of the Tony Awards will be a little confusing this year because there's MJ The Musical, which is about (and featuring the music of) Michael Jackson, but it's a direct competitor of A Strange Loop, which is of course written by (and featuring the music of) a person named Michael R. Jackson. And don't get me started on how Michael Jackson was a music man from Gary, Indiana!

I hear the new Broadway production of The Music Man has updated the lyrics of the song "Shipoopi" to be less sexist. Some fans are apparently a bit riled up by this, though I personally don't have an opinion on it one way or other

.But if I were a writer for SNL (which, luckily for the entire country, I am not), I would create a "Weekend Update" segment about, like, the one person who cares really deeply about this, because I have a really strong mental image of how it would go.

This extremely intense looking dude rolls up wearing a Music Man t-shirt and begins an increasingly unhinged rant about how you can't "cancel Shipoopi" and how Shipoopi is an important piece of the American songbook AND American culture, and if you're going to "cancel Shipoopi," you might as well replace the Statue of Liberty's torch with a GOSH DARN FLASH LIGHT, and how his father died in the WAR defending this country and he'd be rolling in his GRAVE to hear they canceled Shipoopi, and if they cancel Shipoopi, they might as well change Hugh Jackman's name to Hugh JackWOMAN so as not to offend anyone, yadda yadda yadda.

But 100% of the humor depends on him using the word "Shipoopi" like every 5 seconds, spitting it out with increasing volume and vitriol every time until he's SCREAMING "SHIPOOPI"  with a totally straight face and veins sticking out of his neck and spit flying while the host is trying not to crack up.

And the "Shipoopi" guy would be played by Adam Driver. That's it.

My friend wanted a Hadestown valentine this year

What is it that keeps bringing me back to musicals about being ugly and living in France? An oddly specific genre, but a strangely popular one-- I can think of, like, five off the top of my head. I’m actually starting to think the Phantom of the Opera himself ghostwrote this entire genre. You’d think this would only appeal to a very niche audience to possibly be relatable subject matter, but actually, I don’t even live in France.

I’m staying away from attending theatre productions during this wave of the pandemic, partly because I don’t want to get COVID, partly because I don’t want to buy tickets to a performance that might get canceled due to COVID, but most importantly, because given the way things are going, I could very well see them being like, “HELP, IT”S AN EMERGENCY! Does anyone in the audience know the role of Javert?” or whatever, and I, like, do NOT have the willpower to stop myself from volunteering, so really I’m abstaining from the theatre for YOUR own good.

Unpopular opinion: With SO MANY Broadway shows canceling performances due to breakthrough COVID cases in the casts lately (this week alone, Hamilton, Cursed Child, Tina, Mrs. Doubtfire, Freestyle Love Supreme, and Ain’t Too Proud, and quite recently, Wicked) , it just seems like such a pointless idea to keep Broadway open right now. The play Chicken and Biscuits already closed entirely because they just didn’t have the money to close the show for a week and refund tickets and then keep up the costs of the performances. How many other smaller, newer shows will meet the same fate? Even popular mega-shows like Wicked and Hamilton are going to eventually lose money from canceling all these performances. And I feel like with so many performances being canceled, fewer customers from out of town will want to risk paying for hotels and airfare when they might not get to see the show they got tickets for.

All of these breakthrough cases prove that performers aren’t being adequately kept safe by the current COVID measures (yes, the actors are vaxxed, but there is no masking or distancing or limiting outside contacts outside of work-- conditions that would basically be impossible to meet while still putting on Broadway-quality shows) and it doesn’t exactly seem safe for the packed-full audiences, either. Sure, they’re masked and vaxxed, but they can remove masks to eat and drink... which you’re allowed to do in the theatre during the show.... and there’s absolutely no distancing. I know I sure don’t feel comfortable going to see a Broadway show right now. 

There's also the fact that performers' bodies are their instruments. Luckily, it seems like all of the breakthrough cases that have occurred recently have been mild or asymptomatic as far as I can tell, but even people with mild symptoms can develop long COVID, creating fatigue, brain fog, body aches, and more for months-- symptoms that are difficult for anyone, but even more difficult for people who rely on their bodies and memories so fully for their jobs. That could seriously impact performers' careers for the long-term even if they don't get severely ill. And many people who get COVID sustain permanent damage to their lungs-- again, this is horrible for anyone, but if you have to sing and vocally project as part of your job, this could be career-ending.

I know it makes a lot of money during the holiday tourist season, but with hospitals already beginning to fill up again and Omicron spreading fast, a more vaccine-resistant strain (even if it tends to cause less severe symptoms if you’re vaxxed), I really feel like Broadway should quit while they’re ahead and put a pause on performances for now-- maybe reopen when case numbers are lower.