Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 08:44 AM PST

I'm reading James Kirkwoods 'Diary of a Mad Playwright'. It's quite a laugh, and an interesting insight into the world of theatre and celebs.

Lined up next is Wicked - just to give me a point of comparison once the musical comes out.

Posted by Stephen G @ 02/10/2003 08:54 AM PST

Hey BK, did you ever answer the question I asked about 8 Women. Is it in French with English subtitles?

Btw, I said I'd comment on the Michael Jackson interview. So here are some brief comments:
It wasn't actually as bad as they made it seem like it would be. I found for the most part, he seemed sane. Although he is definitely quite wacky. There were a few things that I couldn't tell if he was lying about. The plastic surgery was one of them. I mean it seems obvious that he has had quite a bit of work. But he says he hasn't. Also, first he said he knew the mother of child number 3, then he said he didn't know her and she was a surrogate. That made no sense.

The thing that alarmed me the most is how he makes his kids wear masks when they are out in public. I think that is just weird and wrong. He's making them look like freaks. IF he doesn't want "kidnappers" or whatever to see them, then try sunglasses or a baseball cap. But between the masks and suffocating his baby under that blanket, he is making himself look like a nut.

As for his addiction to children. I wasn't as upset about him sleeping on the floor in a sleeping bag while the 13 year old and his brother used his bed. Granted it's weird. But not totally improper. Now having slumber parties in his bed is a different story. While I don't think he meant any harm, he needs to consider how such things look. It's just not right for a man of 44 to sleep in the same bed as children. But what can you do.

All in all, it was quite odd. One thing I was unimpressed with was his spending habits. What a total waste of money. I can't believe he goes to those Las Vegas shops and blows so much money (without even checking the prices). Granted it's his money to waste. But that just seems totally wreckless.

Oh well i guess it wasn't brief.

BK, another question. Are these mistakes (in your book) that you are finding typos, grammar, sentence structure or what? Just curious.

Posted by Jennifer @ 02/10/2003 09:02 AM PST

Who are the parents who allow their children to sleep with Michael Jackson?

Posted by Laura @ 02/10/2003 09:06 AM PST

Right now I am reading John Irving's A Widow for One Year. I love Irving's work. He wrote one of my very favorite books, Cider House Rules. I have never seen either the staged version or the film of Cider House, though I hear both are very good. After that I will break open Ghost Light, Frank Rich's bio about theatre and Washington, DC and life. I just got a gift certificate to Barnes and Noble so I will be shopping for more books to read. And, of course, when Kritzerland is released, I will get my very own copy, right here from this handy, dandy Web site.

Jrand52: I know the author of Judy Garland, Day by Day, Scott Schechter. He has the most amazing collection of JG stuff I have ever seen and some of the photos he includes are beautiful. Enjoy!

Posted by Ben @ 02/10/2003 09:31 AM PST

Finally went to see Chicago last Saturday. I liked it (didn't love it).

Since everyone else here but me has, I'm SURE, already seen Chicago onstage, I'd like to share my thoughts and ask some questions:

Was that Chita Rivera making a cameo when Roxie first arrives at the prison? I thought it was, but she looked so very different that I wasn't sure. Then by the time the credits rolled, I had forgotten about it, and didn't look for her name.

Was it me, or was Rob Marshall mimicking Bob Fosse's direction of Cabaret (the film)?

How were the musical numbers presented onstage as opposed to in the film? How well do you think the musical #s worked in the film?

Why on earth did they digitally manipulate the choreography??

Things I really liked: CZJ as Velma. Much of the choreography (I was very impressed by the way much of the choreography really TOLD you things about the characters: witness Billy Flynn literally being kept afloat by women rolling beneath him on the ground, or Roxie born aloft by men as she "steps" through their ranks).

What do you all think of the Mr. Cellophane number? My friend and I were agreed that it was the weakest spot in the film. We finally decided it was because the number told us nothing about Roxie's husband that wasn't already abundantly clear, and it brought the narrative to a halt. I'd be interested to know if anybody else felt the same way about this number as presented in the film, as well as whether you thought the number worked better onstage (and if so, why).

Hoping everybody's not already sick to death of discussing Chicago, I am yours, etc.,

Lulu

Posted by Lulu @ 02/10/2003 09:34 AM PST

Oh, yeah!

Fiction: The Shrinking Man by Richard Matheson (yes! Believe it or not!)

Nonfiction: Norma Shearer biography.

Posted by Lulu @ 02/10/2003 09:35 AM PST

Well... here's good news for west coasters (listen up Donald... I expect a full report from you!)

She Loves Me will be done by Reprise! With Rebecca Luker...

http://web.playbill.com/news/article/77789.html

Posted by Craig @ 02/10/2003 09:54 AM PST

Lulu,

My answers to your questions:

"Was that Chita Rivera making a cameo when Roxie first arrives at the prison? "

Yes, it was.

"Was it me, or was Rob Marshall mimicking Bob Fosse's direction of Cabaret (the film)?"

This was a point that BK made upon seeing the show. Personally, I think that there were elements of homage being paid, but I didn't find it to be an overt mimicking.

"How were the musical numbers presented onstage as opposed to in the film?"

The show is sub-titled "A New Musical Vaudeville", and is staged as such. All the scenes and numbers are really like numbers in a vaudeville, complete with introductions from the emcee.

Frankly, I think that the movie handles the numbers better. Making the numbers into fantasy sequences in Roxie's mind not only allows the movie-going audience more accepting of the "unreal" quality of the performance, but it also gives us insight into the main character. In other words, staging the scenes as a vaudeville tells us more about the director (Fosse) than it does about the character. And the show should be about Roxie, not Fosse.

"Why on earth did they digitally manipulate the choreography??"

Not sure specifically what you mean. If you mean, why is it edited in the way it was, this was discussed in last week's notes. Rob Marshall is using the dance scenes to convey atmosphere, and (as you rightly point out) to tell us more about the characters. He uses the camera to focus our attention where he wants us.

"What do you all think of the Mr. Cellophane number?"

Touching, but not entirely necessary.

I have to add that I think Marshall was right in making the cuts he did. In particular, I think that "Class" was rightly dropped from the movie, and future directors of the show should consider dropping it, too.

Just my thoughts...

Posted by Dave @ 02/10/2003 09:58 AM PST

I just finished reading Truman Capote's "The Grass Harp" since I recently saw the musical and was amazed to find some of the lyrics in the text and the plot mostly the same, something you don't usually find. I enjoyed it, but the book also contained several Capote short stories which were mostly weird of pointless.

Regarding "Class", it's a great number but it comes at the wrong point in the show. By the time it's sung we are interested more in the trial. It should be sung earlier. (I feel the same way about NIGHT MUSIC's "The Miller's Son")

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/10/2003 10:12 AM PST

Dave, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

When I wrote "digitally manipulating," I wasn't referring to camerawork or editing. I was referring to the fact that they digitally "enhance" many of the numbers to make it look like the film is missing frames (an old-fashioned way to express it, I know, but I don't know from current filmmaking terminology). The result is a compressed, artificially sped-up version of what was actually filmed. I didn't care for it, and didn't see why it was apparently considered necessary and/or desirable.

Again, thanks for your comments.

Posted by Lulu @ 02/10/2003 10:13 AM PST

Craig,

As much as I love Rebecca and She Loves Me (it's one of my all-time favorite shows), I won't pay the ridiculously high ticket prices that Reprise charges. So, I guess I won't be seeing this.

Posted by Donald Feltham @ 02/10/2003 10:33 AM PST

Love to see all the comments on CHICAGO.

I want to see it again before I say anything else.

BEN - I emailed Scott (author of GARLAND DAY BY DAY) to let him know of the meeting between Frances Farmer and Judy Garland on October 1 or 2, 1967 - and he wrote me back a nice email. I think he has also been in contact with reader JMK about his musical STARCROSSED. Yes, it is an interesting book. And just when you think EVERY bit of Garlandiana has been mined, here comes this book with a fresh approach and a wealth of information. It is also a terrific reference book.

Lulu: Is the Shearer book a recent biography?

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 10:37 AM PST

I just got a new biography called, "Bette Midler: Still Divine" by Mark Bego. I haven't started reading it yet, so I don't know how good it is.

Speaking of Judy Garland, I have a recording of "Lady in the Dark" with Judy (of course, on vinyl). It's not listed on www.eur.com/musicals/index.htm although I haven't really looked anywhere else. Does anyone know anything about this? Last night I just got a new CD burner (finally!), so I'll be able to burn a CD and listen to it at work.

Posted by George @ 02/10/2003 10:47 AM PST

George: Lady in the Dark that you mentioned was a "Lux Radio Theatre" presentation from I believe the 1950s. Judy did many productions for them, including a radio version of Wizard of Oz and Meet Me in Saint Louis.

Posted by Ben @ 02/10/2003 11:01 AM PST

Hmmmmmm....Judy did LADY IN THE DARK on the Lux Radio Theatre in 1953 - but I don't know if this is your recording. John Lund was on the broadcast with her. Is anyone else singing on it?

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 11:02 AM PST

LOL...Ben wins. But what was she wearing??

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 11:02 AM PST

Judy guest starred on "Suspense" in a show called "Drive In". She plays a waitress who accepts a ride home from a customer and is almost killed. It's out on both CD and Cassette, but usually as part of a large collection. One of her best radio performances is a show done for the Armed Forces called "Dick Tracy in B flat". In addition to Judy, this show features Crosby, Hope, Sinatra, Durante, the Andrews Sisters and several more.

I know this was the Saturday topic, but I have finally figured out two Broadway musicals that would make good movies and that have the potential to sell tickets to the non-musical fan.

SHENENDOAH is a good old fashioned R&H-style musical with a book as good as its score. If filmed on location it would be an exciting film to look at. The various sons and daughters could be played by "ticket selling names". Many of the current pop singers (including members of the various "boy bands") actually could be quite good if they stopped the "dancing", picked out a more becoming wardrobe and hairstyle and picked better material. This casting would help draw an audience and allow a Broadway singer to play Charlie. Is John Cullum too old? Is Brent Barrett a little young? How about Jerry Orbach who was a Broadway star before he turned to television.

The other is CITY OF ANGELS which could be done in black-and-white for the scenes of the story and color for the "real" scenes. Stone/Stine could be played by the same actor as could the other "counterpart" roles. John Lithgow would be perfect for the lead(s). His performance was not the problem with SWEET SMELL.... There are also several roles for some of Hollywood's more established ladies.

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/10/2003 11:21 AM PST

Gee, William E, if I stopped the dancing, picked out a more becoming hairstyle and wardrobe, and better material...even I might get somewhere.

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 11:25 AM PST

Jr: No, the bio is not recent -- I don't think there have been any recent bios of Mrs. Thalberg (more's the pity).

I'm ashamed to say I don't even know the title and author offhand, but could post the answers to both when I get home, if you're interested.

Posted by Lulu @ 02/10/2003 11:35 AM PST

Thanks, lulu. Post the title/author if it's a good one, I would like to read it. If it's not, don't worry about it.

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 11:37 AM PST

What I meant is that some of the members of the boy bands are very talented, but the "act" they put on is every bit as phony as Kiss in its day. In order to be taken seriously in a film, they would have to drop the Boy Band persona and play the character. Many of them have the talent and ability to do so... some do not.

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/10/2003 11:42 AM PST

WEL, we agree that CITY OF ANGELS could make a great film noir musical (like SUNSET BOULEVARD, as mentioned earlier...). However, I don't envision John Lithgow as being right for either of the lead roles. I have always imagined someone like Matthew Broderick in the Stine role, and is there anyone more perfect for the part of Stone than the original, Mr. James Naughton?

Posted by Dave @ 02/10/2003 11:42 AM PST

I know.

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 11:45 AM PST

It was a joke.

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 11:45 AM PST

Broderick would be more right for that than he is for Harold Hill (every advance review I have seen has used the word "miscast") but since the two characters are actually different sides of the same person (ie: a writer as he is and a writer as he sees himself) I think that both parts should be played by the same actor, something that obviously would not work on stage. Broderick might be able to do it, but I think others would be more suitable to do both parts. Does Tom Hanks sing?

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/10/2003 12:02 PM PST

Nah! Let's give Scott Bakula a chance to play Stone. He's done film noir detective before quite effectively in Lord of Illusions aka Clive Barker's Lord of Illusions, and he really needs to do more musical theatre.

And speaking of Scotts, wasn't Scott Schechter that porn director who decided to do a nudie musical? 8-/>

btw has anyone noticed that George Bush (both père and fils) is a reptilian entity? That's what David Wechter (rhymes with Schechter) says.

Posted by William F. Orr @ 02/10/2003 12:23 PM PST

The idea of one actor playing both parts in City of Angels is intriguing, but for me, I would have a hard time watching my favorite song from the show, You're Nothing Without Me, being sung by the actor to himself, whether it's done by CGI or some other technical wizardry (filming the one actor singing both parts and then splicing it together or something similar). Part of what I loved about that number on stage was the obvious difference between Gregg Edelman and James Naughton. I don't know if make up changes would do it for me. I know, I know, I'm judging something that doesn't even exist! So Sue Me (Frank Loesser reference)

Posted by Ben @ 02/10/2003 12:40 PM PST

WEL, I agree that Matthew Broderick would not be a good fit as Stone, but I was trying to give an impression as to the "type" I would imagine in each of the male leads.

Hmmm...Scott Bakula. Not a bad idea, but I imagine we would need more widely-known Hollywood names.

Posted by Dave @ 02/10/2003 12:42 PM PST

Stopping in to say hellow from aboard the Golden Pricess sailing in the Caribbean. Tomorrow we dock in St. Martin and on Wednesday in St. Thomas. Just finished reading Stephen King's The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon and am now reading King's From A Buick 8. I took both of these books out of the ship's library as well as Goldman's More Adventures in the Screen Trade. I brought two books of my own on the trip, but I'm sure I'll never get to them. There's an Internet computer room aboard the ship and having traveled with Princess many times, I get free Internet access, which is great since I can keep up with what's happening here.

Posted by steveg @ 02/10/2003 12:54 PM PST

My reading material at present:
1. Barry Humphries "My Life As Me"
2.Annie Proulx "That Old Ace In The Hole".
I can recommend both.

Posted by Tom from OZ @ 02/10/2003 01:01 PM PST

I have been reading M.F.K. Fisher's THE ART OF EATING, which is a compendium of five of her works. It is really delightful to read, and is as much social commentary and autobiography as it is about culinary matters. I highly recommend it!

Posted by Jay @ 02/10/2003 01:21 PM PST

8 Women is in French with Eng. subtitles.

The mistakes I found in the book were all minor little grammar things, a couple of weirdly written or confusing sentences, which I fixed, and one major little omission which I've also fixed.

Now, you won't believe it, but Saturday this here site went through the roof (no mean feat) - we had more visitors and hits than we've ever had in our history, and by a considerable margin, and Sunday was right up there, too. In fact, Friday, Saturday and Sunday insured that soon we will be the most popular site on all the Internet.

Posted by bk @ 02/10/2003 01:34 PM PST

So pleased it was not mean feet going through your roof.
I forgot to check my 45s yesterday (and today). I know of two vocal versions of Spanish Flea. Soupy Sales had a version and in the UK, Kathy Kirby had a version. Quite different songs too. Will there now be a third? Should we allow these Fleas to muliply?

Posted by Tom from OZ @ 02/10/2003 01:47 PM PST

I got my Topper/Thin Man video today. This was a LATE Topper after Mr Stephen Sondheim had left the production staff. The Thin Man had something to do with pigeons and diamond smuggling, but it was nice to see Peter Lawford and Phyllis Kirk again...along with Asta. Miss Kirk's gowns by Helen Rose!

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 02:25 PM PST

My goodness, the merry searchers are very busy - they are simply busy little merry searchers searching merrily. I wonder what they are searching for? Hmmm.

Posted by bk @ 02/10/2003 02:51 PM PST

OK, the title of the Norma bio is _Norma Shearer_ (I know...tough to remember, huh?), and the author is Gavin Lambert.

And it is good; at least so far. I just love that there are at least a few books out there that deign to acknowledge Norma Shearer's existence as something other than Mrs. Thalberg. So many movie buffs love Joan Crawford so much that they swallow whole her poisonous view of Norma. "She's cross-eyed!" they wail. "Yeah...what of it?" asks Lambert, who details her efforts to make the cast in her left eye less noticeable.

As someone who appreciates the style and sophistication Norma Shearer brought to her roles in The Women, Riptide, The Divorcee, and A Free Soul (amongst others), it is quite refreshing to read something that actually extolls Norma rather than (yet again) dragging her name through the mud.

Posted by Lulu @ 02/10/2003 03:00 PM PST

Tom from Oz - thanks for the recent addition to my cd collection! Hope all is well down under..

Posted by Craig @ 02/10/2003 03:18 PM PST

"Mr. Cellophane" has always been the showstopper, in every live performance of Chicago (several)I've seen: whoops and applause when the last verse modulates, and usually standing ovations.

I am half-way through reading The Andy Warhol Diaries (edited by Pat Hackett), 806 pages in small print--it is comprised of daily entries from Nov. 24, 1976 to Feb 17, 1987 (Andy Warhol died on Feb. 22, 1987), with tons of great photos and an index of the 2,809 people mentioned in the Diaries. I bought it when it first came out in 1989, read it then, but just came across it while rearranging book shelves. It's totally fascinating.

The Bellagio Hotel here has just opened a reportedly good Warhol exhibit, with audio commentary by Liza, who was an intimate and relates some good anecdotes. I plan to go this weekend.

I did stop reading it, to read Benjamin Kritzer, though.

Posted by KT @ 02/10/2003 04:14 PM PST

Lulu,

As one of the biggest collectors of Shearer memorabilia on the West Coast (a little secret that most of you didn't know), I would highly recommend the book "Complicated Women" which talks about the actresses of the pre-code era in Hollywood, but the main focus is Norma....I also have a direct contact with her granddaughter Deborah here in LA (we have a mutual friend) and she says that Norma is finally getting the recognition she deserves (Deborah has done a lot to represent her grandmother's legacy)

Posted by Donald Feltham @ 02/10/2003 04:39 PM PST

FINALLY - I realized how Mr Cellophane is incorproated to "Chicago" after seeing the movie. When the song started, I turned to my friend and said "I really hate this song" and then when it was over, I had nothing but praise for it. I thought it was treated well in the movie. I can't ever see that song being cut in any circumstance, or "Class" too, I understood they cut "Class" in the movie because of time restraints, I can't wait to see it on the DVD. It was such a well done movie.

Posted by Matthew @ 02/10/2003 04:46 PM PST

How exciting another Norma-phile. I like all of the movies mentioned so far....but just to be sentimental, I have to say I like her best in Smilin' Through and a close second of course The Divorcee!

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/10/2003 05:16 PM PST

Chat room will be open in a couple of minutes - Let's party, dudes and dudettes!

Posted by bk @ 02/10/2003 05:46 PM PST

"Class" was not cut for time restraints. It was cut because test audiences didn't like it and felt it took them away from the trial too long.

To you Normaphiles:
Is it true she had one brown eye and one blue eye and that's why she was never filmed in color? I know I read that someplace but never knew if it was fact or fiction.

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/10/2003 05:50 PM PST

Hear ye, hear ye, chat is now open. Come one, come all.

Posted by bk @ 02/10/2003 05:52 PM PST

OK, everybody. Get your unseemly butt cheeks in the chatroom, by order of BK.

Posted by Sandra @ 02/10/2003 05:58 PM PST

Good chat tonight, but you non-chatters should be posting here. If there aren't a lot of posts the chat room is in danger of being discontinued.

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/10/2003 06:45 PM PST

Arrgghh... how I hate missing
our lively chats! But my hectic
schedule kept me away yet
another week. While currently
doing my student teaching, I've
been rather involved in helping
mount our high school's
production of Grease, opening
next week. And now, in
addition to my role as
assistant musical director
slash assistant director slash
rehearal pianist, I've now been
recruited for onstage duty as
the Teen Angel. Such fun I'm
having singing Beauty School
Dropout, and my students
seem to be enjoying my
performance as well.

As for current reading, I am
slowly making my way through
Wicked when I make some
time for myself to sit down with
a book.

Posted by Jed @ 02/10/2003 09:10 PM PST

Can Mr Warlowe's version of "Teen Angel" cope with this new competition. Will you be flying on to the stage Jed?
In Every production of "Chicago" I have seen (at least 5 different ones), Mr Cellophane has been the showstopper.

Posted by Tom from OZ @ 02/10/2003 09:55 PM PST

Just in from LES TROYENS at the Met. Wow, that's a long opera and boy was there a crowd! Good tips, good pay, so I can't complain.

I'm really tired, so I'm gonna keep my post short.

Allan, I got my CD today. Thank you so much. It's fun to hear the old lyrics, because they're nowhere near what they are now. I'll be sure to send you a copy of the new disc when it's done.

Sorry I missed the chat tonight! Hopefully Sunday. Anyway, I'm beat. I'm off to bed.

Posted by Jason @ 02/10/2003 09:59 PM PST

oh! I forgot...I'm currently reading (yes, this is for real): "A Mind of It's Own: A Cultural History of the Penis." Can I say penis on the website? Anyway, it's funny and educational all at the same time.

Posted by Jason @ 02/10/2003 10:00 PM PST

Sorry I missed another chat...but it's just that having to get up for work at around 5am every day, I crash at around 4pm for several hours, when I get home, thus encouraging my nightly insomnia. It's a vicious cycle. What a life.

Posted by KT @ 02/10/2003 10:32 PM PST

I'm reading books that friends have insisted I read:

"The Vampire Armand" Anne Rice

"Skipping Christmas" John Grisham

"The Clothes They Stood Up In"
Alan Bennett

and I'm having a ball on my lunch hour picking out bits and pieces from "The Portable Dorothy Parker" (this may even be a desert island book for me).

Posted by Kerry @ 02/10/2003 10:36 PM PST

Oh, if only we were equipped
for flying and such, Tom. But
we are a small town high
school (about 450 students
grades 9-12), so everything is
rather minimal for us. I'm just
focusing on keeping my upper
range under control... I usually
sing low bass, so the F#'s that
appear throughout the song
are a nice test of my range.

As for CHICAGO, I too finally
saw it this weekend and did
quite enjoy it, but would not go
so far as to hail this as the
second coming of the film
musical. I found Cell Block
Tango particularly excellent in
both cinematography and
choreography, and very much
enjoyed We Both Reached for
the Gun as well. Mister
Cellophane, which I agree is
usually a showstopper on
stage, just wasn't as effective
in the movie, but I do still enjoy
the song. For some reason
the one number that really left
me flat was I Can't Do It
Alone... the closest I've come
in any version to agreeing with
the raspberry Roxie gives it.
But all in all, certainly a very
enjoyable film which deserves
much of the praise it has
recieved.

Posted by Jed @ 02/10/2003 10:40 PM PST

I just got home from having dinner at my parents' house. They called me out of the blue (which is my favorite color, so it's okay) and said that they're having dinner at 6:00 p.m. so come on over. So I went and didn't get to chat. Otherwise I would have chatted.

And I'm working on cleaning up the London cast recording (vinyl) of 1776 so that I can have it on CD!! My brand spanking new CD burner is fabulous and eight times faster than my old (and no longer working) CD burner.

My album of "Lady in the Dark" with Judy is the one with John Lund. It says nothing about Lux Radio Theater or 1950. It just says "Command Performance Records" and "LP-10" and that's it. That will be the next CD that I make!

Posted by George @ 02/10/2003 10:53 PM PST

Ah George - that is indeed the Lux Radio Theatre version from 1953 co-starring Mr John Lund.

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/11/2003 02:16 AM PST

Sorry I missed the chat -- it starts at 9:00 here, and I crashed early, so was already snuggling down when you all began a-chattin'.

Donald, I've read Complicated Women and it's fabulous! Next, I want to check out Complicated Men by the same author. I love that a few other people here appreciate Norma...where else would I find that camraderie? Nowhere else on the net, I say, which is why this is of course the most popular site on all of the internet.

Kerry, The Portable Dorothy Parker is very much a desert island book! My tattered copy has withstood repeated thumbing-throughs over the past 10+ years. Strangely, I find myself reading the reviews (from Vanity Fair and The New Yorker) more often than the stories -- though those are great, too.

WEL: Everything I've read about Norma indicates that both of her eyes were blue -- a light blue that was very difficult to light without making them appear to be nearly white. In fact, supposedly in her first screen test for Mayer, they were in a hurry to set up and just gave her flat lighting -- making her eyes go white and her nose practically disappear, which emphasized her "cross-eyed" appearance. They were this close to booting her out of the studio, but a sympathetic soul shot another test instead (a more flattering one), and she was allowed to stay.

Jr: Would you believe I haven't seen Smilin' Through yet? Nor Idiot's Delight (OOP for awhile...big $$$ to buy it) nor Marie Antoinette. But I'm gonna!

Very interesting, what people are saying about Mr. Cellophane being a guaranteed showstopper onstage. I truly can't imagine that, based upon its presentation in the film. Iwonder if, in the show, the audience doesn't know as much about Roxie's husband (the poor sap, I can never remember his name!) as we do in the film? Then that would be the moment where he really belts out his anguish, etc. and the audience would respond. Or something. Then again, maybe the number is just presented in more of a "showstopper" way onstage.

RE: the movie version, I thought that the scene where he's the last person left in the courtroom after the paparazzi and onlookers rush out ("There ain't no baby?") was more touching and insightful (not just about him, but about Roxie...she not only couldn't care less, she's annoyed!) than was his Big Song.

Not that anyone will read all of this anyway, it being morning and all. :)

Posted by Lulu @ 02/11/2003 03:00 AM PST

Lulu,
I read your post. All of it.

Posted by Kerry @ 02/11/2003 04:37 AM PST

Kerry, thanks! :)

Posted by Lulu @ 02/11/2003 04:53 AM PST

Well, a wonderful chat was had by all last night, even though my computer bumped me off-line twice. When it happened the second time, I just decided to call it a night and go to bed. I won't be at next Sunday's chat since Ant and I are going away for a Valentine's Day weekend. We won't be back until Monday.

Posted by Ben @ 02/11/2003 04:55 AM PST

Correction: Complicated Men isn't the title -- it's Dangerous Men.

Posted by Lulu @ 02/11/2003 05:31 AM PST

Lulu---
Thanks for the info on Shearer's eyes. Donald confirmed that during chat. I'm sure it was just one of those stories that got spread around because I know I'd heard it more than once. By the way, despite Norma and Gable I don't think "Idiot's Delight" holds up at all and now I know why "Dance A Little Closer" didn't stand a chance. It's just too dated.

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/11/2003 05:54 AM PST

I'm sure this will be a big topic on the Tuesday chat, but I'd like to be the first to ask since when is Velma Kelly a supporting role?

Posted by William E. Lurie @ 02/11/2003 06:07 AM PST

In answer to WEL's question, Velma became a supporting role in the hands of screen writer (and Oscar winner Bill Condon). And speaking of CHICAGO AND OSCARS, 13 NOMINATIONS!
The question, though, that immediately springs to mind is:
Where is Dennis Quaid's nomination for either of his two brilliant performances this year?

Posted by td @ 02/11/2003 06:14 AM PST

Having just seen CHICAGO (the stage version) on the weekend, I would like to offer a dissenting opinion. Velma is very much a supporting role in the original show as well. There is no question that Roxie is the star of the show, and the show is about her journey, not Velma's. I can understand how some people would get the impression that the show is about Velma, based on the cast recording, since she is featured in more songs than Roxie. But go to the script, and you'll find that this is Roxie's show. The screenplay just made that clearer.

Posted by Dave @ 02/11/2003 06:22 AM PST

Where is Dennis' nomination - Paul Newman got it. And he is so bad. Really hasn't given a good performance in many tries lately.

Glad for everyone - except Dennis indeed is the most egregious omission (a Julie Andrews reference).

Posted by Jrand52 @ 02/11/2003 06:27 AM PST

Uh, and where is the nomination for Mr. Richard Gere's excellent turn in a supporting actor role?

Posted by Jay @ 02/11/2003 08:47 AM PST