With it winning so many Olivier Awards and being such a huge hit in the West End...does anyone think that this will be pulling a Billy Elliot and winning a lot of Tonys when it comes to Broadway next year?
Gosh, am I the only one who would kill for the chance to be young again to do -(audition for)- this show? It looks like so much fun!! And the character of Bruce, what a pip!
Jonwo, Brantley reviewed it:
“Matilda” is a sweet and sharp-witted work of translation, which — like its story-spinning title character — turns dark and sodden anxieties into bright and buoyant fantasies."
“Matilda” is hardly a sugar fest. It stays true to the tartness of Dahl, who reveled in the sinister and knew that children do too."
Who knows what the competition will be like, but based on the show as I saw it in London, it would surely deserve accolades here! It was just great. Does anyone know if Bertie Carvel is reprising his role as Trunchbull? He won the Olivier today (so deserved!)!
Yes, Haydn Gwynne originated the role of Mrs. Wilkinson (though I don't think she had been playing the role in the West End when the show transferred as it had been open several years).
I saw this a few weeks ago in London. The music and lyrics were superb, as was the staging and the performances from the kids.
The book however seemed kind of convoluted and the additions/changes from the original Dahl story added nothing. The first 20 minutes established the characters and the last 20 minutes contained most of the plot. Although everything in between was fun, it seemed a long way around getting to the story- which is really about Matilda, Miss Honey, Trunchbull and what we find out about their past. It's about Matilda's magic powers (not revealed until very late in the show). Way too much time was spent on Matilda's parents with nothing gained. Matilda doesn't visit Miss Honey's cottage until very late, which previously was about the halfway point in the story.
I also have to say that I was disappointed with Bertie Carvel as Trunchbull. The character was originally written to be an imposing, angry giant of a woman to be feared. I thought I would be seeing something along the lines of Carole Shelley as Morrible in Wicked, but Carvel played Trunchbull as a bitter, jealous old queen and it didn't work for me. I didn't find the Trunchbull scary at all, just kind of sad and silly. But listening to material on the CD it seems as though one could play the character as Dahl wrote it with the material the creative team already has. Carvel just didn't. Without the villain being a true villain, the story fell flat for me.
It was also very difficult to understand most of the lyrics, which is a shame because they are so wonderful. Part of it was the heavy british accents, and part of it was poor sound coverage in the stalls area (orchestra level). I was warned about this in advance, but if I were to go back I would sit upstairs instead.
I don't know if I feel like this will be a hit in the US. It's a little too long for a show aimed mostly at kids/families. Most of the show adds little to the overall plot and could be trimmed if needed. It might work better on tour than on Broadway, since the average family would probably spend less to see the show in their home town than traveling to NYC with the high cost of hotels and such.
Just my opinions. The brits are proud of this british show, and should be. But I was far more impressed with the Ball/Staunton Sweeney production than Matilda.
I feel that the major issue Matilda will have to overcome in the US is the movie which is beloved among many people, me and my friends quote it all the time, which augmented the story to make it truly american, so many don't know the real story of the book they just know the movie version, in which the musical isn't based on
Out of curiosity, is the movie version truly beloved by many, or is it more like the movie version of Newsies, where a small group of people love it and assume everyone else does to? (And I'm not knocking Newsies, just not sure if it's love for the movie that is actually fueling ticket sales, as opposed to it just being a quality, new family-friendly show).
Matilda plays on ABC family at least once a month it is not like newsies where the only way one can watch it is the buy the vhs/dvd, i don't know anyone who owns one of those for Matilda, its just constantly on TV
The 1996 movie is actually one of the better adaptations of Dahl's work, I think. For the most part, it stays fairly close to the book so if people mostly know the story through the film, they will not have been led too far astray. The major issue with the film is the Americanization. I'm wondering if they won't Americanize the musical when it comes over to Broadway. Some of Minchin's lyrics don't quite work with an American accent, though.
In the last casting notice I saw it did note the various British accents. While they may tone them down a little (as I believe they did with Billy Elliott, please correct me if I'm wrong), I don't think it will be fully Americanized.
I have to admit that I've never cared for the movie. I was never impressed by Mara Wilson's breathy-lispy thing she had going on in anything I ever saw, and, having been very familiar with the book (my fourth grade teacher read both Matilda and The Witches to us) I was not happy with the Americanization of it all (though at the time I couldn't have told you that was why I didn't like it, it just rubbed me the wrong way back then).
That is what is likly going to be the biggest issue the show will have America's knowledge of the plot coming mostly from the Americanized movie version, which i bet the musical won't change because they were adamant about that when they picked who would produce it on broadway
Yeah, I guess they will want to keep the British setting. The musical just wouldn't work as well otherwise.
Mara Wilson was a bit wooden as Matilda, but I loved Danny DeVito as Mr. Wormwood, and (especially) Pam Ferris as Trunchbull. At least they kept her character British; I can't imagine the role being anywhere near as terrifying played as an American.
I always felt the movie (while american) was fairly faithful to Dahl's book, even if it couldn't quite capture the magic of his storytelling. The musical is not really, and while I am not against adapting the original, I do think the adaptions should make the final product better, and in this case I don't think they did.
It's a shame and (I think) a mistake to keep the british accents for the US productions. While (again) I appreciate and respect the British origins of both the original book and the musical, it's not necessary for the story to be English. Although I did wonder how Mr. Wormwood's number "Telly" would translate over here. I think it's a mistake not to at least try. I really did spend a lot of time trying to understand the accents in the theatre, and that's mental energy better spent on the characters and the story, especially for kids.
I really did like this show a lot, I just think it could be better than it was, and I too am curious about the casting of Trunchbull in the US. Carvel or an American? Man or Woman? In London there was a rumor of Carvel being replaced by a woman when he leaves. I hear the Broadway casting notice also has Trunchbull being played by a man.
Given that the RSC are producing the show on Broadway alongs with the Dodgers, it's very unlikely that they are going to have American accents although it's not location centric compared to Hairspray or Billy Elliot so they could have American accents if they wanted to.
As for Miss Trunchbull, I think the part will be played by a man and it's likely that Bertie Carvel will transfer.
The musical will be kept entirely British - and Tim and Dennis have told me the hardest thing they face is getting kids good enough to act the female lead role (as it's the hardest child part ever written for the stage) and kids to do good accents. It's not as British as Billy Elliot is - so there'll be no problem there. I don't know how the cursing went down in the US (I know the yanks have an issue with anything rude being done/said by children)
The film, whilst good, is a good re-telling of some elements, but over-hammed many of the moments such as Matilda's magic abilities and all that nonsense in Trunchbull's house. The book focuses on the two tricks she can do (cup 'n' chalk) - as does the musical. They originally had a couple of more illusions - but they were scrapped early on because it became less about the story and more about the magic tricks.
It already has the glowing New York Times review, so that main worry is over!
Definitely needs to be kept British. There are many instances where the lack of accent would kill the rhyming (or the meaning) of lyrics (as in "School Song" for example). Plus - I really don't see them changing anything in a show that's been so (nearly) universally praised and awarded.
Bea Arthur Nude Sells For Nearly $2 Million At Auction
Drama Desk Award Winners - MATILDA, VANYA AND SONIA, PIPPIN, VIRGINIA WOOLF & More!
John Bantay Talks to Richard Jay-Alexander About Musical Mondays Farewell
STAGE TUBE: MATILDA Cast Performs on The View!
CHUCK Star Zachary Levi and Krysta Rodriguez Set to Lead FIRST DATE
VIDEOS: CBS Releases Extended Trailers for New 2013-2014 Series!
VIDEO: New Trailer for Ron Howard's RUSH
Gwyneth Paltrow Returns as the Face of Hugo Boss' Latest Scent
BWW Reviews: THE GREAT GATSBY Soundtrack
Donkey Kong Country Returns is Back and Optimized for Portable Play
BWW Blog: Leah Edwards - Practice. Perform. Repeat
BWW Reviews: Millepied, Wheeldon and Martins - A Mixed Bag for City Ballet
Regional Orchestra of the Week: Reno Philharmonic, NV
joined:3/10/11
Posted: 4/15/12 at 05:16pm