maryanne
maryanne

May 1st, 2008, 4:36 am #11

I can understand people liking the unpolished look but I like when the dances are together. I know they are kids, but they can act like orphans, and then they should sing and dance like professionals. We would not like it if adult singing or dancing scenes were a mess, so really why should any less be expected of the kids? It is a musical after all. I saw the annie tour in 2005 (or maybe 2006) and then just last year. The orphan numbers and also Easy Street were highlights for me. They were fantastic.
I saw the original cast and MANY subsequent casts. Not one of the touring casts measured up to the first cast. Once Annie became an institution and the "Annies" seemed to be spat off an assembly line, the magic was gone. I'm sure there were some exceptions, but there is no way to realistically keep ia show like that up to the broadway standards on bus and truck after bus and truck tours, or for so many years
Quote
Share

maryanne
maryanne

May 1st, 2008, 4:39 am #12

the OBC group looked like they had the least amount of dance/acting training. That isn't a bad thing, in fact, it is what I like most about them. I'm sure they had been training since they were two, but onstage they looked like a bunch of rough and tumble orphans playing around- not like robotic child performers.
I liked that they were not robotic performers, which is what I saw time and time again on the touring shows. The Annie were indistinguishable from each other, the orphans lost all the personaluty that was so relevant to the original cast members. I don't know, I think the original show was something really special and was never repeated. I had hoped that the anniversay broadway version would reinvent that magic but it surely did not.
Quote
Share

Julie Smith
Julie Smith

May 1st, 2008, 7:02 pm #13

I saw the original cast and MANY subsequent casts. Not one of the touring casts measured up to the first cast. Once Annie became an institution and the "Annies" seemed to be spat off an assembly line, the magic was gone. I'm sure there were some exceptions, but there is no way to realistically keep ia show like that up to the broadway standards on bus and truck after bus and truck tours, or for so many years
When you say "subsequent Annie's" are you talking about the 1st-4th national tours or tours that came after the show closed on Broadway? I saw the 1st and 3rd nationals when they came through, and though I was only about 10 myself, I remember them quite well. I remember liking one of the companies greatly over the other (though I won't say which one, so don't ask). My point is, they weren't cookie-cutter Annie's or orphans to me. In fact, I remember debating with some of the other girls I knew who also saw both tours about the merits of both.

Now, in the years that have followed since the original run closed, I have seen many other tours. Some equity, some not. Some good, some seemed to be imitations of past tours.

I guess it is just all in the eye of the beholder.

Quote
Share

K-the-O ;-)
K-the-O ;-)

May 1st, 2008, 8:09 pm #14

I liked that they were not robotic performers, which is what I saw time and time again on the touring shows. The Annie were indistinguishable from each other, the orphans lost all the personaluty that was so relevant to the original cast members. I don't know, I think the original show was something really special and was never repeated. I had hoped that the anniversay broadway version would reinvent that magic but it surely did not.
Cindy,

Which Annie's did you see? If you're not comfortable stating names, which years?

Back in the day I thought each Annie was very different from one another. Each actress brought something completely unique to the role. Same for the orphans e.g. no Tessie said "Oh my goodness!" the same way but each was cute and funny in her own way.

I found the 20th orphans robotic, though, and even the 30th. But that wasn't from lack of talent. It was poor direction, imo.
Quote
Share

Zaneeta
Zaneeta

May 1st, 2008, 8:59 pm #15

This goes out to everyone. As an audience member and fan of the show, do you prefer "Never fully Dressed" to be perfectly polished or more like little girls (untrained in dance) jumping around and having fun? I'm sure the director has to decide this and I'm sure different directors have different ideas.
I personally love when a cast of orphans finds that place in which the dance is perfectly polished, and yet it looks spontaneous and fun. It's something that is very hard to do, and I believe it takes a skilled actress to do so. Personally, I love the original Broadway cast more than any other. Mind you, I did not actually see this cast perform in person, but judging from the videos, I thought they were perfect. I thought that their dance technique was natural, and their smiles were real. In recent tours, I sometimes feel that the girls "go through the motions" so to speak. I agree with some of you when it was said that the magic was lost...I think a bit of the show disappeared, and it may not be found again. That original charm has been lost for me, but maybe not for everyone. I still enjoy the show, but I find it to be rather "fake" nowadays. Especially with the way some of the lines and delivered and the way some actors are asked to move onstage...well, that's it for me! LOL. Long message for such a small question...
Quote
Share

Julie Smith
Julie Smith

May 1st, 2008, 10:21 pm #16

Cindy,

Which Annie's did you see? If you're not comfortable stating names, which years?

Back in the day I thought each Annie was very different from one another. Each actress brought something completely unique to the role. Same for the orphans e.g. no Tessie said "Oh my goodness!" the same way but each was cute and funny in her own way.

I found the 20th orphans robotic, though, and even the 30th. But that wasn't from lack of talent. It was poor direction, imo.
I agree with K the O ... nmi
Quote
Share

maryanne
maryanne

May 2nd, 2008, 3:23 am #17

Cindy,

Which Annie's did you see? If you're not comfortable stating names, which years?

Back in the day I thought each Annie was very different from one another. Each actress brought something completely unique to the role. Same for the orphans e.g. no Tessie said "Oh my goodness!" the same way but each was cute and funny in her own way.

I found the 20th orphans robotic, though, and even the 30th. But that wasn't from lack of talent. It was poor direction, imo.
Hi K!

I feel Zaneeta expressed it really well - I saw the OBC with Andrea, she and her pals seemed very "real" to me, they OWNED those parts - maybe because i was 10 but also maybe because the material was fresh, hadn't been overly repeated and transalted and watered down. Those girls created their parts. I saw the 1st, 2nd and 3rd national tours as well as the broadwat cast after andrea (shelly, SarahJ, Allison and Alyson) and the Marissa tour recently. I think there is something fresh and easy and joyful about a new show, before it's repeated and transalated over and over. When Andrea said her lines, she MEANT them, she wasn't just parrotting lines in a script. When Tessie said "Oh my goodness" it wasn't oft repeated parodic comedy relief, it was charming. When Andrea sang Maybe: she really sang it. There was no other girl who spoke those words with heartfelt meaning, rather they shrieked it or rushed it,all meaning lost. The OBC track makes me cry. It is a very sad song! I really feel it started to lose somethng in the translation. By the time the Marissa cast rolled around (she was wonderfully warm and nicely realized), the show had become god awful, where were the sets for pete's sake? Im pretty sure I saw Julie's tour and it was fantastic! Patti Patt's show was, too. She invocked a natural ease and a unique character interprertation that had been desperatly missing from the show. Kristy was an excepetion, a really unusual and delightful take on the character. she had an unusual , childlike voice which really lended itself well. She was such an effervescent little girl that she drew you in. I cannot say that about most of the others: Mollie Hall? Theda Stemler? Katyhy Jo Kelly? Not memorable at all. Kathy Jo was just bad. I like Roseanne and Mary K. Cerain aspects were good in some shows and not in others, sure. But for the most part, it just got worse and worse. Sorry.
Quote
Share

70's kid
70's kid

May 2nd, 2008, 5:23 pm #18

Cindy,

Which Annie's did you see? If you're not comfortable stating names, which years?

Back in the day I thought each Annie was very different from one another. Each actress brought something completely unique to the role. Same for the orphans e.g. no Tessie said "Oh my goodness!" the same way but each was cute and funny in her own way.

I found the 20th orphans robotic, though, and even the 30th. But that wasn't from lack of talent. It was poor direction, imo.
Is it possible this is a sign of the times? There is much more competition for wanna-be child performers with Nickelodeon, Disney channel and the 100+ other channels we didn't have back when Annie first appeared on Broadway. I think I read in one of the books that only 32 girls showed up for the first audition for the original Annie.

Now it seems like every kid wants to be a star (music, T.V., movies) and many parents are jumping on the bandwagon. With so much competition, in order to be remmebered you child must really stand out. I could be wrong, but I assume the parents encourage their children to be as perfect in their singing and dancing as possible as to not worry the director that the child might not perform perfectly in a show. Do the producers/directors seek out the kids who "nail" the audition? With so many kids to choose from, why not take the perfect, "robotic" kid who doesn't need any extra coaching? I don't know.

When I was a kid, adult celebrities were the majority and child celebrities were the minority, especially in the music industry. I don't think it occurred to many parents of young children to perfect anything they did from little league to dance recitals. Did you grow up in the 70's? Remember just being a KID? I didn't go to Gymboree, Kindermusic, Mini Monet art classes, or even Preschool, and I am a well-educated professional. Today there seems to be this unspoken competition among parents of young children. They want their kids to be "accomplished" at dance, sports, music, spelling, etc. by the time they're ten!! Scary if you ask me! The girls who auditioned for the OBC of Annie weren't like the kids who audition today. It's not anyone's fault. Times change and with that, expectations change. Any thoughts?
Quote
Share

maryanne
maryanne

May 2nd, 2008, 5:29 pm #19

I think you are SO right. Really good point.
Quote
Share