Agreed. Her Narrator in Joseph was great - and a great singer, too.

It's being filmed today & tomorrow, likely scheduled for Great Performances for a future season. All depends on rights issues and whether a streamer picks it up first

@@DavidN369IS IT??? OML please tell me where you found this information

@frazzyblue1384 NYT, Theatermania, Deadline, ad infinitum, on the fact of its being pro-shot 7/17 7/18; insiders whom we can not disclose as to when/where it will air. Much like "Sunday" striking a deal w/Showtime and then GP, or "Passion" going directly to PBS, OR"Come From Away" going to Apple +, the producers are going to want to snag the best deal and longest ranging outlet for the production. It is definitely being filmed for posterity, and Great Performances keeps coming up in the mix.

@frazzyblue1384 NYT, Theatermania, Deadline, ad infinitum, that it's being filmed for posterity 6/17 & 6/18; insiders whom we cannot name as to its eventual destination; depends on rights issues & other things, as when 'Sunday" struck a deal w/Showtime first & then GP, or "Come From Away" went directly to Apple+, etc. They aren't doing a proshot just to have it languish in the Lincoln Center library, and GP is the final destination that keeps coming up. Sooner or later, it will surely hit PBS.

@@DavidN369 7/17 & 7/18? So that would be July, not June.

Is the album Now and Then? Listening now. Excellent. Her diction and placement are as specific as her directing.

Wow. Well said. And widely agreed.

I couldn't agree more. There is not much difference between this production and the 1994 York Theater production. That production was well received. the show's success revolves around the chemistry of the 3 leads and it's clear that Jonathan, Lindsay, and Daniel like each other on and off stage. And Groff's performance as Frank, making him more likable and making his intentions more clear with the best performance of "Growing Up" puts this production among the best I've seen. It is second only to a production that the Arden Theater Company did back in the 1990s with the best Mary Flynn I've ever seen Jillene Ringle, a Philly legend.

I have to disagree on one thing--geek that I am, I've had a chance to compare page by page, the 1981 book with the present (well the filmed 2012 London one) and Furth's book is, dialogue wise, almost a complete rewrite until the last few scenes, though keeps some of the same jokes. Of course the intent and scene order are the same (framing device aside)--with the weird exception that now the scene with Like it Was and Franklin Shepherd Inc are combined so that chronologically Mary sings Like it Was right before the TV meltdown--in 1981 that was a separate scene set in a restaurant a year or two after Franklin Shepherd Inc which makes more sense. So being anal, technically, it's a very heavy rewrite (much more so than the revisions made to Company in 1996 or Follies in 1998 and unfortunately the only version of those shows you can license, but that's a different issue.) I think in fact that Sondheim and Furth kinda threw the baby out with the bathwater when revising it. The final 1981 script (I have a copy of the galley proofs with Sondheim's notes when it was going to be published in 1982--ultimately it wasn't) is good. But I guess Furth (and Sondheim) felt the reason the show flopped was due to their work. As others, like the great critic Erick Neher have argued, the revised script makes some mistakes. The first party scene for example--the revised version is significantly longer and more fleshed out and everyone is, somehow, even more unpleasant. In 1981 Mary wasn't remotely as mean a drunk and at least initially tried to keep herself controlled, Frank wasn't such an asshole, Gussie pushes Meg in the pool but doesn't try to blind her with iodine, etc. It's a lot in the revised version. Gussie wasn't originally an actress, but a socialite who wanted to co-produce with her husband and I don't think expanding her character *so* much for the revision and putting a lot of the blame for what happens to Frank on her is an improvement. I could, but won't go on. That said--if anyone is even still reading this--I still agree with what you say 100%. I think this is a solid production of the revised version, but I don't think it treats the material in a revolutionary/new way. I think people were just more ready for it now (the production already was a success--if not nearly to this degree--in London in 2013) AND the chemistry of the three leads seems to make a huge difference. Also, thanks for bringing up the Donmar/Grandage production (with a young Julian Ovenden!) I saw it as a teen and was blown away, it won the Olivier and the only reason it didn't extend was... Because they combined elements that had been dropped since 1981--the Hills of Tomorrow High School framework, the Rich and Happy opening, with elements of the revised version (I remember Growing Up, for example.) And... somehow they never got permission to do this. As I've heard it, the production was going to be shut down in previews, but Sondheim and Furth flew out to see it, loved it, and they all agreed it could play out its Donmar run *but* couldn't transfer to the West End and that version of the script could not be used again. Foolish I think, as I think it worked better than any version since. Ah well....

@@EricMontreal22 I agree with your "throwing the baby out with the bathwater comment". I'm inclined to believe most of the revisions achieved very little; they just moved stuff around and in many instances made characters less likeable. Sondheim & Furth were over-reacting to the criticisms; the problem wasn't the book, it was the production. I have seen both versions and a couple that were somewhere in between. I still think the Donmar Production was better than any other I've seen. That was partly due to the fantastic three central performances, but also because it kept elements of the original that absolutely worked.

@@joshdrayton1230 Completely agreed. I will add that, oddly, I think, at least in the opening scene they make the characters LESS likeable.

That was a snippet of this one, this is the entire interview I think

No, Charley is Steve…no?

have you seen it? i didn't expect much from the story but was so so pleasantly surprised

@@marssandri I have twice