Post by Talissa on Oct 20, 2003 13:06:42 GMT 11
So, how long will it last, do you think? 
THE SHOW-STEALER FROM OZ
From ninemsn.com
Major New York newspapers agree that Australian actor Hugh Jackman's star shines bright in the new Broadway production of the Peter Allen story, "The Boy From Oz".
It's just a shame that the light he brings to the stage is swallowed up by the black hole of a production he's in.
Critics have lauded Jackman's portrayal of Allen - the flamboyant and energetic boy from Tenterfield, in north-western NSW, who helped define the disco era in the 1970s and 80s, before succumbing to AIDS in 1992.
But they have branded the production, which opened at New York's Imperial Theatre, soulless, unimaginative, and, at times, plain strange.
As The New York Times critic Ben Brantley puts it, Jackman is an indisputably authentic star who has helped an "indisputably bogus show" notch up advance sales worth almost $US10 million ($A14.5 million).
He says Jackman captures Allen's spirit, energy, and onstage presence - even if his singing is sometimes off-key.
"Jackman's singing voice, though occasionally flat, cannily echoes the way Allen turned his Australian twang into a shiny instrument that slid from dry urbanity to moist sentimentality," Brantley writes.
"His limbs twirling like the blades of a windmill ... Jackman channels the energy that was Allen with a rejuvenating life force all his own.
"And you don't feel, as you so often do with such interpretations, that your memories of the prototype have been blurred. This is a performance that, against the odds, holds onto its integrity."
New York Daily News critic Howard Kissel says the show itself can seem like "an expanded drag act", but says Jackman's performance "is so dazzling he transforms it into great Broadway entertainment".
"Jackman conveys the almost desperate eagerness to please that is part of many performers' makeup," he writes.
"For Allen, the eagerness was a campy mannerism. For Jackman, it is a challenge he meets with ferocious gusto."
Kissel says Jackman projects the sadness and insecurity that were always part of Allen's personal and professional makeup.
"But his talent is so huge, it transcends Allen's neuroses," he writes.
"Even his dancing shows an actor's understanding ... The show uses Allen's songs to tell his story. In Jackman's voice, the songs always seem appropriate."
Associated Press Critic Michael Kuchwara, writing for the New York Post Online, describes the production as "a particularly frantic and soulless bit of show-biz folderol".
And while he praises Jackman's energetic efforts to rescue the show, he says it remains an unimaginative offering, peppered with Allen's songs even when they don't seem to fit.
"If there were a lifetime achievement award for Broadway's hardest working actor, the personable Jackman would win - hands, feet and legs down or up on the piano," Kuchwara writes.
"They seem to go in every which way as he sings, dances, mugs, minces, and attempts to levitate this leaden production all by himself.
"In the end, `The Boy From Oz' is a show filled with aimless energy, rather than inspiration, leaving theatre-goers exhausted rather than entertained."
ninemsn.com
From ninemsn.com
Major New York newspapers agree that Australian actor Hugh Jackman's star shines bright in the new Broadway production of the Peter Allen story, "The Boy From Oz".
It's just a shame that the light he brings to the stage is swallowed up by the black hole of a production he's in.
Critics have lauded Jackman's portrayal of Allen - the flamboyant and energetic boy from Tenterfield, in north-western NSW, who helped define the disco era in the 1970s and 80s, before succumbing to AIDS in 1992.
But they have branded the production, which opened at New York's Imperial Theatre, soulless, unimaginative, and, at times, plain strange.
As The New York Times critic Ben Brantley puts it, Jackman is an indisputably authentic star who has helped an "indisputably bogus show" notch up advance sales worth almost $US10 million ($A14.5 million).
He says Jackman captures Allen's spirit, energy, and onstage presence - even if his singing is sometimes off-key.
"Jackman's singing voice, though occasionally flat, cannily echoes the way Allen turned his Australian twang into a shiny instrument that slid from dry urbanity to moist sentimentality," Brantley writes.
"His limbs twirling like the blades of a windmill ... Jackman channels the energy that was Allen with a rejuvenating life force all his own.
"And you don't feel, as you so often do with such interpretations, that your memories of the prototype have been blurred. This is a performance that, against the odds, holds onto its integrity."
New York Daily News critic Howard Kissel says the show itself can seem like "an expanded drag act", but says Jackman's performance "is so dazzling he transforms it into great Broadway entertainment".
"Jackman conveys the almost desperate eagerness to please that is part of many performers' makeup," he writes.
"For Allen, the eagerness was a campy mannerism. For Jackman, it is a challenge he meets with ferocious gusto."
Kissel says Jackman projects the sadness and insecurity that were always part of Allen's personal and professional makeup.
"But his talent is so huge, it transcends Allen's neuroses," he writes.
"Even his dancing shows an actor's understanding ... The show uses Allen's songs to tell his story. In Jackman's voice, the songs always seem appropriate."
Associated Press Critic Michael Kuchwara, writing for the New York Post Online, describes the production as "a particularly frantic and soulless bit of show-biz folderol".
And while he praises Jackman's energetic efforts to rescue the show, he says it remains an unimaginative offering, peppered with Allen's songs even when they don't seem to fit.
"If there were a lifetime achievement award for Broadway's hardest working actor, the personable Jackman would win - hands, feet and legs down or up on the piano," Kuchwara writes.
"They seem to go in every which way as he sings, dances, mugs, minces, and attempts to levitate this leaden production all by himself.
"In the end, `The Boy From Oz' is a show filled with aimless energy, rather than inspiration, leaving theatre-goers exhausted rather than entertained."
ninemsn.com
