reviews of the new Mel Brooks play Young Frankenstein"

for tickets go to www.tixx.com
Already been to a "Young Frankenstein" performance? Then share your thoughts!

The cast, set and overall production was amazing! There are just too many highlights to list. I would highly recommend the show to anyone interested in attending. 5 stars! A must see.

Also, I attended the August 16th show. Having Mel Brooks in attendance was priceless. He seemed to enjoy the show as much as the rest of the audience.
Tue, Aug 21, 2007 2:15 pmT. Madani
Fall City
We saw the show early on in the run - 8/11. We loved it for the most part. It was a tad long and definitely needs to be cut a bit before opening on Broadway. The sets were incredible and the special effects were wonderful! Loved, loved the horse/cart scene and the dream sequence. There was a lot more to love,but these two scenes stood out. The cast was quite good, Andrea Martin was incredible as Frou B. The cast in genearl was super, but Megan Mulally seemed like she was just channelling "Karen" in 1930's dress. And why or why was she abruptly thrust into the lab scene with her telephone number?? Ridiculous. She's not the reason why people came to see the show. Next to the magnificent Madeline Kahn she pales. She did fine in her other appearances on stage but the telephone number totally turned me off and broke up the climatic scene in the lab. They shouldn't have changed the hermit's last line from "espresso" to "Baked Alaska" - were they afraid since they already did a Seattle coffee joke that "esperesso" wouldn't fly? It's the line from the movie and it's a line people are waiting to hear. You could hear the "what?" coming from the people all around us. However, we did laugh throughout the show, we enjoyed the whole production. Once it's trimmed - I think it will enjoy a nice run on Broadway. We did appreciate seeing it in this venue and having the opportunity to witness this wonderful production!
Tue, Aug 21, 2007 11:13 amTerry Horton
Brier, WA
My husband, born and raised in NYC, is such a rabid Mel Brooks fan he bought tickets as soon as they hit the box office. We saw the show on 8/14 to give them a week to work out the kinks. Not sure how many kinks there were to begin with but there aren't many anymore. I think they could tone down the strobe effects a little and one of the songs went on for too long, but otherwise it was great. I've never seen the movie version and I wondered if I'd like it at all not knowing much about it, but I was laughing so hard I wasn't wondering for long.

Now, I said that my husband is a rabid Mel Brooks fan, and I know that he's been to loads of Broadway plays including The Producers where he sat behind Anne Bancroft, so imagine his surprise when, just after the lights dimmed, none other than Mel Brooks pops into the seat next to him! He was laughing and clapping just as hard as everyone else around him even though he's already been through countless rehearsals. It was great to see him so happy with his efforts. And, of course, all the way home my husband kept saying "I can't believe I sat next to Mel Brooks!"

I've heard that the show is sold out on Broadway until January and it doesn't even open till October. We're very lucky to have had the chance to preview it here. It made my husband a little less homesick and for that, Mr. Brooks, I am grateful.
Tue, Aug 21, 2007 11:04 amKW
Issaquah
I feel compelled to write as I must strongly disagree with Mark's review, at least in part.

Mullally was terrific -- and is clearly beloved by the audience -- she got laughs and applause just by walking out onstage. Her "Please Don't Touch Me" number was a hoot, as was the naughty "Deep Love".

Mark will be pleased to learn however that the "phone call" has been cut. She just appears at the laboratory, in a very funny scene.

On the other hand, Sutton Foster has an amazing voice -- but I guess is too inexperienced to have developed the comic timing that is second nature to the rest of the cast. She jumped on all of her punch lines, rather than allowing a little pause. But what was most distracting was the fact that her "german/swedish/transylvanian?" accent completely disappeared at timies, especially during her songs.

The rest of the cast is pitch perfect, but I'd like to single out Fred Applegate, especially his performance as the blind man (that Gene Hackman played in the film). He brought the house down with a single number, the hilarious "Please Send Me Someone".

Andd the Puttin' on the Ritz number is truly inspired -- w/ a clever salute to Astaire's "Bojangles" routine thrown in.

As others have said, the show is too long -- still needs cutting -- and I would agree the dance number right before the second act is waaaay too long. In fact it might be more effective and more surprising if they cut 3/4 of it before the monster makes his appearance.

And I'd like to see the show end with the number from the film "Oh Sweet Mystery of LIfe"...rather than the 2 or 3 reprises of other numbers. Overall, the ending didn't quite seem to have the energy and innovation of the rest of the show, which I guess is why they added a number AFTER the curtain call. ???

Nevertheless, overall it was fantastic.

Kelly
Tue, Aug 21, 2007 9:40 amKelly
Seattle
We saw Young Frankenstein on Saturday the 11th and we loved it. The other reviewers were correct though, in saying it's too long and needs some cropping.

I was worried that Roger Bart wouldn't hold a candle to Gene Wilder, but was pleasantly surprised with the quality of his performance. He brought a lot of personality and subtlety to the part, just like Wilder did. Nice job.

Megan Mullaly, the supposed "Big Star" of the show (who I loved in Will & Grace) was surprisingly the weak point of the cast, in my opinion. While Deep Love and Dont' Touch Me were great, the rest of her songs seemed to be put there just so the Big Star could have something to do in the middle of the show.

Sutton Foster as Inga was absolutely the highlight for me. Plus she can yodel! Stunningly beautiful, fantastic dancer and a personality that just radiates. Once or twice her comedic timing was just a bit off (in the bookcase scene) but overwall wonderful.

I also agree that Chrisopher Fitzgerald as Igor and Andrea Martin as Frau Blucher were great as well. Andrea Martin's veteran comic timing was a joy to watch.

To me, the musical was broken into thirds. The first third was absolutely laugh out loud hilarious. Then things dragged a bit as the doctor tried to bring the monster to life (what was up with the phone call from Megan Mullaly right at a climactic moment? That song DEFINITELY needs to be cut). Then after intermission with the Puttin on the Ritz number and conclusion were also very very funny.

Highly recommended!
Tue, Aug 21, 2007 6:42 amMark Olwick
Burlington WA
I went for the "Friends and Family" preview on Wednesday, August 8th. I plan on going again on Thursday, August 23rd for "opening night".

Am very happy that Seattle beat out Minneapolis for the teching of this new musical bound for Broadway. Seattle had the theater space and experienced technical staff available at budget rates. Plus Seattle is far enough away from NY critics to risk a new production.

Robin Wagner's scenic design is budgeted for the spectacular laboratory elements. Peter Kaczorowski's lighting desing is not for the epileptic. Marc Brickman's choice of live tesla coils are worth the price of admission. William Ivey Long's strict adherence to the movie's costumes is unimaginative. Jonathan Deans sound design is flat and pounding.

The biggest question is: Do you have to see (be familar) with the movie before going to the musical?

I own the DVD. I found myself wanting to replace Roger Bart for Gene Wilder, Christopher Fitzgerald for Marty Feldman, Sutton Foster for Terri Garr, Andrea Martin for Cloris Leachman, Megan Mullally for Madeline Kahn, Fred Applegate for Kenneth Mars and Gene Hackman, and Shuler Hensley for Peter Boyle.

Christopher Fitzgerald dominates most scenes with fantastic comedic timing and sublte expressions. The female ensemble resemble The Rockettes. Megan Mullally hits the back wall; yet, I was hoping for less nasality and more depth.

The songs do not warrant a purchase of the soundtrack. "Please Don't Touch Me", "Roll in the Hay", "Join the Family Business", "He vas my boyfriend", "Transylvania Mania", "Please send me someone", "Man about town", "Ah, Sweet Mystery of Life", and "Deep Love" are like chinese food, you are hungry in a half an hour. Additionally, "Roll in the Hay" and "Deep Love" are not for the prudes (or kids) in your group.

The shadow dance (Eric Jackson and Shuler Hensley) was captivating. The "Puttin' on the Ritz" strobe dance left your jaw on the floor.

Without the incredible sucess of "The Producers" and the name of Mel Brooks this show is a cover tune with expensive sets and multiple strobes without an anthem.

I laughed and laughed. It inspired me to pop in the 30th anniversary DVD and laugh some more.
Tue, Aug 21, 2007 12:06 amCurio
Seattle
I think that this Young Frankenstein is destined to have a smash run, then be remade into a movie that keeps intact all the great musical numbers that just pop out at you like one of those great folding dioramas.

The backstory to the characters have been strengthened and brought to life (pun intended) from the hilarious, yet droll, original film version. Some folks have not appreciated the long running time, but there is not one wasted number or piece of action that didn't serve to further the plot or round out a character more fully (or deeply as the case may be...)

The sets are jaw-dropping, and visual effects amazing. Of course saving the best for last, the cast is fabulous with great working chemistry. Roger Bart's transformation from Fronkensteen to Frankenstein is delicious, and Sutton Foster plays the not-so-naive Inga perfectly-what a voice she has! Second City veteran Andrea Martin is priceless, and Megan Mullally's portrayal of virginal/bad girl paired with Shuler Hensley's monster still has me laughing.

Don't compare the show to the movie. That's why they call it Theatre!
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 9:43 pmBrian
Seattle
I saw the show Saturday night (8/18), sitting in the balcony and spent the second act bobbing back and forth to see the stage, as I was stuck sitting behind a giraffe. I'm also a seasoned show-biz professional with a long history of seeing and working on many professional theater productions. In the interest of full disclosure, I'm also a huge Mel Brooks fan. In short, "Young Frankenstein" is going to be a huge hit. Is it perfect? No. And it may never be but it doesn't matter. What's on the boards now is a solid, laugh-filled, monster of a show with great performances, good musical numbers and side-splitting humor. It could go to NY as I saw it Saturday and run for years but I'm sure, with the gifted creative team behind it, it will be even better. The biggest problem in NYC will be not enough Tony categories to cover everyone. As a fan of the film, the creators and the cast did a fantastic job of evoking the spirit of the movie while making the characters and the show their own. Having worked in television, film and on stage, I've always been a tough critic. My kids always look to me after watching something to see if I'm going to tear it apart. I've got nothing to tear apart here. I'd see it every night if I could.
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 4:13 pmSF
Issaquah, WA
My general feeling was the musical was good, very funny and enjoyable. The one thing I thought was lacking was a show stopping number, though Sitting on the Ritz was fun. The next day, other than Ritz number (obviously not original for the show), there were no memorable catchy tunes that I could recall. The Roll in the Hay number was funny, and a little bit bawdy; but still, do not recall the tune now.

Specifically my one comment would be that the first act was too long. In addition, they tried to rush intermission, which after that long of a first act was a mistake. Let us hope the NYC Theater will have more bathrooms than the Paramount. There were several big dance numbers, which I felt could be shortened or eliminated. The boat goodbye scene was too long.

The role of Elizabeth seemed to be over done, and I am not sure the story line really needed her to advance – other than to sing Deep Love. I wonder if that role could be shortened. I thought the cast was strong, and was very impressed by the Sutton Foster, Roger Bart and Christopher Fitzgerald. I think Igor has to be careful to not doi a Marty Feldman impersonation for the whole show, but he was still great.

The lighting and special effects were spectacular. The sets were absolutely amazing and the costumes wonderful. Sound was good, though I was wondering at times if it was a tape or live voices. I did not think the make-up for the monster was very good though.

So, I would think with some additional work, shorten the first act, strengthen the ending and they will have a hit on Broadway.
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 2:30 pmHarry Lightfoot
Seattle
Andrea Martin you are pure genius!
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 2:11 pmKaren
Seattle
We went to the 8.18.07-8PM show and it was wonderful! Dinner @ Ruth's Chris before (learned from our waiter that the cast frequents Ruth's, including Mel). The show itself was extremely entertaining. A gentleman behind us laughed throughout the entire show. The "Puttin' on the Ritz" number was assumingly going to be the topper of the evening and it was that and then some! The efforts of all involved from the leads to the chorus line to the set designers to the orchestra to the grips, etc. they all deserve a huge round of applause. To see this movie brought to live theatre is a treat for your eyes and ears not to be missed. Without a doubt, if you miss "Young Frankenstein" while it's here in Seattle, you're missing a grand show.....
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 1:21 pmSoozan
Seattle, WA
I don't think that I'm alone in considering Young Frankenstein to be the best of Mel Brooks' films. While "The Producers" and "Blazing Saddles" have enduring moments of hilarity, they also host far too many ouch-inducing moments of zany comedy that falls flat, but keeps going anyway. Don't even get me started on "Space Ballls".

Young Frankenstein, however, remains a tightly constructed, intelligent and consistently funny film that does not feel dated even 30+ years later. The difference? Gene Wilder was the primary screenwriter of Young Frankenstein and fought Brooks tooth and nail to keep the film at a certain level of comedic sensibility (I base this assertion on an interview with Wilder on the special edition DVD of the film).

The problem with the current musical of Young Frankenstein is that it all seems to have fallen back into the hands of Mel Brooks and the intelligence and subtle humor that Wilder brought to the original project are tossed out in favor of humor of the lowest common denominator. This latest musical outing feels like it owes more to the original film of The Producers than it does to the original Young Frankenstein, and that's really too bad.

I think it's also too bad that Brooks wrote the music and lyrics himself. As others have mentioned, most of the musical numbers do nothing to further the plot but, instead, interrupt the plot with unnecessary extravaganza. A fair amount of very funny and intelligent humor from the original is sacrificed in order to plow into another dumb song. I was most aware of this when, perhaps my favorite line of Frau Blucher's, "I suggest you wear a tie", was cut in order to allow Elizabeth to inexplicably burst through the dungeon laboratory's wall to sing "I'm Here" which, actually, could hardly even be called a song.

The production is great to look at and there are some potentially brilliant performances (in spite of it all), but this production firmly belongs in the "why did that need to happen?" category.

If only Mel had chosen Space Balls instead...
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 12:46 pmRobert
Seattle
We saw the performance last Wednesday (the 15th), and walked away from the theater talking about how we thought that this will be a hit once it finally gets to Broadway. We felt lucky to be able to see it with the B'way cast and crew.

When I lived in NY I attended several Broadway critic's preview nights with a friend, when the show wasn't nearly as ready for opening. A few didn't ever make it out of previews. Some made it through, then opened and closed the same night. Young Frankenstein is ready, as is, for the stage, but it will be made even better with some slight changes and cuts, as with all shows coming out of previews.

Mel Brooks has taken the Young Frankenstein that we all know and love and re-created it for Broadway (It's Alive, Again!). With a cultural icon like YF, it's a difficult transition from what everyone remembers to an updated musical stage version.

I thought that the performances were tight, with little wasted motion or energy. Set changes were spot-on. Watching the faces of the cast you could see that everyone on stage was putting their energy into it, and enjoying what they were doing. Listening to the various conversations taking place as we walked down Pike to catch our bus home, most of the rest of the people that attended that evening had also thoroughly enjoyed themselves, too.

I just sent a note to my sister, who lives in NY, teasing her about actually being able to catch something wonderful before it makes it to the Great White Way.

Thanks, Mr. Brooks, for a very entertaining evening. I have recommended this show to all of my friends and co-workers.
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 12:38 pmMikeP
Seattle
Well I saw the Producers a few years back when it came to the Paramount, as I was wonder what all the hype was about. To put it honestly, it was good, but I wasn't really impressed.

But Young Frankenstein is a totally different story! All I can say is WOW!!! Yes, there is a lot from the movie, but Mel added so much more! And the Seattle Jokes had the audience roaring. I don't want to give it away, but I hope he keeps them in (and I think he will) should keep the audience roaring on Broadway too.

All I can say is, I SMELL TONY!
Mon, Aug 20, 2007 12:10 pmLinda G
Mill Creek, WA
The best movie versions of Broadway musicals usually depart and expand from their stage bound origins. Broadway musicals of movies have often been compelled to stay as close to the source material as to not offend the large built-in audience such musicals are designed to attract. Young Frankenstein follows in this model. This second Mel Brook’s movie-to-stage project follows nearly every scene of the 1974 movie, with jokes, site gags, and monster faithfully recreated by a first rate cast. While we love the memory of the movie as we see it played out live in front of us, our patience is tested as it seems forever to get to each punch line. At nearly three hours, the production feels bloated, despite some spectacular production numbers and outstanding performances. Let’s hope Mel, director Susan Stroman, and team will trim less potent elements and bring the wit, timing and spontaneity now missing before the company moves to New York.
Sun, Aug 19, 2007 10:18 pmFrank McKown
Santa Monica, CA
About the August 14 performance: the sets, musical staging, and performances were all on the money. I agree with TN that the first act finale dragged. It's difficult to top bringing the monster to life. Though it's not useful to compare the stage performances to the screen performances (Peter Boyle and Marty Feldman are no longer with us) I think it's helpful to make a note on the ending. When I recently watched the film again, I listened to the monster's words and found them very moving. A monster's soliloquy delivered in Shuler Hensley's rich bass voice would have tied things together nicely.
Sun, Aug 19, 2007 10:14 pmBruce
Portland, OR
The show was hilarious and very entertaining if you can stomach Mel Brooks; he ain't for everybody! (See comment from James - Seattle) However, if hilarious parody of musicals goneby, ribald humour, a complete lack of political correctness, and overplayed stereotypes are your cup of tea, then this is the full monty. (Personally, I found this show far less disturbing in terms of overplayed stereotypes than "The Producers.") Igor and the doctor did stand out. Even so, the cast felt exceptional, all around. I would dramatically shorten the dance number at the end of act 1 because it was too long, and because it took itself too seriously as a long formal dance number within a show that takes traditional musical formulas and then completely knocks them on thier head. I'd also shorten the "Ritz" number in spite of it's impact. With the exception of these two numbers, the show held my rapt attention and I laughed the whole way through. I think I'll have the love-epiphany parody "Deep Love" performed by Megan Mullaly stuck in my head for weeks - I thought that was the highlight of the show just because it totally and humorously deconstructs so many sappy sentimental love-epiphany songs from old tired musicals (I'm thinking of Camelot when it was here, ugh). She was spot-on perfect for this part. Summary: A humorous must-see if you have the stomach for Mel Brooks work.
Sun, Aug 19, 2007 8:19 amTN
Redmond
I had the opportunity to see Young Frankenstein last week due to a fortuitously-timed business trip. As a life-line Mel Brooks fan, I was giddy at the prospect of seeing Young Frankenstein in preview. Although I found myself leaving the theater a little disappointed, I am optimistic that they will work out the kinks and deliver a brilliant product to Broadway. To that end, I humbly offer my thoughts, in hope that they will trickle back to the right ears.

Overall, I was entertained and had an enjoyable evening. It was a treat to be in one of the first audiences to see this much-anticipated show. But this show is not, in my opinion, ready for Broadway. The set was truly amazing. It was elaborate and beautiful but without disrupting the pace of the show. The set changes were at times immense and yet flowed seamlessly. Costumes were likewise stunning. However, I felt that the showwas overlong and bloated with several musical numbers that felt like they had been inserted without regard to the pacing and flow of the entire show. (See Miss Erin's comments. She articulates the issue better than I can hope to.) But my biggest concern is that the musical numbers for the most part just weren't funny. Having recently seen Spamalot, I could not help but compare the two shows and YF did not benefit from the comparison. Too many large ensemble numbers, too many jarring transitions, nothing particularly memorable. Indeed, there really was not one catchy number that you left the theater humming.

Overall, the casting was quite good. YF is full of roles that feel as though no one but the original cast could possibly have filled. It was hard not to picture Cloris Leachman spitting, "He vas my boyfriend," Terri Garr vrolling in ze hay, Madeline Kahn keeping Gene Wilder at arm's distance with the line, "taffeta darling" or Marty Feldman explaining how the brain belonged to someone named Abby Normal. In Seattle, some of the actors had more success than others at exorcising the ghosts of the original cast. Andrea Martin is well cast as Frau Blucher, but I would love to see her a little freakier, as she is in the movie role, holding back from the others rather than joing the gang so quickly as she did here.

Megan Mullaly is potentially a bombshell. She has the ability to camp it up and she definitely has the pipes for this role. But again, as Miss Erin writes, "The humor of a double entendre is totally lost when the character knows she's being dirty." But I would also go further and note that it dumbs down the show when the character has to virtually shine a spot light on the joke to make sure the audience does not miss it.

Christopher Fitzgerald was wonderful as Igor. Marty Feldman left large shoes to fill and Fitzgerald did so in great syle.

Sutton Foster was fine, but did not blow me away. Her part lacked the innocence of Terri Garr's original Inge. The movie Inge somehow manages to be a dumb blond and yet wise, serving as a perfect foil for Frederick's pomposity and mania. The stage Inge did not manage to do the latter. She managed to be simultaneously less dumb blond and less wise.

Roger Bart is a challenge for me to comment on because I am so reminded of Gene Wilder's perfection in this role and any comparison feels unfair. However, Roger Bart did an admirable job with the role given some of the musical numbers he had to work with.

Mel, I have faith in you. I have been a fan since I was a child. I look forward to seeing the final product in New York!
Sun, Aug 19, 2007 7:50 amKatie
Saint Paul, MN
I saw the first preview performance of 'Young Frankenstein' and was thoroughly entertained, despite the somewhat bloated 3 hour length. Roger Bart is thoroughly invested and a joy to watch as young Dr Frankenstein. "Puttin' on the Ritz" is a fantastic, explosive showstopper and worth the price of admission. All three of the female leads were weaker than I had expected. Sutton Foster's Inga seems perfectly performed but the character is bland and forgettable. Much like Ms Mullaly, it's a shame that such a talented actor comes across as another expensive piece of set dressing. The humor of a double entendre is totally lost when the character knows she's being dirty. This totally ruins the fun of Brooks' guilty pleasure junior high humor. Megan Mullaly has some stellar pipes and she appears to know she's the diva in this piece, but some of her numbers are extraneous and distracting. Her fantastic character seems to be sprinkled in some scenes to get laughs and keep it funny, but it is out-of-place and slows the pace to a snail crawl. Andrea Martin's Frau Blucher has funny moments but her broad strokes suffer when one has Cloris Leachman's fully invested movie version to compare with it. On the other hand, Christopher Fitzgerald's Igor is phenomenal, and his interactions with Bart are a blast to watch. Every time Igor and the Doctor are onstage, things lighten up a bit and time passes much faster.

My biggest problem with the show as it currently plays is that many of the songs exist outside the flow of the story. Every time something starts to happen, there's a song that stops the pace dead in its tracks. The best musicals are constructed with songs that move the pace, further the story and continue the arcs of the characters. Audiences will come along for the ride for a couple of well-done show stoppers but even with Susan Stroman's fantastic choreography, most of the songs feel like afterthoughts thrown in to use the well-toned chorus line.

Mr Bart's performance stands out so nicely because he is the most earnest thing about this production. The whole production team is trying so hard to get "BIG! LAUGHS!" that they are missing the hordes of chortles and guffaws that naturally flow in Brooks' original movie. I've been recommending the show to my friends on the strength of Bart's Frankenstein, 'Puttin on the Ritz' and the laboratory itself, but warning them about the unreasonable length. If the show was half as long, it would surely be twice as funny. Brooks and his team have some work cut out for them before they head back to Broadway. At least "Young Frankenstein" has moments where it fully succeeds in winning over the audience. The show could be great, but now it's simply mildly amusing.
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 10:30 pmMiss Erin
Georgetown
We were in NYC last week and saw Legally Blonde, Hairspray and Wicked. We loved them all. Two nights ago we saw YF at the Paramount. Of the four shows (Wicked we've seen twice) this one ranks with Wicked in its visual stimulation and overall jaw dropping factor. Simply fantastic! Way beyond our expectations. Hilarious! The props were amazing. The actors were super. This is not just the movie dragged out onto the stage. It is a whole new experience. There are a number of familiar lines from the movie but beyond that, the actors do a great job of making the characters fresh and new and the view will blow you away.
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 1:04 pmSteve, Lee, and Natalee
Woodinville
[b]Hi, Mel,
I've been a fan for a very long time of all your work. Funny, funny show and it was terrifc! We saw it Wed., the 15th. The cast was perfect. The music, the sets, dancing numbers, etc., etc. were first rate. All the stuff that you added that wasn't in the movie was great - which by the way is one of my favorites.

I know it was a preview so I have a suggestion - It was a bit too long. Even though the costumes and the dance numbers were really well done, you might consider shortening the dancing...except "Putting on the Ritz" which was hilarious and brought the house down. The scene with the housekeeper (she was wonderful) was very funny ("He was my boyfriend") the monster and the fiance (Madeline Kahn's role) with the hair and the song broke me up; the bit with the blind monk was fantastic (the monk was so great even though I kept seeing Gene Hackman)!; I could go on and on. As a former New Yorker, I think it will be a smash on Broadway.

Thank you so much for a joyful evening. You really are something else. I'm not your mother, but...you are a genius!!! If I could afford it, I would see it again. How about that for a compliment! You haven't lost your touch. Keep it coming.

Lee Miller
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 12:05 pmLee Miller
Bellevue, WA
A business trip to Seattle allowed an opportunity to see YF. Yes Mel Brooks is trite, predictable, slapstick - and it all comes together in a musical extravaganza that starts off high and goes up from there. Not a weak member of the cast. And even at nearly three hours long, I found myself wishing there was more, particularly for Megan Mullally to showcase her comic talent and stellar voice. This production cost a lot and every penny was spent well. I was grateful how closely it followed the original movie - no need to tweak with something that was so perfect. Certainly there will be adjustments before it makes it to Broadway, but I'm glad I got to see the unedited version. My sympathy goes out to those who will compete for the Tony Awards.
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 11:45 amSteve B
Phoenix, Arizona
OOOOOOOMMMMMMMMGGGGGGGGG.... It was one of the best... matter of fact the BEST musical i have EVER seen.... I saw it yesterday and man i could not sleep.... the Set..... the effects.... AMAZING.... I NEEEDDD to see it again....
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 11:41 amJordon
Renton
Young Frankenstein was nothing short of amazing! Every aspect of the show was first rate - certainly one of the most entertaining things I have ever seen. It certainly shows Mel Brooks' comedic genius, as well as the wonderful
actors right down the line. How do they keep up that energy night after night? The wonderful direction/choreography of Susan Stroman, the eye-popping sets, amazing lighting.... You can see just how much work (and money) went into this. It was a night in the theatre I will not soon forget. This show will definitely
clean up the awards on Broadway next year. Run to the Paramount to see this before it leaves here.
The icing on the cake for me was that I actually had a close encounter with Mel Brooks while walking back to my car after the show. I called to him how wonderful the show was, which he acknowledged.
Perhaps we might see "Blazing Saddles, the musical" in our future! What a hoot that would be!
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 11:17 amTodd Case
Shoreline
Wow.

Am I the only one who missed the kool-aid when they passed it around the theatre? This show was, while not quite horrible, definitely not good.

Given the fact that the production is still in preview and is subject to tweaking, I won't break it down bit by bit or joke by joke. But overall the thing was bland, unoriginal, and and believe it or not, dated. Production numbers were fine, standard fare, but throughout the show I often found myself reminded of other, more powerful, original, and enjoyable numbers from other shows.

The performances in general were fine. Roger Bart was okay; it was difficult to understand him at several points (which, frankly, probably has more to do with the terrible sound system at the Paramount than with him personally). At last night's performance, anyway, he seemed disengaged. But that may change in NY.

Megan Mullaly was fine. Not much more than fine, but okay. I think she was given a lot of slack by the audience because of her prior work. She did fine with what she had, I suppose.

Sutton Foster did what she could do with the part, but the buxom blonde of Mr. Brooks' movies and musicals gets old, and once again, Inga felt like a boring rehash of the big hearted, big voiced, big boobed bimbo of much of Mr. Brooks' work. A very good performance of a re-hashed part.

Standouts included Chrisopher Fitzgerald as Igor and Andrea Martin as Frau Blucher. Maybe they had more to work with, maybe not. But they definitely made the show. Without them, the show would have been close to unbearable.

I know these comments are conclusory, and I am not giving a lot of specifics; in preview status, who knows what the final result will be? But I hope the NYers here to work on it take the ridiculous "Seattle Standing O" with a grain of salt.

At one point during the performance I thought about my now deceased grandfather, sitting around the thanksgiving table making the same old jokes that may have been funny "back in the day," but were just plain dumb and oftentimes offensive in the present. So you sit and listen to your grandfather, and you smile at the right times and you sigh inwardly because you love him and put up with him. But at $450 a ticket in NY, I don't think NYers will be as kind to Mr. Brooks.
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 11:14 amJames
Seattle
I saw the first preview showing of YF and was blown away; completely entertained. Yes, I knew it was a preview, but maybe that is because I'm from the theatre community here and understand what preview means. Seeing a preview doesn't mean you get half of what the show will be when it opens. I knew I would be seeing scenes, music and dancing that will, no doubt, be cut from the show. But that is half the fun of going to one of these events. I will see what the Broadway goers won't.
The sets, special effects, alone, were worth the price of admission. But the caliber of talent was just awesome. Not a weak link in the bunch. It will, of course, change nightly; and will, I hope, eventually be cut simply because it was too long. I can't even pretend how those chorus members feel after a double show day. My thought would be with the musical numbers, not that they were terrible, certainly could be trimmed without any loss to the whole.
In a world where we watch the quasi-talented on reality tv shows weekly,why on Earth, is it a 'risk' for a community to see real talent on-stage trying hone a new vehicle for the industry? Hey, you might learn something or see something you may never have the chance to see again. You can say, 'Hey! I saw the guy from Desparate Housewives singing and dancing like a 'madman'." or "I saw Young Frankenstein when Megan Mallaley or Andrea Martin from SNL played that character!".
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 9:29 amKit Harris
Seattle
I was at the first paid performance on Tuesday night, August 7th.

There were the three names that I was familiar with, Roger Bart, Andrea Martin and Megan Mullaly. New to me was Christopher Fitzgerald, a standout as 'Igor.' He dances! He sings! He is a great comedian! Also Sutton Foster excelled in her role as 'Inga,' a standard Brooksian blonde bimbo (Inga? Ulla?) and managed to give it her own flair. The spilits? On top of a bouncing farm cart? Holy Hannah! Shuler Hensley was the monster. The key to Young Frankenstein is his part. If the core sweetness doesn't come across, the show wouldn't work. Mr. Hensley made you want to hug the monster, but be ready to flee at any moment!

Puttin' On the Ritz was Mr. Hensley's stand out moment. Except for the part in the cave. And the part with the blind villager...and....

It was a very long show, which I expected. All of the numbers were amazing. But I can see how a shorter show would be stronger. Each number is brilliant, I expect to buy the cast album after they arrive on Broadway to find out what songs made it. It must be awful having to make cuts.

At times the crowd reaction to Ms. Mullaly's entrances and exits held up the show for a couple of beats. That might just be preview factor. But applause every time she moved?
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 8:41 amGina T
Seattle
Crove to seattle to see the show-its fantastic..almost perfect for Broadway..Great songs,fabulous stage craft and really really funny..don't miss it..
Sat, Aug 18, 2007 1:12 amRyanito
Vancouver Bc
What an unusual privilege to attend a show where everything is "Top Notch", and this is. Not a(n obvious) : missed cue, bead of sweat on the hard-dancing performers, sorry note from the singers or orchestra, 'technical foul' (I gather the techies and orchestra are the only home-grown part of this spectical, and good going to them, too!).
You could see the VERRRY high-quality costumes (Notice the intricately adorned Tyrolian-attired "Transylvanians" espicially) and sets (the "Roll in the Hay" number, replete with technically-endowed rolling forest scenes on rear-projected scrims (HOWWW did they do THAT?!?!), and featuring two dancer-horses 'pulling the haycart', as they travel-stroll throught the countryside, & whinnying when they hear "Frau Blucher"s name-JUST like in the original 1974 movie. Sometimes a good gag is a good gag. It still makes me laugh).
The ensemble/swing dancers also SING. There is an incredible 4-part barber-shop group in the village scenes which chills you with its harmonies (these guys are also, you will note, featured dancers).
The dancers All will make you tired watching them jump 4' high and throw each other around in character. And don't bother looking for anything out-of-sync; I wasted my time looking for a petulent 'extra' (or 'Supernumerary', as the Operahouse calls them), and saw no one bored with their part, or out of step.
Stars to Supernumeraries, everyone seemed to be glad for the chance to be part of a soon-to-be-Broadway-toasted show. And even appeared happy in their parts.
I am satified, and saving my pennies to see it again before it leaves Seattle. I wish I could explain some of the sight-gags and song lyrics, but they won't convey properly, unless/until you see it yourself. It's a Mel Brooks/Susan Stroman thing. Wowie.
Fri, Aug 17, 2007 3:40 pmMac Mckenzie
Edmonds
The premier show of Young Frankenstein was nothing short of amazing. Those actors work so hard...as does everyone behind the scenes as well. And how do they keep track of all of the sets and get them set up for the next scene so quickly? I think one of my favorite scenes was when Megan Mullally (Elizabeth) makes her appearance by rising up from under the stage with her bright red dress on...that was amazing...the crowd when nuts. And of course Puttin on the Ritz was fantastic as well. I can't imagine the producer making any changes to the scenes...they were all so well done....and the live orchestra was fantastic. I feel privileged to have been able to see the show here in Seattle and pay the modest $70+ for the show...it was worth every penny. I hope in the future that more broadway shows can premier here in Seattle...we really appreciate it.
Fri, Aug 17, 2007 3:29 pmKeith Lau

broadway play
discount broadway tickets
discount codes
young frankenstein review
broadway play tickets
mel brooks
Turbo Tagger