[Mb-hair] Fw: SERIOUS QUESTION FOR MR. RADO

[G Vendo]

Just in case you weren't sure of his opinion of the London version...

Gibson
>From his other e-mail address

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Rado" <jimrado at yahoo.com>
To: "Gibson Vendettuoli" <harrypotterboy12345 at hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2005 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: SERIOUS QUESTION FOR MR. RADO


> Dear Gibson - Although I knew of this "experiment" to
> update HAIR, I was waiting as anxiously as anyone for
> its unveiling in London at the Gate Theatre.  No, No,
> No, this has nothing to do with my revision of the
> piece which will be used in a Toronto production
> coming up in 2007, a production which I am both
> excited about and on which I will be working.  So glad
> you got to see the show in London and reported back to
> me on it.  I had grave doubts about its viability. 
> Thanks for giving me your bird's eye view.  Very
> valuable.  Thankx.  jR
> 
> --- Gibson Vendettuoli
> <harrypotterboy12345 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Mr. Poulin,
>> 
>> Speaking as a HAIR fan, who is not exactly a purist
>> since he's only 15 right 
>> now, I want to know if Mr. Rado had anything to do
>> with the shoddy 
>> production of HAIR I saw at the Gate in London. I
>> understand he has been 
>> revising the show and as of 2003 had a finished
>> version, but if this is it, 
>> I'm afraid to say I don't like it.
>> 
>> The changes made (hopefully only for this
>> production) were uncalled for. It 
>> added a stupid Bush caricature, a second nude scene
>> that reminded me of an 
>> Abu Ghraib scene, a line mentioning "sand-niggers,"
>> and Claude playing 
>> PlayStation (:sarcasm: wow, that's really on the top
>> of a hippie list of 
>> toys in 1968! :end sarcasm:), and I'm not even going
>> to mention the new 
>> ending more than this one time. The acting was okay,
>> but the singing was 
>> little better and the production values (especially
>> in terms of updating) 
>> were zilch.
>> 
>> If it was the decision of the directors, then I'm
>> fine with that; it's just 
>> one production. But if this is what Mr. Rado put in
>> his revised script of 
>> HAIR, I must say I'm sticking to the script used in
>> the first-run 
>> productions (and whatever Tams may still be
>> licensing, including the 1995 
>> script), if only because HAIR is a period piece, the
>> great American period 
>> piece, and attempting to bring it up to date does
>> not a good revision make, 
>> and I believe that the 1977 Broadway revival proved
>> that all too well.
>> 
>> I just want a clear answer as to who made these
>> changes. If it was the 
>> directors, I'm fine with that because I'm then
>> secure in the knowledge that 
>> it's probably not going into the next productions.
>> 
>> Thank you in advance,
>> G. Vendettuoli
>> 
>> A copy has been CC'ed to Mr. Rado so he can answer
>> directly if he so wishes.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________ 
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>