Don’t you all think Tony Bennett is performing with contemporary artists to keep Tony Bennett relevant? I mean, I like Tony Bennett too but it doesn’t say much about his partner except that they draw a new crowd. Years ago, Engelbert Humperdink had his daughter opening his shows as well. And, she was fine.
Cosmicfish, I like your explanations. I appteciate the explanations.Thanks.
I liked Lady Gaga but my ear isn’t trained. My nickname is Poker Face. 
I thought Idina Menzel was going to sing. Disappointed she didn’t.
The show was terrible. Boring.
Who cares if Tony Bennett is performing with contemporary artists to stay relevant? What’s wrong with staying relevant?
The reason it was brought up here is because their album, tour, videos, etc. show that Lady Gaga has sung traditional music or MT repertoire before and is quite good at it. She is versatile and some likely didn’t realize this about her. I don’t follow Lady Gaga at all, but am just making a point.
Well, I agree with all of that too. SOM was not that good in my opinion but the rest of it is fine. I also agree it was probably the best thing in a very, very bad Oscar show which is not saying much, either. I don’t know why people are bickering about this since she is probably nobody’s pick to play Maria. She sang okay, not great. It was mostly but not always fine. I did really like Pink last year. And, yes I know she breathed at the wrong place and I do not care at all. She had the magic, imho. LG was missing magic, imho. Maybe cosmicfish has explained why. I’m not sure, but some of us noticed it seemed wooden and stilted. Sorry.
I don’t think you need to be castable in a role (such as Maria) to sing the score in a concert. I can think of music my D can sing and perform even if she would never be cast in the role due to her type/looks. This was a concert, not a theater production.
BTW, I don’t think people are “bickering,” but rather voicing different opinions on a discussion forum…a cafe one, no less. It is not an important issue!
I think it is pretty difficult (though not impossible) to produce an awards show that is not boring. It’s why they are so rare. It is kind of like sitting through graduation when your child’s last name begins with “W”.
Funny to bring up graduation - they are the most boring shows of all!
I like Tony Bennett and his new partners. The guy is having fun. At his age, he can’t really sing anymore but he tries a little, talks a little, and laughs a lot as they go along. Why not? I don’t think he’s trying to fool anyone.
Did you know he’s a painter too? A few years ago he made the poster for the NOLA Jazz Fest, a portrait of Louis Prima.
http://www.nola.com/jazzfest/index.ssf/2010/02/tony_bennett_discusses_the_201.html
Marie, why do you keep bringing up that you liked Pink last year - just curious - how does that relate to Lady Gaga this year???
I’ll be honest what irks me most on threads like this - and this may be my own problem - is how nit pick and picky and critical people get of a television show. The negativity just takes me down!!! NPH stinks! Gaga stinks! Dresses stink! Again, my own personal problem - I prefer to focus on what I DID like - or turn the channel and don’t bother to comment further on it!
Carry on. 
I would say that her performance was on par with what could be expected from current musical theatre stars. Some might think it is wonderful. Others … a lot less. The comparisons with Julie Andrews are along the same lines of the reviews here of the SOM and Peter Pan “debacles” on national television.
I happen to think that the genre does not translate very well beyond a small audience that is happy to overlook the imperfections and focuses on the positives of the experience. When one adds all the modern tools required by a larger audience, those imperfections are magnified. And no amount of technology can mask the obvious!
As far as the duo with Bennett, it seems that HE is happy to sing with Lady Gaga. I happen to think that the results are not THAT great, but one has to applaud that both of them are stepping outside their comfort zones and give it a try. I would not pay to attend such a show – nor buy the record – but I do not mind when it comes up on a show a la Jimmy Fallon. After all, I can hit the FF button – just as it was ever so needed with that Oscar night! 
“Marie, why do you keep bringing up that you liked Pink last year - just curious - how does that relate to Lady Gaga this year???”
Oh, because it was a pop singer doing something unexpected that people did not know she could do and I thought it worked. I do remember some people were very nit-picky about her breathing but that I thought was nit-picky. Btw, last year’s Let it Go was not all that great imho and was supposed to be I think. And, I also was impressed by Faith Hill the year she was pulled in at the last minute when Whitney Houston was dismissed and she had about a day to practice and was very good so I’m not just always critical or looking for technical perfection at all or anything like that but the SOM thing this year just missed the mark in my opinion. Of course, the whole show felt flat, unfortunately. Yeah, the dresses, too. 
Hmmm. Well, I don’t necessarily agree with that. Yes, I did compliment Lady Gaga and thought she sounded very good. But the way you put it, it sounds as if you don’t think the true musical theater stars (which Lady Gaga isn’t), are all that good in the first place. Have you listened to Audra McDonald, as one example of a true and current MT star (the only person to have won 7 Tony Awards?). Seriously, I can’t imagine anyone thinking her voice isn’t GREAT. Same with several other current MT “stars.”
I see it with a slightly different twist. To get a current MT star to so her best rendition in the style of JA would likely be less satisfying. It would say that we think someone else can match her voice, but it would be more disappointing and less of an honor because they would still fall short. Gaga did an “interpretation” not an imitation. With that you are saying that JA is incomparable - it isn’t possible to do it like she did it so we’re not going to try. We are accepting that Gaga isn’t Julie and isn’t trying to be. Plus, an already uninteresting show wouldn’t be made more interesting by a talented but unknown to the masses MT vocalist attempting to sound just like JA.
You are right, and I should have used a better term than stars, as that term does include the true superstars (as the one you mentioned.) Using more words, I should have be clearer that I meant to describe people who are starring in current productions where MT is shown, and form a wider range of “stardom.”
De gustibus!
I never expected for LG to be Julie; I expected her own interpretation, which I enjoyed. Since she has a musical theatre background, I think she could have done a whole hell of a lot better than Carrie Underwood on NBC. But her performance Sunday was just supposed to be a tribute, not a replication, or audition, and I agree, no matter who they got up there, no one could have compared to JA before her vocal cord surgery.
I think Tony Bennett and Lady Gaga have reached stages in their careers that they can do this kind of stuff (stepping out of their normal roles) and have some fun, and their careers won’t be hurt by it. No one is going to say, "Well, I was going to buy their next CD, but now I’m not because ‘he is partnering up with contemporary musicians’ or ‘she is singing musical theatre stuff’. They are good enough that they won’t lose any of their core audience, and I doubt they really care much if someone criticizes them - so why not push the envelope?
What would have been really cool, is if they had had Christopher Plummer there with JA.
The Academy chose to push the envelope on this one, with the idea that everyone would be talking about it afterwards, and they achieved that. 95% of what I read has been positive.
As for me, my first take on Lady Gaga as a tribute to Julie Andrews and the beloved Sound of Music was that it was odd. I personally enjoy Lady Gaga and I do really enjoy the current work with Tony Bennett but Lady Gaga is not a soprano with a vocal range such as Julie Andrews but the audience they are aiming for wouldn’t likely be excited if they had selected a soprano such as Rebecca Luker or even Kelli O’Hara or Kristin Chenoweth or Audra McDonald. I thought it was really touching when Julie Andrews came out and they embraced and JA did a fine job with the presentation of the award for musical score.
FYI in terms of Gaga and Tony Bennett, their performance at Tanglewood this June sold out immediately. My favorite however on the previous Duets CD is the performance with Amy Winehouse… what a major loss as so talented.
The high point of the evening for me was the Glory performance by Common and John Legend, two extremely fine and talented performers who delivered beautiful sentiments in their acceptance speech. I haven’t quite caught up to the movie yet but hope to get to see it soon.
I personally enjoy Neil Patrick Harris on the Tony Awards but he was not an engaging host here. The whole evening was such a slog and no surprises in any of the well-deserved recognition for the award-winners. Good thing that Downton Abbey was on PBS.
Well, my opinion still differs from yours even with your clarification. For starters, Audra McDonald just finished playing a lead on Broadway (Lady Emerson, for which she won a Tony). I realize it is a matter of personal taste but others starring on Broadway right now (or very recently) or about to…include some terrific singers in MY opinion…here are some and their current show, or very recent show, or show coming to Broadway soon…(in addition to Audra McDonald)…and some of these singers have also won Tony Awards…
Kristin Chenowith (On the 20th Century)
Idina Menzel (If/Then)
Phillippa Soo (Hamilton)…not well known yet, but a fantastic singer
Jessie Mueller (Beautiful)
Judy Kuhn (Fun Home)
Sierra Boggess (It Shoulda Been You)
Kelli O’Hara (The King and I)
Chita Rivera (The Visit)
Soozie, I agree with you. Those of us who see a LOT of theatre know that there are multiple incredibly talented singers performing in MT. Those who are not theatre fans, obviously, would not be aware of these artists. I would add Anika Larsen to your list.
Definitely Anika Larsen too. There are a lot more terrific MT singers I haven’t even listed, but was trying to list who is currently starring on Broadway, just starred or is starring in a show heading to Broadway this year.
And oops, because indeed Anika is currently on Broadway in Beautiful!!!
Now this is a whole other subject that I find pretty interesting. Artists are constantly scrutinized to see if they are using technology to improve upon their performances. If they do, they are criticized mercilessly for it. BUT if they perform without the technology and perform anything less than perfect (which happens more often than not, even when you are talking about the masters), they are criticized mercilessly for singing even a single note imperfectly. They really can’t win for losing, and for this reason I think most of them just tune out every possible form of review or critique because there is no way to win an argument which has two opposing answers.
I follow a singing group whose music I really enjoy. Reading the comments after their music videos, they are often accused of being so good that it just simply isn’t possible that they are not using autotune.
The other day, a poster stated that in one of the group’s recordings, the lead singer had sung a note which was not on pitch, and blasted the group for not having “taken care of that” in editing. As the poster had given the exact moment in the video in which this atrocity had occurred, I listened to this particular note several times and could absolutely not discern that she was off pitch. If she was, it was by an incredibly small amount.
So which is it? We want “perfection” and if it cannot be attained by normal methods, well by golly, the producers should make sure it happens by applying technology to perfect it. OR: we want to hear the authentic performance of talented human beings, but if by chance they do turn in a really great natural performance, we must INSIST that they had to have used technology to fool us. OR: if they do give us what we want and correct or enhance their performance with technology, we need to get all over their butt and criticize them for being unethical.
SMH…