seen from China
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Canada
seen from Canada
seen from Canada

seen from Germany
seen from Canada

seen from Singapore
seen from Canada
seen from China
seen from Canada
seen from Kazakhstan

seen from Canada
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China
seen from China

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
Who up justifying they bean
As a fellow Johanna lover, what's your opinion on Mea Culpa and its inclusion in the show? I know it's not in the movie and the Josh Groban revival, but I recently saw a local production that cut it as well. I have Mixed Feelings about it and I'm pondering if it's better for productions to perform the show as-written or to cut some of the grosser parts.
I HATE it being cut. I fully, fully believe that the show can not function as well as it should without it. As much as I love the Josh Groban revival and would probably say it's my favourite production to date, a major issue I have with it is how sanitised it feels.
Sweeney is not supposed to be a straight or non-ironic show, and a lot of the subject matter is dealt comedically. The show is self-aware of the size of its characters, and from that it inherently takes on a camp-ish quality β but because of that, I see so many productions make what is, in my opinion, the mistake of not placing emphasis on the darker parts of the narrative, or allowing the characters to take their situation seriously. They use the humour of the show as a distraction from the darker themes, attempting to sanitise it, as I said, but Sondheim's humour has never been like that. The events of the narrative are funny because they are so severe, not in spite of their severity. I find that Sweeney has a very absurdist sort of humour, and, additionally, not in spite of that, would even argue really that the audience resonance of such themes that it covers has shifted from 1979 significantly, but that's neither here nor there.
People are afraid of absurdism, I think, as to an outsider it's uncomfortable to observe. The characters in Sweeney aren't laughing because victims of cannibalism, rape, incest, murder are funny, but because it's completely ridiculous that THIS much horrific suffering is dealt upon these people. It's so bad that it BECOMES funny after surpassing its darkness. You can't deliver the humour properly if you don't first acknowledge the darkness existing. The thing is, I'm guessing a lot of people are concerned about the audience getting the wrong message, but that should be the job of the show. To help the audience suspend their disbelief and bring them into the world of the characters, so that they can understand why they're laughing. Instead, the show runners and the audience both try to ignore the darkness, and distract it with humour, which leaves the events of the show feeling shallow. As I said, the socio-political climate has shifted from 1979. I think we NEED dark productions of Sweeney now, more than ever. People need to face things in front of them. But I digress on that front.
Even in a narrative sense, the removal of Mea Culpa ruins the effect of Todd's sympathy from an audience. We want him to kill the Judge. We want to sympathise with him, and the morality of his actions can speak for themselves. Surface level comedy won't save audience engagement from very dark subject matter, but a compelling protagonist can. If we don't hate the Judge, why would we want Todd to kill him to the point we can justify all his other actions? We root for Anthony and Johanna despite their limited contact as we know Anthony is a good man and we want her to get away, we feel the urgency of the situation and understand Todd's anguish, we want him to win. I'm even a little irritated with a younger Mrs Lovett on that front, as I believe the grey morality of her being an older figure with information advantage over him, and simultaneously a widowed woman in poverty who needs him, does far more for the show than having her a victim vaguely irritating Todd, and kind of making Todd just look like far more of a cut and dry asshole, but I digress again. Without Mea Culpa, the Judge is a vague figure we see mentioned by other characters, which works well for the first half of Act 1, but after a time the suspense is outgrown, and we see him. That suspense needs to continue to grow, and a couple pieces of dialogue and a duet won't do that. Mea Culpa is completely and utterly necessary to the show.
Hadestown plays with metaphorical phrases sooo good
The underground railroad in real life is not a railroad and is but underground but it was used to help get slaves to freedom.
In Hadestown there's a literal railroad that literally takes you underground where your soul is enslaved. The literal replaces the metaphor and the final destination is slavery rather than freedom. But then there's also a pathway for the souls to get out of Hades so the underground railroad as a metaphor with its IRL meaning also exists in Hadestown in contrast to the literal one
Then there's the phrase "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" and Hades literally paves the road to hell ("the river of Styx is a river of stone" is how Orph describes it) and literally has good intentions while doing that as part of his industrializing+electrifying his kingdom. For the underground railroad, the literal version contrasted the metaphor but for this the literal version recomfirms the meaning of the phrase
Also "underground railroad" and "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" are not said in the show, Anais Mitchell left them as things for you to bring to your understanding of the show as an audience member. Writing is a lot of knowing what to put on the page but it's also a lot of knowing what to not put on the page and I love deliberate omissions like that where the writer tells me they trust me. Sondheim did something similar in Company by leaving out the phrases "two's company, three's a crowd" and "misery loves company". Aaron Burr acts like a burr in Hamilton but Lin-Manuel Miranda left out that comparison as well
On entirely unrelated news to my many and varied nos, I want you all to know that Angela Lansbury looks like a dead fish in Sweeney Todd's 1982 Pro-Shot and I mean this in the most flattering and complimentary way possible. She and George deserve awards for their expression work alone. Never have I seen a woman so stiff and yet so expressively horrifying to look at. And HIM. To quote my buddy, "The makeup department was doing something. He looks like a corpse that washed up from the ocean. WHICH HE IS."
I can't tell you how much watching this has endeared me to both of them.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch β’ No registration required β’ HD streaming
Manifesting a revival of Assassins with Annaleigh Ashford as Squeaky Fromme and Amir Talai as the Proprietor
My biological daughter btw. Yearning for a production that finally does her justice but alas I'll wait.
Okay, I will bite: rank the top Sondheim characters who could be fixed by lesbian sex, and the top Sondheim characters who would be made worse
I rest my case. Now, about Rose Hovick's lesbian brothel and *allegedly* shooting her lover because she made a pass at Louise...