Casting Around for News

I’m sure there’s plenty to talk about on the local theater scene that I’ve missed lately because of being mired in my own little world. I could, for instance, berate myself further for not getting out to see SPARC’s “West Side Story,” which everyone has been telling me was just awesome. I could also comment on the summertime shows that are going to have cast substitutions soon – Harry the Horse in “Guys and Dolls” and a couple of folks in “There Goes the Bride” – and ponder how those kinds of changes alter the chemistry and timing in a show (does it tend to throw other cast members off or is everyone actually a little sharper? Discuss.)

But instead I find myself wondering how it is that Fergie got cast in “Nine?” Fergie? Maybe I shouldn’t judge; I mean, she did pull off a couple of great one-armed cartwheels during the American Idol finale. And I didn’t realize she had acted before. Perhaps I’ll rent “Grindhouse” and then judge the wisdom of that casting decision…

The Fergie announcement also had me thinking about stage-to-screen adaptations in the past and how they seem to always lead to some controversy over casting. Ever since the big “My Fair Lady” dust up more than forty years ago, second-guessing directors who look at star power versus vocal ability has been a national pastime. Rob Marshall definitely heard about it when he went with Renee Zellweger in “Chicago” and there were those who doubted both the leads in “Sweeney Todd” and I still don’t get the inspiration for John Travaolta in “Hairspray.” But, judging by the relative success of all of these adaptations mentioned, maybe directors actually know what they’re doing? Who’d’a thunk it?