Note: This post is published later in the day on Saturday, to when I originally started it.
I did a Broadway thing and bought a ticket.
This post is being written early on Saturday morning (it's after midnight), so it's hard to say "I saw something tonight", when now I've become "future girl". Therefore, I "saw something last night", even though I've yet to go to bed.
Friday, January 16, 2026 I went to the local performance hall and saw the season's opening week of "Some Like It Hot". The performance week started on Tuesday, and I was able to get a ticket for Friday. By pure chance, there were rush tickets happening (as seen on socials), and since it's super rare for this to happen, I decided I best get a ticket while I can because I won't have this opportunity again.
Rush seats were offered for balcony only; I can't complain; I was close enough in the seating area that I had two empty seats next to me (I was third in from the aisle) while every other seat was taken. It seemed jammed packed and I don't know if it was due to people seeing the rush price on their feeds, or if they were people who purchased at normal price. I'm sure it was a mix of both. Glad I got there at 6 to get the ticket.
As this was an event that would not allow you to take photos, I only have before and after pictures of the stage; nothing in between.
I blurred out the front of people's faces for privacy, but you can see "how close" I was, even in the upstairs area.
The photos were officially taken on my new handy dandy iPhone 17 and quite honestly, these four don't show much difference in anything I've done previously. Again, I've not edited much from them, with the exception of putting my name and blurring out front faces. A review of the phone will have to be another post because I don't want to start getting all nuts with multiple things. It's late and I'm tired.
The performance lasted 2 hours and 45 minutes which includes a twenty minute intermission. It also started five minutes late and they made the "please take note of the exits" announcement twice. Someone wasn't paying attention the first time, apparently. Also included was the "please no photographs", which is why I have before and after of the stage.
The curtain was washed out in black and white to make it look "old". Different start from the normal red velvet that's usually draped. Sometimes it's been black velvet and the event logo is projected in the center, but this time the production chose to begin with a black and white (or grey) curtain. They ended with a more blue wash (bluish grey?).
For the uninitiated, the original movie premise is a pair of contract / freelance musicians (played by Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon) in 1929 Prohibition era Chicago, who are performing at a speakeasy that gets raided. They find themselves out of work and then witness a "Saint Valentine's Day Massacre" (aka the Chi-Town mob hit we hear stories about). The gents must then attempt to outrun this particular set of gangsters in order to not become victims of their own shooting. They end up joining an all female jazz band, dressing up as women (yup, they really did do drag). To add another celebrity name to the film, the lead singer of "Sweet Sue and Her Society Syncopators" is Marilyn Monroe and the band leader is Joan Shawlee. Some shenanigans ensue while the band travels by train to Florida, and the men end up in some other precarious positions. One of which is going head first into the "Friends of Italian Opera Society" event in the same hotel the jazz band is staying in. Spoiler alert: This is not an opera event, it's a front for a national mob conference. Oops. Other things happen and in the end, people got what they deserve; to a point. It has so much comedic value for its time, there is no wonder why it's a mainstay on the American Film Institute's top 100 "must see" movies. There are big names added to the cast list, that I'm sure people recognize the secondary people (like George Raft, who plays one of the main mobsters, he had a very great line in this movie, which referenced something he did in the 1932 "Scarface" film [talk about being typecast!]).
I'm not going to spoil it further in case anyone wants to see the film, but I do highly recommend it. Thanks, Jimmy, for having me watch it, all those years ago. You created a monster with this. Haha.
Privilege, coincidence, happenstance, whatever you want to call it, I was able to see the 2002 Boston Broadway performance of "Some" and am glad I got to, as it was actually starring Tony Curtis. He obviously wasn't reviving his old movie role, but got to play upgraded character ("Osgood"). It was really amazing to have seen the film and had something to compare to, when I saw the live performance. This stayed as true as it could, in order to do the Billy Wilder and I.A.L. Diamond film justice.
Unfortunately, the 2022 (to now 2025/26) production veers off topic from anything done previously. If you find your way into seeing both the movie and this new musical, don't expect things to be the same, or even close to it.
I'm not saying it was horrendous, but it definitely took on a life of its own.
The year is now 1933 and the show starts with a musical number by "Sweet Sue" (who would become the bandleader to the all female band). She's running her own mini show in a club and it gets raided, which "Joe" and "Jerry" (the main guys) are performing at as well. At this point, I can say "at least the character names were kept, but Sue isn't supposed to come in for another half hour or so". Since something else happens within the few scenes to create the mob hit, the show could potentially progress into the premise of the movie. I hope? They seem to have already changed the idea and conversations...
Yea, no; this 2025 version is a serious reimagining of what we thought about anything prior. There is maybe a total of 30 minutes of original film dialogue through out the entire musical, and everything in between is brand spanking new: New people, new names, new music. Everything was made to keep the show moving. They also travel west to California instead of south to Florida.
There's no easy way to try to explain this without further spoiler alerts and sounding like a bad person. Please don't take the next description wrong. I want to explain this as best as I can, as it does get brought up in the new show.
The original (movie) cast was white. Part of the reason they could go to Florida was because the end result of the final few scenes, were to take place in a hotel in Miami (yes, I know. Stay with me for a minute). What type of people are in Florida to begin with? Retirees, some with lots of money. Even in the 1920s, which is why we meet a pivotal character there (what ends up being Tony Curtis' character in the stage production).
The new musical changes things up. They take both Jack Lemmon and Marilyn Monroe's characters and make them black. They take Joan Shawlee's character and also have her be an energetic black woman, full of "let's get this thing done!". Joe E Brown's original character, "Osgood", went from a rich old white guy to a middle age Latino male.
So with these new character versions, the production understood that they couldn't allow the train to travel south from Chicago to Florida, without ruffling feathers and getting into problems (remember, this is the 1920s and 1930s). Therefore, they made it a point in the show to have one of the lines be something to the affect of "have you seen me? We can't go south. We're going west... to California". Which leads into the song "I'm California Bound". Knowing all the troubles in the country at the time, it was safer; even for an all female band, to go where there won't be as much racial issues. The need would be to stay secure and out of harm's way, considering there originally was only one male with the group of women. He happened to be the assistant to the bandleader and looked like he couldn't harm a fly if his life depended on it.
Which side note, they also took said assistant and changed the role from a male character made it a constant cigarette holding female (who has a tendency to curse every so often).
These things were part of where this new production started straying away from the original ideas. They had different races and genders for characters and they also changed a majority of the story lines to meet a more inclusive audience for today's standards. There's a theory online where the Jerry/Daphne character wants to stay as Daphne for reasons I don't want to get into on here, because I feel I've already raised some flags regarding the race topic. It's a touchy subject to begin with and the overall premise of all the versions of this title is a bit muddy.
Especially with what's going on in the last few years.
I'm so sorry; I don't want to offend anyone or have any problems. It's hard to want to talk about things and not have to worry about getting shut down. Please understand that I'm meaning well with this, and that's why I'm still trying to be vague and tip toe around things.
It's that given the state of affairs in Florida at this very moment, I'm honestly surprised the musical is playing at all down here. Just knowing it's two guys, in drag, playing in an all women's band, while at some point having to reveal who they are, there's a reason the film got banned when it came out. But everyone understood why. It got unbanned and became a legend. With this update, it's been politicalized and made to be equal but still show parts of historical bigotry and racism. This is not what I want to do. Those bad things are not okay and I do not condone it.
This show was truly a new experience and entertaining, yes. They took an original idea and made it new, yes. There was a lot of singing, tap dancing and jabs meant to sting a little. People are attempting to "poke the bear" and see how far they can go with their words and actions. At least there were lines in this musical that made you understand why they're going left instead of right as well as doing something new. It will anger a lot of people, I am sure. I know a few people who have seen this new version and walked out of it because it wasn't what they were expecting. They, like me, know the movie and thought this would be close to it. During intermission, they left and didn't come back. I, at least, gave it a chance. I wanted to make sure I had a good enough time.
Yes, by the end of the show, I can say this production truly rum punched their way into the overall culture of the moment. They took a 66 year old thought and changed it to meet the 21st Century. Would I want a two hour movie based on this version? Possibly not, simply because they took ideas from history and mixed it with a famous movie and created something different. Would this work today? I don't know. Jazz itself is such a standard and niche genre as it is. Making a historical comedy based in the end of the Jazz Age might be tough. Also, from what I've seen previously and what I know about that time in our history, I don't know how what they've done could be completely accurate. I'm not a history buff by any means and I don't pretend to be. I do need to look up some things regarding what would be (socially) accepted / acceptable for certain relationships to happen during the 1920s and 1930s. I'm not familiar with all of that.
So again, going purely by "this is entertainment, this is something to do for three hours on a Friday night", I did enjoy watching it. It had some (new) music and even though there were some audio drop outs in some conversations (as well as the singing dropped under the backing music), it wasn't that bad overall. It did appear they were using a backing track at one point too, as the music was raised higher than the singing, but I could be wrong. I didn't see a live orchestra in the pit area; there was just a man at a computer and soundboard. There were some lighting issues as well (spotlight challenges) but that happens during a live performance. People shift too quickly. There also looked like there was a makeup problem too, from what I could tell. It could have been my bad eyesight mixed with the lighting or it could be something else. I know you need a certain level of stage makeup on, to "be beautiful under the hot lights", but it was caked on in some places and looked really awful. I'm not trying to nitpick but I do find myself catching little things, even when we're watching a movie at home. It's become subconsciously second nature to me to seek out the oopsies.
Would I honestly see this show again? Probably not, but I am glad I did because it was an experience. I was too entangled in the beginning of it, telling myself "stop doing the film dialogue and just watch", so once my brain finally did stop, it was all right. There was one scene in particular (the door / chase scene) that was a little over the top and too much, but it finalized that part of the conversations and scenes. Although, if anything, that specific scene could have been dialed back a little and maybe changed slightly. Some other things could have been changed, but they were so minor, it would become a throwaway scene and nonsense.
I know I sound like I'm being overly critical. I'm not trying to be. I don't want to give it all away and have people not see either the film or the musical - see one or the other, or both, but don't go into either one thinking they're the same. I fell that you should have a fair and honest opinion and go with an open mind. I did (and do) appreciate having now added this to my wall of Broadway performances (I frame the ticket and Playbill) because it truly was something I wanted to see when it was announced. I was concerned about outside reviews of it and because I didn't know how drastic it had been rewritten, I'm pleased I got to go. This being a "contemporary reimagining", it gave me something to think about and talk about with people. The topics and themes within this production are conversations I'd like to have with my friend and family to get their opinion on it as well as research it a little more to see how historically accurate it was or could have been.
Until I can figure out a way to stop circling around this and go to bed, take care of yourselves and go see a live event some time,
Cheers;
, I haven't had time to finish it. I've got about 50 or so pages in (it's a thick book), but this week has been all about work. When the bosses are away, the 3 mice can't play. Therefore, all reading gets put on hold. Thus far, insightful look into another death during the JFK years. Can't completely divulge a lot, as I'm not nearly into the middle of the story. But, from what I have turned in pages, it's worth picking up
, and I must say, it came together nicely, however, it was surprising. One of the most surprising parts: when Shan brought together his two pivotal characters (Raimi from book one, and Jeery from the second), each man had his own narrative towards the end. To distinguish between the two, Shan used different fonts. I can't tell which type it was, but it was noticeable. At first, the change in letters was confusing, but once I read on, I figured out who was saying what. My only real concern was the fact it revolved a little heavy on the Jeery character, rather wrap the first two books together, nicely. True, this one did elaborate a lot more in to Jeery's history and why the people he's known to trust, seem to have screwed him over, but like the second book, they kept Raimi a lot out of the picture. It seemed rushed in places, to make the two stories mesh in the third, but beggars can't be choosers. Each character's history did end up being explained... rather hastily in some points, but done in taste in others.
I felt like I needed an update into my blog. The story brings you quickly in to a fictitious underbelly of gangster ruling. Just like any other mob books. But this has "history"....not of New York or Jersey. Shan built this adult novel around Inca ideas and thoughts. Having stated in the beginning, he uses months and names as the titles for his chapters. Some of his characters also deal with their pre Columbia American roots (aka parts of modern day South America).
, so I'll let you know in a few days how great this is (then it's off to the last of the series, 
).