Podcast Summary: MickeyJoTheatre – Merrily We Roll Along (2025 Broadway Revival Proshot) - REVIEW

Host: Mickey Jo (MickeyJoTheatre)
Episode Date: December 9, 2025

Episode Overview

Mickey Jo, theatre critic and content creator, offers a detailed review of the professionally filmed Broadway revival ("proshot") of Merrily We Roll Along directed by Maria Friedman. He shares his insights both as someone who saw the production live and as a viewer of the film version, exploring the show’s evolution, the nature of proshot recordings, performance nuances, directorial choices, and the broader implications for future theater filmmaking.

Main Discussion Points & Insights

Introduction & Context

[01:48 – 06:25]

• Personal history: Mickey Jo recounts his experiences seeing Merrily on stage and via film, highlighting the show's journey from the Menier Chocolate Factory in London to Broadway, and noting it's one of the few productions with filmed versions on both sides of the Atlantic.
• Terminology: The producers refer to the current release as a "film" rather than a "proshot," subtly shifting audience expectations—“they're not showing the proscenium or anything happening beyond the proscenium... they don’t want to clue you in that it’s inherently still a stage production.”
• Viewer agency: A filmed production makes the director’s choices of focus explicit, unlike the theater where audiences can decide what and who to look at.

Merrily We Roll Along – The Show Itself

[06:26 – 14:00]

• Brief history: Originally a famous flop, Merrily has grown in reputation and is now considered an important part of the Sondheim canon.
• Plot summary: Tracks a trio—Franklin Shepard (composer), Charles Kringas (lyricist), and Mary (writer)—whose creative and personal relationships unravel, told in reverse chronology.
  • “It’s told in reverse... we move backwards through the various years to see how exactly he got there, to see what happened. Finally ending at this place of optimism and belief in everything that they were going to go on to do…” [06:58]
• Production’s strengths: Maria Friedman's staging is character-driven, deeply attentive to detail, and humanizes relationships and supporting characters.
• Age-appropriate casting: Modern productions correct the original’s problem of having young actors play older characters, which previously felt false.
• Notable details:
  • Transitions, aesthetics, and costumes clearly mark the reverse movement through time.
  • Deep connections and personal longing are made more impactful by the narrative structure.
  • Subplots and minor characters receive more attention and development.

The Film/Proshot Version – Craft & Choices

[14:54 – 24:59]

• Filming style:
  • Unlike the prior UK capture (which felt like viewing alongside a theater audience), this filming puts the viewer "on stage" via intense close-ups and cinematic choices.
  • “There’s a real extraordinary proximity. ...certainly in the first few scenes of the film are considerably more intense and more intimate and more filmic than a lot of pro shots we’ve seen before.” [14:56]
• Cinematographic pros and cons:
  • Pros: Close-ups highlight subtleties in the performances (notably Jonathan Groff’s single tear, Lindsay Mendez’s haunted looks).
  • Cons: At times, the extreme focus frustrates by obscuring action elsewhere on stage, diminishing ensemble and spatial relationships.
    • “...earliest appearances of the ensemble as they are singing... we're just seeing Jonathan Groff's haunted expression. ...The first time we saw two ensemble members in the frame singing was, like, weirdly halfway through this bit of music....” [16:36]
    • “...really egregious part... we see his face when she’s saying ‘I’m sorry.’ We don’t see her deliver the line.” [17:40]
  • The lack of wide shots, proscenium views, or audience reaction reinforces its “film” identity—“You’d be forgiven...for believing that this wasn’t filmed in a theatre at all.” [18:54]
• Artistic/market reasoning:
  • The choice to position this as a film may aim for broader commercial appeal, avoiding the “lesser than” stigma that sometimes attaches to filmed live theater.

Disruption of Theatrical Norms: Intermission & Structure

[20:56 – 24:59]

• The cinema version omits the stage show’s intermission, heightening narrative intensity and possibly setting a template for future productions (raises accessibility questions).
• This could influence regional and non-Broadway productions to attempt one-act versions of Merrily.
• “I think you gain an awful lot through the intensity and focus of doing the whole thing without a pause, without an intermission.” [22:56]

Performance Highlights

[26:06 – 32:35]

• Jonathan Groff (Frank): His performance is particularly effective on screen due to subtle acting choices visible in close-up.
  • “...seeing the subtleties and nuances of his choices. The moment when he is convinced to end things with Gussie...the moment he is then won over once again by her in her desperation. And seeing the way that he played that. Seeing those moments when a single tear rolls down his cheek.” [26:30]
• Lindsay Mendez (Mary): Her grandeur is effective both on stage and screen, but the intimacy of film reveals further emotional depth.
• Daniel Radcliffe (Charlie): “Franklin Shepherd Inc.” remains a showstopper, with energy translating well to the screen.
• Supporting cast: Crystal Joy Brown’s and Katie Rose Clark’s performances are more nuanced and comedic on film, with subtext and gestures heightened in close-up.
• Ensemble/friendship: The on-screen dynamics authentically convey genuine friendship, so their unraveling is deeply affecting—“...there’s an honesty to the friendship in the moments they have together, which makes their separation and the cracks and the splinters even more devastating.” [31:54]
• Maria Friedman (Director): Her profound attachment to the material shines through—her artistic history with Sondheim and her own role in earlier productions deeply inform her direction.
  • “I think what you're really feeling is her history with the show, her history with Sondheim, that somehow has become infused into the creation of the Broadway production, and that has been captured.” [29:58]
• Choreography (Tim Jackson): Underappreciated on stage, but in the film, movement and character interactions in “Old Friends” read as authentic, lived-in friendship memories.

The Nature and Future of Proshots

[32:35 – 37:47]

• Creative possibilities: Invites debate on whether filmed theater should emulate live experiences or reinvent the material cinematically.
  • “It makes me very curious about what the Hadestown pro shot...is going to look like...Curious about whether this sets a trend for sort of more artistically realized filmmaking around stage production, rather than just...relaying it as faithfully as possible to an audience who isn’t necessarily in the theater, but empowering them to feel like they are....” [32:59]
• Audience debate: Mickey Jo champions viewer discussion on the virtues and drawbacks of close-up-heavy filming—“Did you like the close-ups and what we gained from them, or were they an issue for you?...did you like the fact that it had more of a specific artistic identity?” [33:19]
• Definitiveness: This could become the de facto Merrily for future generations and spark a trend in more ambitious proshot presentations—“...as it endures. And now that it’s been captured for posterity, I think this will be remembered as a pretty definitive staging of the show.” [19:51]
• Inspiration for creators: The saga of Merrily is held up as hope for creators whose initial efforts may have been poorly received: “Let everything that happens to Merrily We Roll Along now, including this...let that all be a light at the end of the tunnel to any theater makers whose work is not debuting in the way that they had hoped...” [34:15]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “God, less than five minutes into this video, I've already found a way to use the word oeuvre. This is gonna be a good one.” (Mickey Jo, 02:22)
• “We don’t even really get a clear shot of the entire band. You get close ups of—I was going to say fingering, but that sounds like something else is happening.” (Mickey Jo, 03:24)
• “You know when there's a lot happening, when there's a very rich sort of visual production going on, you can make choices about who you're paying attention to.... But on screen they guide your focus much more specifically.” (Mickey Jo, 05:13)
• “It’s really quite devastating and weirdly uplifting at the same time. To end in this place of hope and optimism with a song like Our Time.” (Mickey Jo, 09:24)
• “This feels like you are standing on the stage because there's a real extraordinary proximity. ...More intense and more intimate and more filmic than a lot of pro shots we've seen before.” (Mickey Jo, 14:57)
• “...watching a recording like [a Steadicam on the entire stage] is such a miserable experience. I've had to do it on a handful of occasions... It is not compelling whatsoever. It does not invite you because our eyes can do things and sort of fixate in ways that cameras can't.” (Mickey Jo, 15:24)
• “You'd be forgiven for believing that this wasn't filmed in a theatre at all, because there's very little sense of it. And that, I thought, was a puzzling choice.” (Mickey Jo, 18:54)
• "As it endures... I think this will be remembered as a pretty definitive staging of the show." (Mickey Jo, 19:51)
• "I can talk about Jonathan and Lindsay and Daniel separately, but it's this trio that became great friends, I believe, during the entire process. ...there's an honesty to the friendship...which makes their separation...even more devastating." (Mickey Jo, 31:46)
• "Did you like the close-ups and what we gained from them, or were they an issue for you? ...Or did you like the fact that it had more of a specific artistic identity? Because I have seen commentary either way." (Mickey Jo, 33:19)
• "Let everything that happens to Merrily...let that all be a light at the end of the tunnel to any theater makers whose work is not debuting in the way that they had hoped..." (Mickey Jo, 34:15)

Timestamps of Key Segments

• [01:48] – Mickey Jo sets up the review and his experience with various versions of Merrily.
• [06:26] – Detailed plot and narrative structure of Merrily We Roll Along; exploration of why the reverse chronology and new staging work.
• [14:54] – Shift to film/proshot discussion: filming style, editing choices, viewer perspective.
• [17:40] – Critique of specific moments lost or diminished by the filming choices (e.g., Gussie’s “I’m sorry”).
• [18:54] – Discussing the almost stage-less, audience-free film identity.
• [20:56] – The omission of intermission in the proshot and its implications for future productions.
• [26:06] – Performances: what is gained on screen versus stage, with special focus on the leads.
• [29:58] – Maria Friedman’s directorial perspective as an actress and Sondheim veteran.
• [32:35] – The broader conversation: artistic re-conceiving, the future of proshots, and audience engagement.

Final Thoughts & Call to Action

Mickey Jo concludes with an open invitation for listeners to share their opinions on the proshot’s creative choices (especially the close-ups vs. wide shots debate) and which musical should be professionally filmed next. He teases his upcoming review of Into the Woods and encourages subscriptions.

Overall Tone:
Conversational, wry, passionate, and deeply informed — balancing critical analysis with enthusiasm for theatre and optimism for its future.