On the Production
This production of The Boys in the Photograph is most notable for its use of spectacle in creating the onstage environment in which the show takes place. Perhaps all the technology used to create the show existed prior to the production, but it is all used to maximum effect and, possibly even more importantly, it is all justified in terms of what transpires on stage. There is no effect created on stage that does not enhance the storytelling of this musical.
One of the major opportunities made possible by the set is the ability to have concurrent action happening on stage: for example, there are scenes that take place in the boys locker room on one level of the set, while the streets above are a simultaneously active playing space. This achieves one of the major goals that director Janice Honeyman wanted in her staging of the show, as articulated in this interview with Kgomotso Moncho:
This is entirely our own production so we can let the creativity fly. Having done so many pantomimes here, I know the theatre very well, technically. I want the show to look like a film and I have great faith that Johan Engels will help me achieve that.
A moment from "The Final", the staged soccer match in THE BOYS IN THE PHOTOGRAPH
Honeyman is referring to the fact that the staging is original, not a replica of an overseas production. The major strength of her direction is that the production, while employing a filmic vocabulary in the way that scenes shift and fade from one to the other, remains immensely and intensely theatrical.
The choreography is by Celeste Botha. This is Botha’s first choreography for a major musical (see this article for an overview of her work on the show) and, while her work has a great deal to recommend it, her inexperience is telling. She is able to create compelling movement, most effective in the physically innovative soccer match which is staged using a hybrid of contemporary dance and physical theatre. However, her choreography for the show doesn’t quite explore the physical vocabulary of this era or the characters in the way that, say, a Jerome Robbins staging would. However, her work was solid and I would like to see her develop and refine her artistry as a musical theatre choreographer.
The performances were solid throughout in terms of range and characterisation, although the accent work was possibly not as refined as it should have been. In particular, Carly Graeme plays the role of Mary resourcefully, by turns strong and vulnerable in her reading of the role, while Tammi Meyer turns in a moving performance as Bernadette.
All in all, I really enjoyed my trip to the show. It is a better show, I think, than The Beautiful Game was, but it is not yet a great one. However, greatness is just one step away – a step that would involve a great deal of work, in particular, from Elton on his lyrics and on further refining the book of the show.
Purchases from Amazon.com
FROM LEFT TO RIGHT:
1. The Beautiful Game Original London Cast CD.
2. The Beautiful Game Vocal Selections.
Musical Cyberspace 
I saw this production twice. I bought the recording of ‘The Beautiful game’ a few weeks before watching the show, and already got the sense of an empty hole in the whole musical, and was curious to see if the new production would fix that. I
I feel the changes were minor and if anything, took away from the original. Mainly, I love the song ‘Our Kind of Love’ from the original, and I do not agree with the composer that the melody was ill fitting and worth scrapping, or rather, phantomised. It is a beautiful melody and provides a good shift in style from the rest of the score which is generally less quicker and short phrased. Perhaps, if the new home of the melody worked, I would have let this go, but as Love Never Dies, it does little for me.
The new title song, as you very successfully put it, needs to be worked in to the show much more strategically. Now, if there ever was a song that does not feel right, it is The Boys in the Photograph and not the late Our Kind of Love.
Absolutely what I thought about Born in Belfast- nice but really a rehash of ‘Tire Track and Broken Hearts’. The title projections were bland.
I think, as you’ve pointed out, that there is way too much conceptional elements in the show, and too little drama. The way the photograph of the players has been used as a motif and a kind of metaphor made me think of it as a motif, and did not help me suspend my disbelief further into the story. I dislike the way the boys fade out one by one on the screen, it is way too obvious. The whole idea of a photograph is a beautiful thought- sentimental and a snapshot of young life, caught before the boys get caught by the world’s divides. However, to blow it up like this drains it of spontaneity, and I was deflated and a bit disappointed in how it is written into the show.
The set was good in portraying the home of the characters as a cold and troubled place. However, I wanted more intimacy in terms of use of space to portray the cozy and loving moments, however brief they were. For example, the wedding scene and the following bedroom scene overbears the wedding couple. The party scene downstairs is way too long- ‘Let us love in piece’ could start sooner.
I agree that the choreography in this production is limited in ways, made worse by the problem of such a large set- the actors needed to make use of space and claim their world much more. Strangely, the soccer game choreography seemed very ‘staged’ to me, not groundbreaking enough. I am not entirely convinced by the staging of ‘God’s Own Country’, with the actor downstage right right through leaving the space deserted.
In general, I just struggle to like the convention of songs spread out with spoken dialogue in between each one, and no music to accompany. Some of my favourite shows, like Aspects of Love, are sung through, and though that is not the style of this musical, it still bothered me. This would be helped by your suggestion that the title song be divided throughout the piece in shorter motifs, that would link moments together, and tie up a story that I find really problematic in its current form.
I’m a big fan of Lloyd Webber, and thought Aspects of Love was awesome in the Joburg theatre last year. But when one friend asked me at interval (of The Boys), ‘So what is the story really?’, all I could say sounded like a concept, and I struggled to pitch the show to him- makes me wonder how Ben Elton/ LLoyd Webber cope with doing that.
I agree with your views on the ending. The original ending was much more touching and beautiful, and believable. I actually struggled to believe my eyes when John came back, and before I could even swallow this- the curtain went down. As if Ben Elton thought, ‘Okay folks, there’s your happy ending, now go home! Now leave me, I’ve got to figure out what Christine does when she sees the Phantom after 10 years on Coney Island, because the world cares so much!’
Thanks for great review!
Interesting review.