The London production of Avenue Q will re-open again today, after its second move to its third theatre, the Wyndham. Once again, it seems that ‘the sun is shining, it’s a lovely day’ for the London production, which originally opened in 2005 at the Noël Coward Theatre, before moving to the Gielgud Theatre last June.
The hard part was inventing the candy-gram. The easy part, it seems, is for Mel Brooks to turn his films into stage musicals. Following The Producers and Young Frankenstein, Brooks is working on his third Broadway musical, this time based on his 1974 film, Blazing Saddles.
Blazing Saddles was a spoof of classic Hollywood Westerns, telling the tale of a a corrupt political boss, State Attorney General Hedley Lamarr, who wants to drive out the folks living in Rock Ridge. His modus operandi? Appointing a black sheriff to run the town. Nominated for three Academy Awards, the film is considered by many to be one of the greatest film comedies.
Brooks, who is working on the third song for this musical, spoke to The Canadian Press. Although he had little to say about his hopes for the new musical, he did have a few things to say about Young Frankenstein, or to call it by it’s full title, The New Mel Brooks Musical Young Frankenstein:
If I did (Blazing Saddles), I wouldn’t rush to New York with it because the Times would say: ‘Oh dear, oh dear, another movie converted and transmogrified into a musical…. The Times was only lukewarm to Young Frankenstein, but you know, everybody else was hot – some of the greatest reviews I ever got…. I think if Young Frankenstein had come out first, it would’ve done spectacularly. But following The Producers, you know, that was a rough go for critical praise. But you know what counters that in less than a second? Audiences – live audiences in their response. They are so enthusiastic with such rich laughter and applause.
Brooks seems to be under the impression that Young Frankenstein was a great show! Some responses to his sentiments:
Oh well, I guess we’re all allowed to be subjective about our own creations, just as Brooks is about Young Frankenstein. I only hope that The New Mel Brooks Musical Blazing Saddles is a damn sight better than its predecessor.
OUT Magazine has published an interview with Arthur Laurents. Entitled “Arthur Laurents Will Not Go Quietly”, the article deals somewhat with personal life and his relationship with Tom Hatcher, but also allows him to offer his trademark frank assessments of a few musical theatre matters.
Here are just a few snippets from the three page article, which can be read at the OUT website.
On his decision to change the Spanish lyrics in the revival of West Side Story back to English:
It’s hard to be tactful…. I’ll say this: I realized that we had to put in more English for the audience.
On the forthcoming Broadway revival of La Cage aux Folles:
It’s in vogue now, this so-called darker side of everything, which I think is just muddy. And cheap. Literally, in both meanings of the word. I saw it in London. I thought the production was homophobic…. There’s a line in it about Albin, [the main attraction at the nightclub]. The boy says, “How can I introduce him to my fiancé’s parents the way he dresses?” Well, in London he wore a dress and a wig in private life. In New York, he wore a suit with piping. It was effeminate, but this was out and out camp. I didn’t see Douglas Hodge, who is a very good actor. But I saw him on YouTube, and he can’t sing. And he wore a dress like it belonged to a maiden aunt.
On Julie Taymor’s Spider-Man:
I wouldn’t go to see Spider-Man.
On the much anticipated Encores! production of Anyone Can Whistle:
They’re doing some cockamamie version of it. I’m just rehearsing how I can say, “No comment.”
On his favourite Rose from Gypsy:
Patti. I shouldn’t have said I like Patti best because they’ll get pissed off. But I do.
On possible future projects:
They want to do Gypsy in London. They only want Patti and me…. She wants to. And if I did, it would be for her. I can say I’m going to live forever. But if I do Gypsy again, it might cut that short.
On Disney’s idea for an animated West Side Story:
Disney wanted to do an animated version — with cats! They sent a DVD. The black cats and the white cats. It was pure camp. They showed the Maria cat coming down the rope of an ocean liner. She was an illegal immigrant.
On a new film version of West Side Story:
I still would like another movie – because I thought the other one was so bad. And, frankly, anti–Puerto Rican. The Sharks wore makeup and had this phony accent and DayGlo costumes. But who would direct it?
A few comments of my own:
Nonetheless, it’s an interesting interview and I’d urge others to read the entire article. Scroll up and click on the link now! And, as always, feel free to leave your own comments below.
Million Dollar Quartet, Broadway’s newest jukebox musical, begins its four week preview period tonight at the Nederlander Theatre. The musical tells the story of the legendary impromptu recording session by rock superstars Johnny Cash, Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins and Elvis Presley in 1956. With a book by Colin Escott and Floyd Mutrux, the show features hit songs like “Blue Suede Shoes,” “I Walk the Line,” “Fever,” “Great Balls of Fire,” “Riders in the Sky,” “Folsom Prison Blues” and “Whole Lotta Shakin’ Goin’ On.”
Starring as the musical greats are Eddie Clendening (Presley), Lance Guest (Cash), Levi Kreis (Lewis) and Rob Lyons (Perkins), who are all making their Broadway debuts following their run in the roles in the Chicago production of the show. Hunter Foster plays Sam Phillips, the man who discovered them all and who brought them together for this most memorable night in the history of rock ‘n’ roll, and Elizabeth Stanley plays Dyanne, a woman who arrives with Elvis on that December night more than half a century ago.
Directed by Eric Schaeffer, the show will open on 11 April. The official website is available here.
Following two flop jukebox musicals based on the music of Elvis Presley and Johnny Cash respectively, will Million Dollar Quartet actually be any better? I suppose taking a pinch of the Jersey Boys formula and marrying the music to it’s actual context has helped and the show was certainly very popular during its Chicago run. But to me, it still seems like just another jukebox musical at this point.
A musical adaptation of the 1982 film An Officer and a Gentleman will receive a reading on 13-14 May 2010 under the auspices of Gordon Frost Productions ahead of an Australian production in 2011. The film dealt with the experiences of US Navy aviation officer candidate Zach Mayo at the Aviation Officer Candidate School, where he comes into conflict with Emil Foley, the Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant who trains him and falls in love with factory worker, Paula Pokrifki.
With a book by Douglas Day Steward (who penned the original screenplay for the film) and Sharleen Cooper Cohen, the musical will feature a score by Robin Lerner and Ken Hirsch. The reading will be directed by Simon Phillips.
Purchases from Amazon.com
FROM LEFT TO RIGHT:
1. An Officer and a Gentleman DVD.
Word from The New York Times is that Love Never Dies, which recently opened to decidedly mixed reviews in its debut run the West End, will definitely open on Broadway as planned despite any rumours to the contrary. In fact, Andrew Lloyd Webber has said he’s fully committed to bringing the show to the Great White Way. However, there will be some changes to the show following feedback from critics in regard to the production. Not particularly surprising news, perhaps, but one does wonder what will be changed, in terms of both broad strokes and finer details. Certainly, I’ve voiced my own opinions on the matter in my track-by-track commentary of the original cast album, which can be read on this blog starting here. Guess we’ll have to wait and see…
Purchases from Amazon.com
FROM LEFT TO RIGHT:
1. Love Never Dies Concept Album Cast Recording.
2. Love Never Dies Concept Album Cast Recording – Deluxe Edition.
With the show having opened Off-Broadway last night, it’s time for us to see what The Scottsboro Boys looks like for ourselves. Here’s a gallery of photographs by Carol Rosegg and Richard Termine.
With a book by David Thompson, The Scottsboro Boys features a score by John Kander and Fred Ebb – sadly, a posthumous premiere for Ebb. The show is directed and choreographed by Susan Stroman and has a limited run Off-Broadway. With any luck, we’ll see a Broadway transfer of this show, which seems to be the most astutely political small scale musical since Stephen Sondheim’s Assassins. Dealing with the issue of racial injustice, the musical delves into the infamous “Scottsboro” case of the 1930’s when a group of African American teenagers were unjustly accused of attacking two white women and the boys’ attempts to prove that they were innocent of that crime.
John Cullum, Brandon Victor Dixon and Colman Domingo head up the cast, which also features Sean Bradford, Josh Breckenridge, Derrick Cobey, Rodney Hicks, Kendrick Jones, Forrest McClendon, Julius Thomas III, Sharon Washington, Cody Ryan Wise and Christian Dante White.
The final part of this track-by-track Love Never Dies commentary covers the ending of the show, dealing with tracks 12-13 on the second disc of the original cast recording.
12. “Gustave, Gustave”
The title of this track made me chuckle. Why is it that in the Phantom universe, names must always be repeated – and often to a melody? This particular outburst comes from Christine, who has noticed that Gustave is missing. The Phantom immediately thinks that Raoul must have taken the child when he left and he bemoans this using the melody of “The Beauty Underneath”, which works perfectly well here – without the rock beat and throbbing bassline. Squelch is summoned and replies that Raoul was definitely alone when he left, singing is words to a melodic line taken from “The Coney Island Waltz” that seems to be popular choice for recitative in this show. Then Phantom turns his attention to Madame Giry, who says she could never have even considered harming the child knowing that he was the Phantom’s son, a statement that sits more than a little oddly considering how vengeful she seemed towards the boy at the end of the first act. As she continues with her speech, which is sung to the melody used for all such outbursts by this character, Giry also says she understands ‘how it hurts to see one’s own child brought to harm’, which I suppose is meant to prepare us for Meg’s upcoming revelation. Next, Fleck arrives with the news that Meg’s dressing room was smashed and that she saw Meg taking the child, looking incredibly suspicious as she did so. No one seems bothered enough to ask Fleck why she didn’t do anything about it at the time.
Head spinning yet? I hope not, for there is even more desperate plotting to come. Having spent much energy trying to hide any real development towards a conclusion such as this one, the creative team has to work even harder to try and make all of this even vaguely believable.
Giry intrejects, fearing she has snapped but insists that Meg could never hurt the boy. The Phantom seems to know better and miraculously also seems to know where they have gone. This lease to a chase, like there was at the end of The Phantom of the Opera: this time we’re trying to track down a potential murder by running through the streets of Coney Island to the pier. This makes for several cases of mistaken identity as the characters push through the crowd in their attempts to reach their destination. Mark my words, if this was a film it would be a chase by hot air balloon, the one used earlier to bring the crowds to this performance at Phantasma.
13. “Please, Miss Giry, I Want to Go Back”
Meanwhile, at the pier, Gustave begs Meg to take him back. She is too preoccupied reprising the little song she sang to Raoul about swimming in the sea to cleanse her conscience and ‘leave the hurt behind’. This allows time for the others to arrive just in time for Meg to have a mad scene, delivered to the tune of “Bathing Beauty” (!), in which she reveals the secret that has tormented her for years: how she had to prosituted herself for the Phantom’s sake, to get permits, to pay bills, to seal deals and to get the press on their side. “See what I’ve become!” she proclaims, having switched now to the melody of Madame Giry’s outburst recitative. The only problem is that until now she’s behaved in a fairly normal way with little to indicate that she has anything bubbling underneath her confident facade. And what was the trigger here? Her past experience has only an oblique bearing on this situayion, have to do with this siutation?
This is where Ben Elton, Glenn Slater and Andrew Lloyd Webber need to decide what story they are telling. If Christine is the protagonist and the crisis is represented in a choice between Raoul and the Phantom, then this climactic sequence has no place here. The protagonist’s choice is meant to precipitate the climax; thus, either one of the alternative endings I suggested in part 11 of this commentary would bring that story to a close.
If the Phantom is the protagonist (a fact that the creative team seem fond of dropping into press statements, but don’t seem too bother about dropping into the play itself), then the crisis needs to be represented in a choice between Meg and Christine. Meg has not been presented as even vaguely being a viable alternative to Christine in the plot of this show. He simply hasn’t been shown to place any value whatsoever on Meg’s presence in his life. I said above that there is no trigger for Meg’s actions, no pattern of cause and effect: this is because the Phantom arrived on stage with his choice already made. At least if there was a scene in which Meg confronted the Phantom and he dismissed her, kicking her out of Phantasma (his home) and and throwing some money at her (for services rendered) this scene would have some motivation. But as it stands, it does not – and we still have quite a bit of it to endure.
The Phantom asks Meg for the gun, trying to convince her that he sees her at last. He says that he looks at her and sees ‘the beauty underneath’: how ironic, we as the audience are meant to think, we see her beauty is on the outside and that she is twisted and broken inside. Meg seems to buy it until the Phantom makes a mistake by mentioning Christine’s name, at which point Meg shoots her. Giry runs to get help, never to return, and Christine’s long death scene begins.
First, she tells Gustave, who is asking for his father that the Phantom is his real father. ‘Look with your heart,’ she tells him before she dies – or so it would appear. Gustave screams as a big dramatic musical reprise of “Once Upon Another Time” takes over, followed by the Phantom singing a reprise of the same song, lamenting the loss of Christine and wondering what to do with Gustave. Christine – who hasn’t actually died yet – manages to summon up enough energy and breath to sing some really high notes, telling the Phantom to ‘love and live and give what (he) can give and take the love that (he) deserve(s)’. Even after this, she’s doesn’t die. We still have a reprise of “‘Til I Hear You Sing”, during which she asks the Phantom for a last kiss before dying (at last) in his arms.
Following this, the show’s opening flute melody of “Beneath a Moonless Sky” plays, segueing into the Phantom’s “darkness made light” theme, which appeared when he named Gustave as his ‘saving grace’ at the end of Act I. With this, the Phantom turns to comfort Gustave, who unmasks him with out any horror as the curtain falls.
Final verdict: This ending as it currently appears doesn’t work. Firstly, it’s unmotivated by the action of the play. Secondly, it is overly plotty, trying to fit in all manner of narrative detail that has been glossed over earlier in the play and which has caused the scene to appear so unmotivated in the first place. Thirdly, the dénouement pushes the suspension of the audience’s belief to the absolute maximum. It takes too long for Christine to die and she sings far too much when she should be too weak to even sustain normal breath. Maybe the creative team should go and have a look at the end of Carmen to see how to make a death scene truly effective.
The final, final verdict: Is there a good show in Love Never Dies? Potentially, yes. But it is not one that can be realised by making a few cosmetic changes made to the show as it stands. The writing team needs to get the details of the narrative straight, taking into account which storytelling traditions they are manipulating here: melodrama, operetta and the conventions of the sequel. They then need to distill that clarity into the book, the lyrics and the music. Slater, in particular, needs to up his game at this point. And then those revisions can make their way into production, transformed from drama into theatre. Only then will Love Never Dies achieve its full potential.
And that, my friends, brings this track-by-track commentary of Love Never Dies to an end. If you want to read more about the show, click here to see all the blogs about it that are available at Musical Cyberspace.
Purchases from Amazon.com
FROM LEFT TO RIGHT:
1. Love Never Dies Concept Album Cast Recording.
2. Love Never Dies Concept Album Cast Recording – Deluxe Edition.
The eleventh and final part of this track-by-track commentary of Love Never Dies works through Christine’s climactic performance of the title song and its immediate aftermath: tracks 10-11 of the second disc of the original cast recording.
10. “Love Never Dies”
It is time for Christine’s climactic performance. “Love Never Dies” begins with a fairly lengthy instrumental introduction which may be very beautiful, but what is it’s function? Is it meant to, like the meditation in Jules Massenet’s Thaïs, the moment in which our heroine commits to the path she must follow? If so, how will that be represented on stage? I do hope it isn’t there simply for it’s own sake or to cover Christine’s entrance.
Let’s face it: this song has to be beautiful, transcendent. It has to awaken whatever has been sleeping in Christine since she last sang the Phantom’s music, the soul make gives her instrument meaning.
Andrew Lloyd Webber has done his job with the music – although he’s been fortunate enough to have this song in the bag for more than a decade. Glenn Slater’s lyrics are another matter: they sound something like English translations for the surtitles of an French opera. They aren’t graceful enough; they’re too literal; and they don’t sing. The lyrics weren’t much better when the song was known as “The Heart is Slow to Learn” in 1998, although it seems that back then that the lyrics place the song in the spot now taken by “‘Til I Hear You Sing”. The song has still never been better than when it was “Our Kind of Love” in The Beautiful Game in spite of the composer’s protesting that it didn’t fit into that show. Whether or not it would have been better to let it remain there and to write a completely new song for this spot, it is here in Love Never Dies now and it needs better lyrics. Lyrics that sing. Lyrics that move us and, more importantly, Christine.
11. “Ah Christine”
In the dressing room after the performance, the Phantom congratulates Christine on her marvellous performance. Christine is overwhelmed by the effect singing the song has had on her. Much of this is done to yet another inappropriate non-diegetic reprise of the “Beautiful” theme.
Christine then discovers a letter from Raoul stating that he has left for good, which is set to the “Little Lotte” theme from The Phantom of the Opera in which their earliest days together as children were recalled.
Now as I see it, this scene provides a way in to two alternative endings other than the one we get and which will be discussed in the final entry in this series. Both would require some rewriting throughout the rest of the show, but I think that is going be be a feature of any attempt to get this show up to scratch no matter what narrative strategies the the creative team chooses to follow.
In the first, the Phantom arrives in Christine’s dressing room to sing of his triumph, only to discover that Raoul has taken Christine and Gustave and fled – a last desperate attempt to keep his family together. Christine, at this point, wants to stay, having had her transcendental experience as she sang her song. The Phantom pursues them and, in the streets of Coney Island, Raoul and the Phantom finally face off in a duel. Raoul is killed and Christine, seeing the Phantom for what he is, unmasks him in front of everyone as she did in The Phantom of the Opera, takes Gustave and leaves as the crowd closes in on him and burns Phantasma to the ground. In the emptiness that is left behind, we are given an epilogue in which we see Gustave as a young man achieve some kind of musical acclaim, realising all the good in his father without the burden of his deformity. As his mother looks on proudly, beautifully and filled with regret, the curtain falls.
In the second, we see the two sections switched around. Christine discovers Raoul’s note first and it becomes clear to her how both men have manipulated her during the course of The Phantom of the Opera and Love Never Dies: in the former, she was a pawn; in the latter, she is the prize. The Phantom enters singing about his triumph and Christine sings about her transcendence, but realises that she needs to discover her own voice. Being the Phantom’s mouthpiece is not enough for her anymore. Raoul is out of her life, she tells the Phantom, but she cannot stay with him either. It’s very intellectual and very Ibsen – see A Doll’s House. She takes Gustave and they leave as the Phantom laments how he will never hear Christine sing again. Cue a similar coda to satisfy the emotional expectations of the target audience and we’re home free.
I think either might be a good alternative, but instead we’re treated to a second, melodramatic climax involving Meg and the big secret she and Madame Giry have been hiding throughout the show…
Final verdict: To Glenn Slater: please write better lyrics for this show and especially for this song. To Andrew Lloyd Webber: please demand excellence from your collaborators. To both of you: please go through the entire show carefully and decide which story you want to tell; consider whether the climax of your story is Christine’s choice or the melodramatic nonsense with which you’ve chosen to end the show; and don’t let Ben Elton distract you with any more of his bizarre story ideas. Or if you are going to go with the melodramatic nonsense, please set it up better so that it is only melodramatic and not nonsense. That should sort out this section of the show and several others too.
NEXT UP: Second climax – or dénouement?
Purchases from Amazon.com
FROM LEFT TO RIGHT:
1. Love Never Dies Concept Album Cast Recording.
2. Love Never Dies Concept Album Cast Recording – Deluxe Edition.
Musical Cyberspace 
A Random Thought About Movie Musicals…
Lots of people complain about the way that stage musicals are adapted for the screen, often citing unfaithfulness to the source material as the reason for their woes. But…. should we be expecting or looking for the same experience when watching a stage production or a movie or the same narrative? Sometimes, perhaps, these two things do fall in line, but I don’t see why they should have to. They aren’t, after all, the same thing at all.
“But they’re adapting a stage show,” you might say. “Shouldn’t the filmmakers aim to preserve or imitate the effect of the show on film?”
Of course it’s an adaptation: a movie version of a stage show is by definition is an adaptation, a translation. It’s not the show itself, but then again, it never can be. Certainly the essence of what makes any show work should be preserved, but is that where it should end dramatically or intellectually?
I don’t think so. Anyone else have any thoughts? Head on to the comment box…