WSS: Does the revival IMPROVE anything?

Posted: 11/11/09 at 7:54pm

I hope this doesn't become a flame war or anything--I'd just like to see some discussion and opinions.

I haven't seen the WSS revival, just as many clips and images as I can find. I have seen past WSS productions, including both the mid 90s N American tour and the 99-2000 London production, both of which were essentially complete recreations of the original production from blocking to sets.

I admit, I'm a bit of a traditionalist in that I often think the original designs and especially choreography are as important to most of my fave shows as anything else (I'd kill to see my fave show Company done back as it originally was) while I also realize that sometimes this can backfire and create a museum piece, that it's often difficult to truly know what's original and what's not, and that new approaches to material can often create stunning shows (two of my fave theatre experiences were seeing the 90s revivals of Carousel and Show Boat). So I can see both sides of the story. Still I thought both productions of WSS played very well (particularly the London one which had a very strong cast when I saw it).

Anyway, so often it seems the consensus I read about the current revival is that it's largely good to great--but almost DESPITE the changes. People seem to like the set, and be so so about the costumes but I haven't heard anyone say they're an improvement on the originals. Similarly one of the points people like the best is the dancing, which is one of the things kept closest to the original (despite my one big upset--cutting a big chunk of the ballet).

SO I guess my question is, was it worth it to redesign and change the show? Would a similarly carefully done revival which kept faithful to the original have worked less or more well?

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:10pm

Eric,

I saw the pre-Broadway production in DC three times. The strong points for me were the overall dancing with the exception of America and the cutting of the nightmare portion of the ballet. In terms of choreography, America just did not soar like it should have.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I liked the spanish.

Karen Olivo is a talented actress and singer, but a dancer she is not.

My favorite portions of the show were the Quintet and I Feel Pretty. The staging of the final scene was a huge let down. And to this day, I can't figure out why the character of "Kiddo" was added. This addition did nothing to enhance the show.

Updated On: 11/11/09 at 08:10 PM

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:12pm

Updated On: 11/11/09 at 08:12 PM

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:14pm

Dottie, wait, so you LIKE that the nightmare section was cut? Or not?

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:24pm

Thanks, Blaxx. I didn't even realize I spelled her name wrong.

Eric, I was very disappointed that the nightmare section was cut.

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:26pm

Oh Lord I think I need sleep--I misread your post and thought you meant a strong point was that the Nightmare was cut. I was all set to argue you down but now I approve :P

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:27pm

Eric, how far are you from Stratford? Isn't there an amazing production of WSS that they did (or are still doing)?

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:32pm

Very very very far--basically as far as I am from New York (I should change my screename, I'm back on the west coast right by Vancouver). My grandma goes to Stratford every year and she saw WSS last month there and said it was one of the best things she's ever said--a number of reviews have also said that they think it's a more satisfying overall production than the current New York production. I really wish I could see it (one interesting change though is while the choreography is Robbins, it is being done on a thrust stage)

*edit* nevermind, it closed a week ago...

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:35pm

No.

[winston89]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:44pm

I don't think this production improves anything. In fact, I think it might make things worse.

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:47pm

That was kinda my assumption--it's almost that the things that make it good and worth seeing were all things that were there from the original (well plus some of the cast).

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 8:48pm

I still like the Spanish. I hope they end up offering the script as an option for regional companies in parts of the US where the general audience is bilingual. I think it would go over better in those locations anyway.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 9:11pm

I was one of the few who did not like Laurent's staging of LuPone/GYPSY, I enjoyed it as a semi-concert-production at City Center, but as a full fledged Broadway Production starring one of our first ladies of Musical Comedy, it left me cold.
Lack of any scenery that helps place the piece, the miming of the windows, a puppet lamb, etc., the cutting of crucial scenes including Rose's reprise all rubbed me the wrong way. I loved Boyd Gaines, but I found Benanti shrill, too attractive and yelly (I know that's not a word). And LuPone's theatrics and Diva fits when she should have been acting the sh*t out of a classic piece were. to me, atrocious.

I bring that all back up, because the critical, if not monetary success of LuPone/GYPSY must have been the incentive to revive WEST SIDE STORY. But as it has been beaten to death here, Laurents decided He knew how it should be done and only He knew how to do it. As it turned out, his major revelation to translate dialogue to Spanish, was wrong and has been somewhat changed.
His casting also brought a lot of controversy, Hosefina was a good choice for Maria and has proven herself worthy, Karen is still a very sore spot for us purists but the audiences and the TONY voters loved her. For me, Matt and Cody were terrible in these roles, Matt lacked in both the singing and acting and Cody's acting was so bad, I didn't even notice what a fine dancer he is. George was actually fine but since he spoke little English, he got totally lost.
I thought the ensemble was great and they danced the show wonderfully.
This production should have soared, the time was right and the talent is out there, and hopefully will be obvious as parts are recast.

I still think everyone should see it, either as a chance to see a classic on Broadway or how "not" to do a classic, you decide.
Updated On: 11/11/09 at 09:11 PM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 11/11/09 at 10:01pm

I am one that thought the entire production was simply substandard. I didn't believe in any of it -- and I love WSS and was really looking forward to this production.

I don't think the production values had much to do with that. I think it was sadly miscast and horridly directed.

Musicals work because: when words are no longer enough to express emotions-- we sing. When song is no longer enough -- we dance. I never felt that the song OR dance came from anywhere from a performance p.o.v. I found he whole thing to be rather soul-less.

[hmpeterson]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 11:46am

In my opinion, there are certain pieces of theater that are timeless and strong enough to stand on their own without them being "freshened up." WSS is one of those pieces of theater.

I don't know why Arthur Laurents felt the need to bring a fresh approach to WSS. I know his partner thought he should but it was a bad idea. WSS doesn't need to be "freshened." It is perfect the way it is. It just needs a fantastic cast who is PROPERLY cast in the roles. For me, the only proper casting was Maria, Action, Graziella, and Baby John. And I personally think, that was the biggest downfall of this show. The casting was very poor. And that is not a knock on people like Matt Cavanaugh and Karen Olivo who I think are very talented performers....they just weren't right for these parts. I know Karen won the Tony, but IMO, she was the weakest Anita of all Anitas ever nominated.

I also think the Spanish was a huge mistake. I think it was handled very poorly. I think if you are going to go that route, you either go for it 100% or you don't do it at all. The Spanish was done half assed. It made it seem like more of a marketing ploy than a true representation of Puerto Rican culture. But from what I hear, the Spanish is pretty much out of the show at this point.

Arthur Laurents should have nothing to do with revivals of classic theater anymore, IMO. All he does is take his petty little issues he has with former collaborators out on the production so he can stick it in their faces. He doesn't enhance the productions or make them better.....he makes them worse. Because at 90+ yrs old, he still acts like a bratty 12 yr old. How is that good for theater....it isn't.

Having said all that, WSS is still WSS. I saw it because hearing that music still makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up...it is so beautiful. And there are some good performances.

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 11:50am

"I know Karen won the Tony, but IMO, she was the weakest Anita of all Anitas ever nominated. "

- The only other Anita nominated for a Tony was Debbie Allen. Did you see her?

[musicaltheater1]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 12:00pm

I had high expectations of the revival but I too, was quite disappointed with the acting and changes to the songs and staging. So, the revival for me wasn't an improvement. But I am glad it is doing very well.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 1:08pm

No.

[MusicSnob1]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 1:12pm

Yes.

[James885]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 1:37pm

I saw the DC tryout and I don't think it improved upon anything. The addition of the spanish just seemed like gimmick to me, although I did like it when Anita reverts to spanish after Bernarndo is killed. Matt Cavenaugh was grossly miscast, and I thought that he and Josefina Scaglione had little chemistry. In fact, he looked much older opposite her.

Karen Olivo acted the part wonderfully, but she is not a dancer. Granted this was during the tryout when she was still settling into the role, but it was blatantly obvious during the performance I saw that she was struggling a bit with the choreography.

The show as a whole was a bit mis-directed. I don't know what Arthur Laurents was thinking cutting the nightmare ballet and the original choreography for America. I had the same reaction when I saw LuPone Gypsy and discovered that he cut the reprise of Small World. I also hated the way the Officer Krupke number was staged.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 2:48pm

Umm...no.

[defyingravity11]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 2:52pm

While I was disappointed by this production, I think Josefina did wonders as Maria. The first time I saw it, she was out sick. I ended up seeing her twice because I loved her performance. I wish that the entire ballet was kept intact. However, I'm glad that Arthur cut the procession in the final scene (since there was no ballet segment to mirror it). I also enjoyed the fence in the rumble.

[hmpeterson]

Posted: 11/12/09 at 3:40pm

"I know Karen won the Tony, but IMO, she was the weakest Anita of all Anitas ever nominated. "

- The only other Anita nominated for a Tony was Debbie Allen. Did you see her?

Yes. And IMO, Debbie was better than Karen. If Karen could dance like Debbie, it would be the other way around. My bad, I thought Chita was nominated.

I know you love Karen Olivo, ljay, but it is my opinion that Karen Olivo is a very talented actress that I don't feel was right for Anita. And I know you disagree and that is fine. But I am entitled to my opinion.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/13/09 at 11:32am

Karen's acting, particularly in the second-act scenes, was very good, but it was no better than the acting of the other Anitas I have seen.

The job of every Anita is to dance the hell out of Act One and act the hell out of Act Two.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/13/09 at 1:16pm

I liked the revival ok, but it didn't wow me. I've never seen the full dream sequence, so I have no idea what I'm missing other than the usual comments lamenting its absence. I was pretty much ambivalent about the use of Spanish. Knowing the book and score, I knew what they were talking about, so it didn't distract me in any way, but the inconsistent use of Spanish throughout the show left me scratching my head as to why the concept was even employed. I was equally ambivalent about Matt's Tony. I thought he was ok, not awful, but I'm sure there are better performers up to the task, just like I felt there were probably better choices for Riff and Action, though Cody and Curtis were adequate. I did think Josephina was quite strong and Karen was worth the price of the ticket (despite how anyone feels about her dancing, her singing and acting were more than enough to keep me riveted). The two changes that truly tarnished the show in my opinion were Somewhere and the finale. Those two changes absolutely destroyed the emotional impact for me. I had no idea who that little boy was singing Somewhere other than he was a contrived and cliched device of emotional manipulation that added nothing to the scene other than the appearance of a cute little kid. He was the Joey Lawrence of West Side Story.

Oh, and Maria's "Killer! Killer!" blocking made no sense whatsoever.

But considering the only other West Side Story I've seen on stage could easily be deemed the worst production ever (and if you had seen it, you would not consider that an exaggeration), my quibbles are relatively minor, which would explain why I can't say I didn't like the revival.

Updated On: 11/13/09 at 01:16 PM