Riedel: PORGY AND BESS canceling Broadway run?- Page 3

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:25pm

"This whole controversy sparked outrage and outcry without anyone ever seeing a moment of the show on stage."

Diane Paulus reaps what she sows. Her entire sales pitch is based on something she presumes the public thinks of as "stuffy," that with her tinkering she'll make more understandable, more relevant, more now. I imagine in her pep talks to the cast she fed them all the lines she uses about making something more accessible because theater needs to be a partner in a dialogue with "the community." I'm sure the pep talks are seductive, just look at her eyes in the photo I linked. I bet when they're in action they're like that hypnotic snake's in the Jungle Book.

I bet she talks about how the cognescenti know and love Porgy & Bess and now, with their efforts, "real people" will too. (In many ways, she IS the Sarah Palin of contemporary theater, a person with little native talent who finds herself thrust upon a platform much bigger than she deserves, filled with insecurities she tries to manage by lashing out at "the elites.")

But regardless of my fantasies of how her POV came to be repeated by her cast in that (what has turned out to be) "unhelpful" pre-publicity, what we wound up with was super-talented people like McDonald and Boykin going on about how this production was going to be better and clearer and more understandable. I find this particularly interesting coming from Boykin, since he has played Crown previously. Did Paulus convince him that with the changes he wouldn't see the same old faces in the audience? Or did he come to be the victim of Stockholm Syndrome in the rehearsal process?

More likely, I bet Paulus told them what the sales angle was going to be, and without imagining a Sondheimian backlash, they went with it because Diane is nothing if not convincing.

The fault is not with Sondheim, he reacted to what Paulus carefully chose to put before the public in advance of performances.

As for how (or why?) the non-profit ART has been planning a Broadway production from the beginning, that's an equally intriguing question with artistic and financial implications that will be worth exploring as time marches on.

[SondheimFan5]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:26pm

I am wondering if maybe Audra (or one of the other stars) wants out? Or maybe the team is looking to replace some cast-members, or re-work the production? (as it is billed as a "workshop" though it is with full set/costumes and orchestra)

I think a delay til the 2012-2013 season would be ideal...there are SO many revivals opening this season, and so many potential Best Actress in a Musical nominees.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:28pm

P.S. For an example of how Paulus so convincingly creates a non-existent "elites v. real people" dichotomy like Sarah Palin does, we need look no further than the opening paragraph of Broadwayworld's review of the show:

Dear Mr. Sondheim. It ain't necessarily so. While purists, pundits, preservationists and scholars may have qualms about the revised production of The Gershwin's Porgy and Bess which had its official pre-Broadway press opening at the A.R.T. in Cambridge, Mass. on August 31, mere mortals who have no preconceived notions of how the work "should" be presented are in for a thrilling night of musical theater. Powerful, imaginative, and gloriously cast, this intimate yet soaring Porgy and Bess is both timeless and full of life.

Please note that this sales pitch is the ONLY trick Paulus has in her carpetbag. God, the more times I reread that paragraph, the more pissed off it makes me.

Updated On: 9/2/11 at 12:28 PM

[Q]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:30pm

"In this case, the director, writer and musical director made comments in articles that were part of show's marketing that I found not only pretentious but downright stupid."

And it happened again, much to my amusement - no Audra in the list.

Unless I missed something, Mr. Sondheim certainly included her in his attack. And now, she is exempt.

[crewdude]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:39pm

"Sorry, but I have to blame Sondheim." You must mean Thank Sondheim.

The blame goes with the director thinking that she is better than the material.

[ReggieonBway]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:41pm

Sounds like people want this to fail. Negativity abounds.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:41pm

Q,

Probably because, in a way, she's vindicated herself. People are practically calling her the definitive Bess, saying she has re-minted the role in a way no one has before. Of course, all of that is hyperbole as there's no one alive who's seen every single Bess. But she did the one thing that others involved in the production seemingly haven't: she backed up her talk with a performance for the ages.
Updated On: 9/2/11 at 12:41 PM

[D2]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:45pm

First of all: PJ, I love you!

Secondly: Am I the only one who is finding the comments made by Paulus, Parks and McDonald eerily reminiscent of the arrogant and pretentious remarks being made last year by a now-fired "genius" director and neophyte composer about their brilliant re-imagining of something that didn't need to be re-imagined?

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:46pm

"She certainly doesn't play 'too big for the room'."

Robbie, I was referring to her talent being too big for the room, not her physical performances, aka hamming it up. I've seen her on stage, and it's the "wattage" I was referring to in my post.

Thanks for those of you who weighed in on the question. I was also interested to hear that some of you felt that it was a gross oversight that Brantley proceeded with his review as if the leading man was "barely in the room" (again, not literally, Robbie!). It sparked my question, because I have see her outshine leading men before. And a leading man that was quite capable and even outstanding. Stokes in Ragtime in L.A. was incredible. I was sure he was going to win the Tony. Then he got to Broadway with Audra, and the focus of the duo was "off." Still a memorable performance, but nothing like the impact it had on the west coast, before that, with LaChanze. And, once again, Audra got the Tony.

Updated On: 9/2/11 at 12:46 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 12:57pm

The thing about Taymor is, she actually IS an artist. The only thing Paulus crafts is sales pitches.

[D2]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:06pm

I'm not a Taymor fan, Namo, but I will agree that there are aspects to her work that I do admire - there were even moments in SPIDER-MAN that were breathtaking in their visual and conceptual beauty. But only moments.

I know I'm in the minority around here, but I have to say that I found Paulus' work on HAIR to be appallingly lack-luster and over-rated at best.

And both of them are stunning in their arrogance. Artist or Marketer, whatever. They've both hoisted themselves on their own petards, spectacularly.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:09pm

"but I have to say that I found Paulus' work on HAIR to be appallingly lack-luster and over-rated at best."

As with P&B, the strong cast did all the heavy lifting.

[D2]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:18pm

Exactly.

[Lolagetz]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:29pm

Joey, sorry I misunderstood your comments. I thought you were trashing the show. Now I get it. Although you haven’t actually seen this production, you were just trashing the creative team based on the comments they made in an article about this production. Oops, my bad.

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:31pm

First, Gaveston2 thanks for clearing up the Workshop details, concerning KISS OF THE SPIDERWOMAN in Purchase, NY. The fact that Frank Rich, the Times critic, " found" the workshop and wrote about it infuriated not only Hal Prince but huge numbers of the Broadway theatrical community. The result was the loss of possible other workshops insulated from poisonous word of mouth.

Secondly, the balance of singers in duets, trios, and quartets is absolutely essential, whether it be in Broadway musicals, opera, or oratorios or other choral works utilizing soloists. If Norm Lewis can't match Audra McDonald in volume then it is up to the music director to work with the two of them so that there IS an appropriate balance. It is certainly possible to accomplish. Hopefully, they won't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I, for one, want to see this production succeed and come into New York City. Let's not have another Purchase, NY debacle.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:32pm

I was a BIG fan of HAIR and would have actually argued for Paulus' win of the Tony over Daldry (though Daldry's work was certainly worthy of recognition). I have absolutely no other experience with her work...though, for some reazy, I have a gauzy memory of seeing The Donkey Show. But I can't tell you if it was real, a dream or drug-induced. Fitting, no?

Best, I guess I didn't really flesh out my thoughts. I knew exactly what you meant by 'too big for the room.' I just was hazy in my response. I think that, though she is without question someone who demands a great deal of the focus when onstage, I feel she very much can be of a piece. Alas, I didn't see Ragtime. But I remember when it came in. And there was talk amongst some of my friends here (both connected with the show and peripheral) that splitting up the cast after Toronto was a really bad mistake. It allowed performances to grow and change seperately and that, by the time they came back to New York, what once was a seamless company had become very disjointed. It wasn't just an 'Audra' thing. It happened with a number of the principals.

The other work I've seen her do hasn't misshapen the shows to the point where it seems out of whack. But, perhaps, she is becoming a performer who would be better served by works like Caroline, or Change, or Gypsy...a show where she is the undisputed star, and everyone else is supporting. Please note I'm not saying she's right for either (though her Caroline would be fascinating). Just that perhaps her wattage demands a vehicle like the two I mentioned.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:45pm

Honestly, any issues I might have had with vocal power in their duets I simply chalked up to bad sound board work.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 1:46pm

"there was talk amongst some of my friends here (both connected with the show and peripheral) that splitting up the cast after Toronto was a really bad mistake. It allowed performances to grow and change seperately and that, by the time they came back to New York, what once was a seamless company had become very disjointed. It wasn't just an 'Audra' thing. It happened with a number of the principals."

Robbie, I find this very enlightening, and I"m glad you mentioned it!

As far as "How Do You Solve a Problem Like McDonald?" ... I find it fascinating. I agree that if you put her in a star-vehicle role, she can shine all she wants. The only person I can compare her to right now would be Meryl Streep. Meryl has been able to adjust and play off of some varying talent. She's had leading men who were (arguably) her equal, and she's had novices and subpar partners on screen, and she STILL manages in most cases to both shine AND create a balance. Perhaps it's easier to do on film and when you're not singing. I know it's got to be very tricky.

And I actually hate the thought of Audra having to tone down her performance ... and it isn't just a "volume thing" with singing. She is a star who pulls your focus, just by being on stage. You can't help but watch her. How do you tone down the "it" factor? I don't have an easy answer. There have been other high-wattage stars who have struggled with this: Heburn, Crawford, and Davis come to mind. Hepburn flailed for years until she found Spencer Tracy. Many of them sought out "star vehicle" projects where their connection to a leading man was secondary or nonexistent.

Anyway, I'm glad you got what I meant by "too big for the room."

Updated On: 9/2/11 at 01:46 PM

[justoldbill]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 2:06pm

A sound board for PORGY AND BESS. I'm cold with fear.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 4:34pm

Yeah, well, there ya go. Welcome to musical theater post-Funny Girl.

[SondheimFan5]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 4:54pm

How 'bout Stokes as Porgy?

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 6:41pm

You're welcome, Gypsy9, and you're right: after the SPIDER WOMAN debacle, Prince seemed to lose interest in the whole Purchase, NY experiment.

I think it's a tough issue. On the one hand, other than some software releases, what other industry has to do deal with critics reviewing product before it is finished and polished? On the other, what other industry charges money for product that isn't complete and ready to market?

Obviously, critics should tread lightly when reviewing workshops and previews, and clearly acknowledge that what they are seeing isn't the final show. But critics have enough trouble intelligently discussing finished shows; I don't know we can expect them to understand the sometimes subtle differences in a work-in-progress.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 7:17pm

Companies offer "beta" software all the time, and customers pay for it. They also review it.

The big difference between now and the KISS scenario is the advancement of blogs and sites and message boards like this one that have jumped and trumped the major newspapers and have proven to be a threat to their very existence.

Whereas before it could be considered bad form, you can now add "keeping up with the Joneses" as a legit excuse for printing it.

Updated On: 9/2/11 at 07:17 PM

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 9/2/11 at 9:57pm

I doubt Brantley will change his opinion if the show opens as scheduled and, assuming that is the case, the show is doomed. The only time I recall Brantley doing an about-face was re: LuPone in Gypsy -- didn't like her at Encores! then raved when it opened on Broadway. For a show like this, a Brantley pan would kill the show. It's not fair, it's not right, etc., etc. but there it is. Sad to say, but what else is new? This has been the case since Brooks Atkinson and is still the case, no matter WHO the Times critic is.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 9/3/11 at 12:10am

One party benignly controlling this whole affair is the the Old Grey Lady herself. THE NEW YORK TIMES. They published and edited the original interview with the new team. They published the full letter S. S. wrote. And then they decided to send Brantley up to BeanTown, who panned the show.