Cradle Will Rock- Page 3

[ChairinMain]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 2:21am

The doubling in 1985 was:

Michael Barrett (Clerk/Pianist/Narrator)
Patti Lupone (Moll/Sister Mister)
Brian Reddy (Harry Druggist/Professor Maime)
Randle Mell (Larry Foreman/Dauber)
David Schramm (Mr. Mister)
Mary Lou Rosato (Mrs. Mister)
Michele-Denise Woods (Ella Hammer)
Henry Stram (Dick [First Cop]/Junior Mister)
James Harper (Rev. Salvation/Professor Trixie)
Tom Robbins (Editor Daily/Gent)
Gerald Gutierrez (Yasha)
Charles Shaw-Robinson (Dr. Specialist/Bugsy)
Casey Biggs (Virgil[Second Cop]/Gus Polock)
Laura Hicks (Sadie Polock/Reporter #3)
Paul Walker (President Prexy)
Daniel Corcoran (Steve/Professor Scott/Reporter #1)
Susan Rosenstock (Reporter #2)

[After Eight]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 7:01am

"Just do the story, that's what we go to the theatre for."

Yes indeed, that's why we go to the theatre. Unfortunately, the last thing today's hip, hot shot (or cold shot) theatre/opera directors care about is what we go to the theatre for. Audiences are treated with scorn --- just mechanical dummies to fork over cash, fill seats, and applaud on command --- while the works themselves are remolded like clay to suit egotistical "concepts."

Sayings that are anathema to the powers that be in our the present-day theatrical landscape:

Leave well enough alone.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

And now, we can add your common-sense plea:

Just do the story, that's what we go to the theatre for.

[newintown]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 7:46am

I've always found The Cradle Will Rock to be ersatz Brecht/Weill (so did they). I wonder if the whole shut-down had never happened, would the show still hold as significant a place in theatre history?

[ken8631]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 7:48am

Going tonight, know nothing at all about the play. Heading there cuz wife loves Raul (her facebook pic is her and him together - lol).

[wonkit]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 9:57am

I was at the performance last night. My first observation is that the audience was attentive and enthusiastic, although every comment I heard from audience members afterwards suggested that people felt good about being part of "an event" rather than being overwhelmed by what they actually saw.

SPOILERS in the following paragraphs:
If I had closed my eyes, and just listened, I probably would have been more satisfied. Everyone on the stage had beautiful singing voices, and acted the somewhat awkward Blitzstein book with fervor. Vocally, my favorites had to be Esparza (who delivered on every level in a somewhat thankless part - he doesn't even show up until about 2/3 of the way through, although his entrance is priceless), Randolph (who has the best song, "Joe Worker," a song that was written to stand alone and was brought into the production by Blitzstein), and Petkoff (whose warm voice and pleasing presence always appeal to me). Everyone else in the cast did themselves proud.

It is difficult for me to comment on this production in one sense: I spent a significant amount of time listening to the 1985 recording and reading up on the political situation at the time of the premiere. I have no idea how this production would strike someone walking into it cold. I can only conclude that total confusion would reign. The doubling of parts did not particularly bother me, but I already knew which character was associated with the music I was hearing.

I just thought the director's choices were sometimes overtly clever but did not serve the impact of the production. For example, a young boy was cast as the arresting officer in the first scene, the son of the druggist, and another minor role. I don't have my playbill at hand so I don't recall the young man's name. He was extraordinarily talented and did a very good job with everything he was given. My problem is such casting made no sense. It is funny to have a police officer played by a child, but there is nothing childlike about that character. Having a small child as the person who dies in the explosion increases the poignancy factor, ignoring the fact that his father is older and has apparently been widowed for some time.

Another example would be the portrayal of Sister Mister and Junior Mister in the scene lead leading up to the song "Honolulu." The cross-dressing and a lot of the activities during the song bordered on the embarrassing. These characters are supposed to be ridiculous enough without the addition of pink high heels. They are lazy and worthless, not ridiculous.

Without going into any details, the staging of the last two minutes of this production totally undercut the effect of the finale, even though I understand what was intended by it.

Having finally seen a production of this, I am more convinced than ever that it really is Weill light. The performances were strong but the material is weak. It is virtually impossible to become emotionally attached to any of the characters or their troubles. Some of the melodies are quite lovely, but hardly worth 90 minutes of viewing.

I understand why this piece has never had more than a month or so on and off Broadway. Even in a full production, there is so little to carry away from the theater.

Updated On: 7/11/13 at 09:57 AM

[Jane2]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 10:04am

thanks wonkit. I"m a little disappointed that Raul doesn't show up until so late in the story. I mean, he's the reason I'm going to see this!

[wonkit]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 10:07am

That makes two of us, Jane2. He raises the dramatic stakes in this production - so even his limited time on stage is worth it. People were actually leaning forward once he came onstage!

[Jane2]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 11:31am

I'm so happy to hear that. I adored him since Rocky Horror. You can imagine my excitement when he came to my theater to do Tick Tick Boom!

[Hest882]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 11:43am

I am sorry to miss this--in spite of the mess it seems to be--so I am grateful for everyone's reviews.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 11:59am

I'm surprised that people are surprised by their (non) emotional responses to this. It's American-Brechtian, first of all, and also, just look at how OLD it is. I'm a revival hugger to the end, but shows that age are a challenge from the get, let alone when you're dealing with political allegory, etc. I'm excited to see it (hell, I am getting on an airplane), but I'm expecting to come out of it with an appreciation from a historical perspective much moreso than any deep emotional connection. (Not to say politics aren't emotional, relevance doesn't matter, and so forth, but that the feelings incited by rousing political manifestos are different from the Why We Go To The Theater 101 catharsis I wonder if people are looking for.)

Oh, and, yay Raul.

Updated On: 7/11/13 at 11:59 AM

[ken8631]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 12:06pm

Also disappointed that Raul doesn't show up until late - he's why we are going!

[wonkit]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 12:35pm

emcee - I agree with you, except that so many people talk about how thrilling it is to watch something so relevant. My problem is that the relevance is tangential at best, and this piece does feel OLD to me. A few buzz words come up ("right to work") and people go, - oh, how relevant. Also - there are a number of emotional moments - or they should be emotional - that don't work because they are immediately undercut by the tone of the rest of the piece. The love song between Gus and Sadie, the death of Stevie, Nickel under my Foot - you should feel these songs. But I didn't, even when they were beautifully sung. I didn't expect to be swept away by my emotions, but I did want to feel some emotional response - which the production seemed designed to prevent. I very much want to hear your reaction to this, as I respect your opinions.

[ken8631]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 12:38pm

So not as good as the Encores production of "Anyone Can Whistle"? - which had Raul and Sutton Foster?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 1:00pm

Well, I think the obvious thing to say is that even with a political show, relevance is a very personal thing, and so it varies. Although I do agree that things can get shoehorned into being relevant (or more relevant than they are). Dunno if that's the case here. But, the point still stands that this show is almost 80 years old -- I'd be surprised if it didn't feel old and rickety, at least sometimes. I like seeing things like that, but it doesn't work for everybody.

Also - there are a number of emotional moments - or they should be emotional - that don't work because they are immediately undercut by the tone of the rest of the piece.

I guess I'll see when I see it, but I have a feeling that may well actually be the point. Which can be frustrating as an audience member, sure. But again: Brechtian.

(For what it's worth, I think in modern theater we're spoiled by Brechtian things that are emotional -- but this was 1937, it's a different thing. And if what you're referring to was purposeful, I respect the creatives for going there.)

I've seen a lot of Encores! productions over the past... probably decade or so, and Anyone Can Whistle was, in my opinion, one of the best. That one was special.

[Kad]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 2:22pm

This may not be Brecht, but Blitzstein wanted to ape Brecht's theatrical philosophy- which, yes, includes cheating the audience out of emotional catharsis.

Which is why Brecht's epic theatre does not work and never did. Audiences don't want to go to the theatre to be hectored and watch characters they don't care about reach emotional moments and then get interrupted by an irrelevant song.

This of course creates an issue when people want to stage these plays, and directors like to either cute them up or treat them like high drama. They're neither, and Brecht had explicitly likened his optimal theatrical experience to either music hall or a boxing match. It also doesn't help that so many of Brecht's concepts are now standard theatrical practices, either.

Very few working directors are able to make Brecht plays, and those modeled on Brecht, work. Sam Gold is, by and large, a rather naturalistic director (see: his work on Annie Baker's players, which are very much modern naturalism). He would not be top of my list for a piece like this.

Lear deBessonet, whose Good Person of Szechwan was probably the best Brecht production in NYC in at least a decade, really seems to "get" the style and what it needs to work. I'd love to see Alex Timbers try his hand at Brecht, too. But Sam Gold, I'm not sure this sort of thing is in his wheelhouse.

[mschwager]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 2:25pm

Do we think this will get recorded? Live or otherwise?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 2:34pm

This may not be Brecht, but Blitzstein wanted to ape Brecht's theatrical philosophy- which, yes, includes cheating the audience out of emotional catharsis.

Exactly. I didn't want to say that outright without having seen it yet, but I suspected that's what's going on here.

I've seen Brechtian techniques work really well, but in the hands of directors who are able to allow them to evolve and be incorporated into something that doesn't deny emotional connection. Of course, they're using Brecht's techniques to create the exact opposite of what he intended, but that's another issue.

[NYC4Life]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 3:33pm

I am going Saturday. To see just one of these artist for $25 would be enough. I doubt will be disappointed.

[wonkit]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 3:58pm

I applaud City Center for arranging so many $25 tickets for these performances.

[sowren1020]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 4:00pm

Alex Timbers is exactly the director I was thinking of for this or Mary Zimmerman, big scale but with the ability to have the audience participate, maybe not getting the pat experience they expect. The Gus/Sadie song by Robert Petkoff and Judy Kuhn was the key or me, you hear that song beautifully sung and then when the next scene unfolds, your investment in them colors your involvement for the rest of the show. But the way this director sabotaged the scene, there was very little way to carry forward the momentum of the plot.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 4:31pm

Sorry if it was asked already but what's the run time for this?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 4:39pm

90 minutes. When are you going?

Updated On: 7/11/13 at 04:39 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 4:40pm

Tonight.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 4:40pm

Aw. I was hoping I'd run into you again.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 7/11/13 at 4:41pm

And for some reason I honestly thought this was over 3 hours long.