Singing in the Rain Revival?- Page 2

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 12/15/16 at 7:04pm

Esther Blodgett said: "Cutting to another reason for a 'delay'; this show just isn't that good. The best number in the original was the title song which used the original choreography from the film and was done to a recorded track because the sound equipment would work in the (very expensive) rain storm on stage.

The rest of the show is sustained mediocrity at best.

It would be better all around to show the 1952 film on TCM once a week for a year.

 

"

I love Derek Hough and would probably pay Broadway prices just to watch him stroll around in tight pants.

HOWEVER, I saw SINGING THE RAIN in Pittsburgh (with the very talented Lara Teeter) and I could see no reason whatsoever for the show. The film is often considered the best movie musical ever made; why not just show that?

Unless Hough also takes off his shirt...

(I.e., I'm agreeing with you, Esther.)

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 12/15/16 at 7:19pm

Singin' in the Rain is my favorite movie; it's pretty much perfection. I've never seen the musical version but I can't imagine there's anything to be gained by putting it onstage. However, I'd love to see Tony Yazbeck or Robbie Fairchild do it, if it must be done. 

[bear88]

Posted: 12/16/16 at 3:24am

Singin' in the Rain is my favorite movie; it's pretty much perfection.

Yep. I had no interest in An American in Paris when my wife and I were in New York for similar reasons. And  as much as I like that movie musical, it's no Singin' in the Rain. Some stage musicals are meant to be stage musicals, and just don't work on film. This is the rare example of the reverse being true. If I ever saw it, I would just compare it to the film version and find it lacking. 

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 12/17/16 at 9:47pm

Until Rodgers and Hammerstein, and even after them most of the time, film musicals have very different structures than stage musicals.

Instead of spacing the musical numbers throughout the action, movie musicals tend to have a bunch of songs in the beginning and then few to none in the second half, as the plot is being wrapped up. 

Also until R&H, studio heads thought the point of songs was to make hits to publicize the show and and secure the recording royalties, not to tell the story. So anything that hadn't been a hit on Broadway or wasn't a new attempt at a hit, was dropped. This, too, contributed to the relative scarcity of songs in non-R&H-type films.

Putting a film musical with five or six songs on stage only makes it seem slighter, so the tendency is to add a lot of "filler" to flesh out the evening.

I don't want to say it's never been done well, but no example comes to mind.

***

Adapting non-musical films for the stage is something else entirely.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 12/17/16 at 10:25pm

GavestonPS said: "I don't want to say it's never been done well, but no example comes to mind."

 

42nd Street

[theatreguy12]

Posted: 12/17/16 at 11:32pm

I totally agree.  I'd go with Yazbeck over Fairchild though.  He has more personality as an actor, or at least IMO.  He brought that energy to Gaby in OTT that worked really well.  It would transfer over nicely to a musical like Singing in the Rain, where the lead has that dynamic personality too.

Fairchild is a fantastic dancer, but I thought he was kind of just there when it came to his acting and singing.  Certainly not bad, and I know he got a Tony nod, but not groundbreaking in those regards.  

His dancing though?  Absolutely.

I'm not a huge Hough fan.  I'd see it anyway just to see what they do with it.  Much like I was keen on seeing AiP for the same reason.  Though I agree, it's really hard to beat the movies.   You almost just have to appreciate them for their "stage" take on the material.  Because they'll never surpass the cinematic endeavors of said movies.

Though it would be him playing another Gene Kelly role.....I still would have gone with Yazbeck over Hough.  Had he wanted it.

 

perfectlymarvelous said: "Singin' in the Rain is my favorite movie; it's pretty much perfection. I've never seen the musical version but I can't imagine there's anything to be gained by putting it onstage. However, I'd love to see Tony Yazbeck or Robbie Fairchild do it, if it must be done. 

 

"

 

[Buscee]

Posted: 12/19/16 at 4:46pm

As much as I would love to see Derek Hough on Broadway I am really not a fan of the stage version of Singin' In The Rain.  Great movie, bad stage show. I saw the original Broadway production and it was dull.

I believe that the version that was on Broadway has been revised, and it is different from the one that is currently licensed. Better than before, but still not good.

 

Derek needs a better show for his immense talents.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 12/19/16 at 5:05pm

AEA AGMA SM said: "GavestonPS said: "I don't want to say it's never been done well, but no example comes to mind."

 

42nd Street

 

"

Excellent example. Thanks.

[Sunny11]

Posted: 12/19/16 at 5:41pm

I think that Matthew Morrison would be another great option as lead. He has done two dance heavy musical roles on stage in Footloose ( understudied the lead during the national tour) and Hairspray. While on Glee he covered several Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire songs very well. 

[caringtype1]

Posted: 12/19/16 at 7:20pm

The version that was being talked about for Broadway was the Paris production from 2015, which was based on the movie, not the original Broadway production. I saw it and it was almost identical to the movie. I thought it was truly excellent. I would definitely see it again if it came to Broadway.

[Princeton78]

Posted: 12/19/16 at 8:12pm

Christopher Rice anybody?

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 12/19/16 at 8:25pm

I saw this staged years ago, rain on stage,etc. It really didn't bring anything "new" to the property. Unless we're desperate, I don't see the need for this. Really. 

Was there a need for Andrew Lloyd Webber's "The Wizard of Oz"? No, not really...

Updated On: 12/19/16 at 08:25 PM

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 1/13/17 at 12:15am

Eloise Kropp would be splendid as Kathy Selden https://youtu.be/6TsE-vHxTtE

Updated On: 1/13/17 at 12:15 AM

[Ado Annie D'Ysquith]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 2:00pm

Dead as a doornail.

Link

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 2:10pm

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 2:13pm

If the production is happening in France, shouldn't it might as well transfer? Weird.

[coreman009]

Posted: 10/20/17 at 2:45pm

BOOOOOO this is devastating. Derek Hough would be absolutely perfect in this role and I've been dying for him to bring it to Broadway. Any chance another producer picks it up and brings it with Hough?

[bear88]

Posted: 10/21/17 at 12:14am

The things you forget...

I have seen Singin' in the Rain on stage about a decade ago at a community theater production. It slipped my mind for some reason.

And Broadway by the Bay (SF area) is bringing it back again next month. I have no strong desire to see it, as I saw the movie version recently in a theater and have the DVD. But my wife kind of wants to go, and I won't argue, as I was very impressed with Broadway by the Bay's production of Next to Normal earlier in the fall.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 10/23/17 at 4:13pm

Just in case the "shelved" language last week wasn't good enough for ya, it now "will not happen."

So like... when is this thing happening!?!

[BwayLB]

Posted: 10/23/17 at 4:21pm

BroadwayConcierge said: ""

That's devastating. I've seen the movie twice and I thought it would make a wonderful adaptation. Maybe if Derek is still committed to playing the lead, Singing in the Rain can be a TV production instead like GreatBroadwayFan pointed out in his Top Musicals NBC Should Do

[Smaxie]

Posted: 10/23/17 at 4:22pm

Or, you know, one could just watch the movie, which cannot be improved upon. 

[BwayLB]

Posted: 10/23/17 at 4:28pm

^ It doesn't need improve it could partially ruin the magic