Bright Lights, Big City - review 6.16

[sundaymorning6am]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 1:18pm

The cast is top-notch. Perfect for the show. I would complain about some of the direction, but with the structure of the show, there’s really no other way that it could’ve been done. The set was very minimal, and I think there should’ve been more of a set though that would’ve been hard with so many scene changes. I loved the lighting, very cool. The music is fantastic, I love all of it. The choreography was very fun as well. There was no energy from the audience, IMO, and I think that really effected the casts’ energy. I felt like the opening should’ve been louder, and especially the beginning of “Back in the City.” Andy Karl just kind of walked forward and I felt like he should’ve been running in from SL and hi-fiving Jeremy Kushnier.

Jeremy Kushnier was great as Jamie, I felt like he really got the character. The mental breakdown of his that takes place in the second part of the show was really believable, as was his turn around that he had at the end [aka his declining of Tad’s coke].

Orfeh was perfect for Clara. She sounded amazing and really acted the part quite perfectly. And when she took on roles in the ensemble, she was sexy and energetic.

Andy Karl was fun as Tad, though not an energetic as I thought he should’ve been. It kind of like a return of Andy Karl in “Slut.” His voice and dancing were great.

Jonathan Shade [our “Pippin”] was heartbreaking and beautiful as Michael. His voice is beautiful. And he doubled perfectly as the ensemble characters as well. The confrontation between Michael and Jamie is one of my favorite parts, and him and Jeremy nailed it.

Alysa Wojciechowski managed to look scared and lost perfectly as Mary O’Brien McCann. Alex Keiper had a great voice and sounded great at the beginning of “Coma Baby,” but jesus, that costume! Wow. That costume was something.

Julie Tolivar was sweet and beautiful as Vicky, very enjoyable. I believed that she thought Jamie’s writing was beautiful and she wanted to be with him.

Marian Murphy and Kelli Barrett, as the Mother and Amanda respectively, were very good. Kelli was beautiful and I totally believed that she was a model.

Don Daniels were effective as Chuck Bean, but I don’t think he was boisterous as he should’ve been though. Lastly, Christopher deProphetis was great in the ensemble and as “Pierre” in the finale.

My favorite part was “Stay in My Life” and “Wordfall.” I felt like the show was coming full circle and it felt fully written. I liked the effect they used of projecting words on the back wall.

The big problem with this show is the book, or lack of book. There really isn’t any script. I would say, maybe, there were 3 minutes of dialogue. There isn’t any structure at all. A lot of the scenes felt very disconnected, there wasn’t really any cause and affect until the second half of the show where the plot [which I felt was Jamie trying to get to Amanda] is made clear. It was just one song after another. Mr. Goodman should bring in somebody to write a book for the show because the music is so fantastic that I think it would be a crime for the show to go unnoticed by the larger public.

But the show is really easy to get into and when the plot picks up in the middle, it’s great. As I said before, I love all the music, so I had to hold back from mouthing all the words. I had a great time, and I’m really glad I saw it.

Everyone should go!
Updated On: 6/17/06 at 01:18 PM

[gustof777]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 1:30pm

thanks for the review! I love this Cd and really wish that I could make this

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 3:05pm

Keep in mind that just because there is no Dialog perse doesn't mean there is no book. The book to a musical is MUCH more than dialog. I will agree that the book and some of the lyrics need major work. There's no real arch to the piece. That could have still happened with a sung-through piece.

[broadwaybelter]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 3:18pm

glad you had a great time! I really want to see this!

[uncageg]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 5:06pm

I am in New York (leaving today) and really wanted to go down to Philly to see this, but I couldn't as my best friend is vacationing with me. He had a lot he wanted to do in NYC.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 5:40pm

Yeah, I think Sundaymorning realizes what the book to a musical entails, and points out the same problems that you do. I happen to feel the same way though, it needs dialogue to frame the songs with some kind of structure and arch. It would also help to flesh out the characters. It would give the audience a nice rest because the musical occasionally begins to feel monotonous. It would also help to transition better between what is Jamie's fantasy, what is Jamie's memory, and what is actually happening to Jamie in a much more engaging way. The story is clear to me but it feels aimless and jumbled and episodic right now and I imagine that somebody who hasn't done their research on it would say "Huh? Coma baby?".

Plus I think if there was more dialogue it would disencourage comparisons to RENT, to which it is mildly similiar. Make it a rock musical rather than a rock opera.

I just think it needs more framework is all.

[snowie862]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 6:07pm

I think the show says what it needs to and doesn't keep you there for 3 hours.

[ruprecht]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 6:48pm

Sundaymorning, I think I met you last night, that being said, I disagree with some of your points. The show as snowie said, says what it needs to say without boring you to tears. Could it use clearer direction, yes, a teeny bit more book, yes but if you're paying attention to the lyrics, your "book" is right there.

I would love to see this show with a proper amount of people on stage and real sets. The lighting was very inventive and beautiful but I'd like to see the "city".

I thought Andy Karl was incredible for the exact reasons you apparently didn't. Tad isn't supposed to be rushing around like a chicken with his head cut off, he's suave, smooth, gorgeous and the life of the party. Can't blame him for what was some of the most sound mistakes I've ever heard in one show at one time. I think he's a PERFECT fit and can't imagine anyone else in the role now. Jeremy Kushnier had some very effective moments and I felt alot of sympathy for him. He's a good actor and I think he's grown since Footloose. Again, if I could have heard everything he sang, I'd say he was in great voice and just "pathetic" enough without grating on your nerves. Orfeh had me stunned into silence. I couldn't even bring myself to clap after "my son". It seemed intrusive. To all those who like to think her acting needs work, I say RUN to Philly. She's also never looked better and that's really saying something.

Julie Tolivay had a perfect quality for the role she played and an undeniable sweetness. Pippin(John Shade), was heartbreaking.

All in all, I think the weakest link (besides the sound problems), was the foggy and vague direction. Was it worth the trip, absolutely, would it work say, at a Dodgers? Definitely.

And for the record, it was nothing like RENT. Nuff' said.

[sundaymorning6am]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 7:07pm

No, no. I didn't think Andy needed to be running around like a chicken either, I just felt that a little more energy during his first "entrance" would've been nice. Though as I said in my review, I think the low energy from the audience could've been the reason for that. I didn't mention (or blame) any sound mistakes on him, I didn't notice any.

I loved the cast and the show. All I'm saying is that the show could use a little more structure. In my opinion, of course.

One more thing. Let me just make it known that I'm a HUGE fan of this show, the cd's been on repeat on my iPod and stereo for the past 6 months, and I know 99.9% of the lyrics word for word.

Updated On: 6/17/06 at 07:07 PM

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 8:31pm

Ah guys, nothing's perfect! I mean, that's what previews and out of town tryouts are for. Figuring out how to make it work the best way.

I don't think it needs to keep you there for three hours but I wouldn't mind sitting there for another 25 minutes if it meant the characters would feel more fleshed out and real. Maybe it's TOO short?

I say that because I really enjoyed it! I think the music is great.

Also, the show is undeniably similiar to RENT. The lyrics are written in the same colloquial style, the music has the same rock-Broadway hybrid feel, I could go on. Similiar does not mean same. Lots of things are similiar in this world but stand on their own.

Last, I don't think the lyrics are always clear. You shouldn't have to be completely familiar with the cast recording or source material to be able to follow everything.

I do agree the direction isn't quite up to the game, but hey, you work with what you have and the book doesn't call for too much right now.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 8:49pm

Sorry this show does NOT need another 15 minutes. There were plenty of times I was bored. The show takes too long to warm up. I think the opening number is too long too. I got the sex drugs rock and roll after the first 4 mins. Also the stage is soooo busy the lyrics have no chance to land. Action is always stronger than anything spoken. I don't think it needs dialog, just a clearer book and better transitions from numbers. I felt that the show is generally an ensemble show with a lead. People had stories but you never really had the chance to care about them. Orfeh's charater was there, then gone. You hear about her son which was touching. My question was what's this got to do with Jamie and his problem (esp because she still fires him). It wasn't clear A)that jamie really comes out of his funk and B)HOW he did once you realized he's moved on. I also had issues with the Coma baby and the missing girl. NOT because they were weird, but I found myself in the middle of the show trying to figure out what the represented. I also don't think one should have to do research on anything before seeing a show. That was actually explained very well.

The piece has potential, it just needs MAJOR revisions. I wouldn't go about putting dialog in it just because it resembles Rent. That's NEVER a good way to create art (making decisions based on someone else's work). It only resembles Rent in it's sound really. You can say the same about MANY of the golden age musicals.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 9:38pm

Ugh, don't put words in my mouth. I don't think they should put in dialogue BECAUSE it resembles RENT. I just thought they could have left parts of it to spoken dialogue rather than setting the dialogue to the same melodies. Personal preference. And I happened to mention RENT as an afterthought.

And that's my point. The style of the show resembles RENT, and since there is only one RENT it will often be compared to it. Like when Superman came out and then they created a bunch of similiar superheroes but each different in their own way? It's called forging a new genre, and this show succeeds because it's different in terms of material.

You just pointed out a bunch of things you thought weren't clear and then said that the show was clear. Huh?

The coma baby and missing girl, to me, represented: How big and wide the city is, and how all kinds of things can happen there; Jamie's (or really Jay McInery's) fixation on alienation which is slightly incongruent in the musical as he spends the musical fighting to connect to people (I never got the anti in Jamie's hero. Even his coke snorting was apologetic). Among other things. It's a hard working metaphor!

I don't care if it's weird, I love weird, I just thought they could have been more creative about how they did it. I mean, he's fixated on a face on the milk carton.

I thought the resolution of themes were very clear. The show boils it down. Jamie misses his mom and can't succeed at his job, so he leads an aimless life in New York. When he finds an artsy girl, is reinspired, and reconnects with his family, he doesn't need his aimless life anymore. It IS dramatically coherent.

Arguably, the disjunct feel of the first half vs. the thematic organization of the second half could represent Jamie's character development since the whole thing is set in his head. That appeals to me.

Visually, the show could just go crazy. Especially in terms of sets. The ending, for example, is very effective, with the words falling from the sky.

PS If the show had boring parts, they could... get rid of the boring parts and write more exciting/interesting parts! I thought the parts that dragged where all in the first 45 minutes or so. After that the show started developing a plot and got way more interesting. If they add 15 really interesting minutes, let them go for it :P I think we're pretty much on the same page here. The show is fun but needs work.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 10:44pm

"Plus I think if there was more dialogue it would disencourage comparisons to RENT, to which it is mildly similiar. Make it a rock musical rather than a rock opera."


Those are your words not mine. I didn't put anything in your mouth. Anyway, the point of the coma baby was indeed metaphor. It's actually straight forward. The coma baby was basically Jamie's reluctance to enter and really DEAL with reality. The missing person is obviously Jamie disconnected with himself. Trying to "find" himself. That's what members of the cast say. It actually makes sense, it's just not very clear till the last 5 minutes. It left me wondering the entire show.

Ummm what the hell are you talking about? I never said the show was clear. EVER cause it certainly isn't. I dunno WHERE the hell you got that. If you're talking about the research comment, that was in reference to who the coma baby and the missing girl were. It was obvious that they were major news stories in 1984.


As far as dramatic coherence is concerned, it's not as simple as you describe it. Firstly, he only sorta changes. He's still partying with the same people. Andy's character is very much still in Jamie's life. So are the drugs prob. He's suddenly fallen for this new girl (who's a philosophy major, not an artist) but he's not really over his ex-wife. As a matter of fact one of the last lines Andy says is "Amanda will be there". What changed? Presumably he can write now since there are a bunch of words on the set, and he talks to his brother. Ok that's nice, it just happened all at once. The change was too instantaneous. I think the show spent to much time describing the problem and not enough of an emotional arch showing us how he was gonna get out of it. I just saw him down on his life the entire time. He didn't really struggle to change anything. Then he meets a girl and his brother punched him and suddenly he has an AHA moment. Why?

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 6/17/06 at 11:40pm

Hm, I think I might step out of this since it seems to have turned into a game of who can air a more condescending tone, but really quick (because I am not good at letting sleeping dogs lie):

My comments about RENT were, as I pointed out, an afterthought. I can understand WHY you took my comments as you did (it was thinking out loud) but you then began lecturing me about the creation of art. That annoyed me. I think the recitative in RENT brings the show down and I feel the same way about BLBC. This is just a personal opinion to which I continue to be entitled. In the sense that you can learn from what you perceive as other people's mistakes, yes, you can sometimes let other people's work affect your own work. Most artists function within the world of the things that influence them anyway.

Yes. It's a metaphor. About alienation. From self and from the world. A very good metaphor that can be talked about beyond the more obvious connection you point out (which I failed to clearly note, granted). I never really felt his alienation though. I sensed that some of the people around him were alienated, but I never really felt him descend into that world beyond his participation in its activities. He was too thoughtful. Which may have been the point.

I used the word artsy disparagingly. She was most definitely artsy.

When I said research I meant read the book/see the movie/know the story and be able to fill in holes. I thought you meant the same and were saying the story was clear (rather than it was clear that they were news stories. They did hold up a newspaper that said COMA BABY).

I actually assumed the news stories were made up. Google tells me nothing about a Mary O'Brien McCann. Correct me if I'm wrong, I wasn't born yet. Jay McInery probably wouldn't have used the real name.

I just don't know if the themes lend themselves to traditional musicalization. The hero has no big goals and there's no big dramatic arc. Merely the point made that it's a phase of life people get trapped in and suffer through until they move on to another phase of their life. The dramatic changes are subtle and suggest the character may be moving on (he loses his job, reconciles with family, gets new girlfriend, bis typer gets hyper again) but we leave him before we know. I appreciate the inconclusiveness. Maybe the show does work better in its concert mode after all. Who knows, we'll see.

[bestnurse]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 12:13am

I saw it Friday night and thought it was great. The audience was not nearly as energetic as Bway audiences but I think they didn't know when to clap. The sound needs alot of work but the performers gave their all especially Jeremy. The songs are difficult to sing and he was almost flawless. I might see it again. It apparently is closing early because of poor ticket sales. That's too bad but the Prince has terrible marketing and advertising. There isn't even a mention of it in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Updated On: 6/18/06 at 12:13 AM

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 12:22am

Ron you seem to read a lot into these posts. Nothing I've said was condescending and where are you getting this lecture business. You said something, as an artist, I responded. It's really not that deep. Don't take it so personally.

[bestnurse]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 12:27am

Seriously, enough. Everybody is entitled to their opinion. And, as much as I love theater, it's just entertainment. Get worked up over something more important. Do you spend this much time discussing our fragile sense of security? You should.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 1:24am

Actually Bertolt brecht might disagree with the notion of theatre being just entertainment.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 1:31am

I'm still confused about the Coma Baby. Not the significance of it, but what actually IS a Coma Baby?

And I agree that the story is hard to follow. When I first got the CD I listened to it and I loved the songs but was very cloudy on the story. I have the book, but I haven't read it yet. I love the way it is written though. I'm not sure how the show was directed, but I think if it had a very clear direction and creative team the should could work. If it was made clear wht was flashback and what was present, it could work.

Are there any pictures of this production available yet?

[snowie862]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 2:12am

http://www.playbill.com/news/article/100368.html

Mary O'Brien McCann - Amanda. Missing. in the end she "dies".

Coma Baby - I personally think she represents Jamie. Her mother is dying. She's born at the end.

Mother is in a coma. But the mother is pregnant. Therefore, Coma Baby. Stuck in Mommy's tummy
Updated On: 6/18/06 at 02:12 AM

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 2:23am

I'm not sure about pictures, but there are some structural problems with the piece itself. Keep in mind I'm told it's been revised so we might not be refering to the same things.


As far as the coma baby goes, this is what I gather. This was a big story in 1984. There was a 16 year old mother who was 3 months pregnant. She got into a car accident which put her in a coma. The baby grew and formed while she was in the mother's womb. Many people weren't sure whether the baby could survive in such conditions. They eventually delivered her by C-Section.
Updated On: 6/18/06 at 02:23 AM

[snowie862]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 2:39am

[FosterChild]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 2:42am

Jazzy, wouldn't it be great if they got the REAL coma baby (who'd be 22 or so now) to play "Coma Baby"!?!? :)

I guess it's my time to chime in here, as I saw the show tonight in Philly. A friend is an agent, and had a client in the show, so I tagged along, as I found the CD to be pretty interesting, after HATING the original NYTW production in the 90s.

First of all, shame on the Prince Theater for having a half-full house on OPENING NIGHT! The raised section that I was seating towards the back was basically empty--although there was a video crew, so maybe they purposely didn't sell it to get in their way?

In all of the discussion about whether or not the charismatic Andy Karl lept forward fast enough in the first number (he did), I feel that many people forgot to give Jeremy Kushnier proper praise as Jamie, an extremely difficult part that he surveyed beautifully. In addition, he has great chemistry with Julia Tolivar, who played Vicky (the part Sherie Rene Scott does on the CD) and Jonathan Shade (who apparantly posts on here?) as Brother. I'd rather not go through the entire cast, person by person, because honestly, there ARE a few weaker links. NOT being included anywhere near that list is Orfeh, who took a role that I don't even remember from the NYTW production and made it something unforgettable. I wish she were given the chance to sink her teeth into a big dramatic role here in New York--the girl's got the chops. Looking at her work here, you can imagine what it would be like if you could line up a similarly talented group of Broadway favorites to take on the smaller roles. I was very nervous about Orfeh doing this part--she seemed too young and sexy, but pulled it out with flying colors.

Stafford Arima did a great job of reinventing the show... I completely agree with the other posters that it had NOTHING in common with "Rent." Comparing them because of the style of music is simply naieve. The story and storyTELLING have nothing in common.

Anyway, I'd say it's 80% there and defintiely worth seeing this time out. I look forward to the show making it to Broadway one day, hopefully with many of these stars.

[WaltSummersPI]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 2:57am

FosterChild... I agree with everything you said.

The work Jeremy and Orfeh do in BLBC, especially, is amazing. The show itself is very abstract, and probably not to everyone's liking (for the record, I like the show a lot, although some of the music I could do without). But this, at least how it's being staged in Philly, is the actor's showcase, and there are some spectacular moments in this show.

[BreeDaniel]

Posted: 6/18/06 at 8:13am

I too would like to chime in for many reasons. I went Friday with Rup and while I now know more than I ever needed to about the show, it's inner reality and coma baby (thanks to Sunday6am and Ronin), I'm going to discuss it in more layman terms.

FosterChild made the most sense out of anyone on this thread. It's more a showcase for some exceptional actors that we're used to seeing in much showier, bigger roles, who are absolutely flawless in this show. Who knew Kushner had such acting chops and Orfeh takes you on such an emotional journey in under three minutes, with JUST her eyes, than most of the musical theater women this board (and Broadway in general) is obsessed with will in an entire career! I mean that seriously. Broadway needs to get their heads out of their you know what's and do right by this woman before we lose her completely. Andy Karl has never had a bad moment on stage as far as I'm concerned and it's no different here.

I will agree with those who discussed the ineptitude of the people handling the sound of this show, what a joke. I feel like i need to make the trek one more time, only to hear the third of the show I missed.

The Prince has one of the worst reputations when it comes to "advertising" the shows they have. I wouldn't be surprised if it's closing early because no one even knows it's there now. The night Ruprecht and I went, it seemed the lobby was 90% New York(Broadway) fans and no local residents whatsoever.

It is nothing like Rent and can't be likened to it, just because it's a "rock" score. First of all, PSG and Larson are light years different in style. PSG is more a rock music writer, Larson wrote musical theater songs, dressed up to be rock music.

This could and should have a life in NY. It's a poignant and interesting story with great music that would do well in an intimate Broadway house, or as Rup suggested, a Dodgers size off B'way venue. I feel this was time well spent and I'm more than happy I went.