My Qualms With The WSS Revival - Page 2

[Drunk Chita Rivera]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 5:23pm

"Hasn't she been "sick" a lot?"

No, she hasn't been sick in a while. After the Tonys she was really sick, I heard something about an "upper respiratory infection" but she was out for about 2 weeks. then in August she had a vacation. So really she has not been out THAT much, no more than some other Broadway performers.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 5:24pm

so glad Natalie Cortez is in this show now. Is she a swing and Anita u/s??

I really wish this show & Hair would update their websites with cast changes.

Updated On: 10/7/09 at 05:24 PM

[Kalimba]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 5:33pm

Glad to hear they finally have an Anita u/s who can dance (Natalie Cortez). Be thankful you didn't see the dreadful Jennifer Sanchez as Anita. She actually made Yanira Marin (no longer with the show) as Anita look good.

[ljay889]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 5:38pm

Yanira was still on the company board in the lobby as of like 3 weeks ago.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 6:14pm

Great analysis, frontrow.

As Arthur would say, "The production stinks."

[ljay889]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 6:24pm

9. A Boy Like That - If any number needs to be in English it is this one. It's not just the text, it is the sound of the English lyrics as they mesh. I had hoped this would be one of the segments reverted to English by the time I saw the show.


- Wait. That number WAS reverted back to English. It's back to Spanish now?? WTF?

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 7:44pm

Ugh, this revival sucks.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 11:18pm

No. It does not "suck." (How old are you anyway?)
What it is is not nearly as good as it could/should be. The material, however, is strong enough to survive some of the more misguided decisions made by Laurents.

[dancingthrulife04]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 11:25pm

Be thankful you didn't see the dreadful Jennifer Sanchez as Anita. She actually made Yanira Marin (no longer with the show) as Anita look good.


I'm sorry, but I've seen them both and this gets a big LOL from me.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 11:30pm

Um, I realize that some of you put this material on some sort of pedestal, but I'm sorry, the show just didn't do anything for me. Sure, the music (at times) is thrilling and great, and the choreography is great and the integration of the two is great, but other than that show was just blah. The set was awful. The direction was bad. The performances were awful. And the story wasn't too thrilling. I didn't even know Anita got "raped." I mean, that's a major plot point that wasn't done well at all. She's got at least 2 feet on most of those boys. I wasn't afraid they were going to do anything but do her hair. Please.

The material is great, but I'd like to see it reinvented. The fact that it can't survive without the original choreography means that maybe it's not so great. Look at South Pacific, Sunday In the Park, Gypsy, etc. They've all had great revivals that took a new approach to the material.

[ljay889]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 11:31pm

Oh dear God.....

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 11:35pm

The Spanish translations have further weakened this show. Unlike "Light in the Piazza", where the show was CONSTRUCTED for scenes not understandable to the average theatregoer, this show was not constructed for such a purpose. Character development went to the dogs with this one.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/7/09 at 11:42pm

The fact that it can't survive without the original choreography means that maybe it's not so great.

Or maybe it means something else entirely.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 11:25am

I'm sorry, the show just didn't do anything for me. Sure, the music is thrilling and great, and the choreography is great and the integration of the two is great, but other than that show was just blah. The set was awful. The direction was bad. The performances were awful. And the story wasn't too thrilling.

It seems most of your complaints relate to this particular production, and most of them I agree with. If the story doesn't move you or connect with you, well then it doesn't. I can say that when this show is really well performed it can pack a powerful punch and move many to tears. Not everyone, of course, because we all respond to different stimuli.

The material is great, but I'd like to see it reinvented. Look at South Pacific, Sunday In the Park, Gypsy, etc. They've all had great revivals that took a new approach to the material.

I would love to see a WSS with entirely new more athletic (less balletic) choreography. I would love to see one on stage with Cool and Officer Krupke reversed. (I just think Cool works better at the later more tension-filled point in the action.) But beyond that I am not sure major changes can be done because of the way the show is constructed.

Also, you mention SOUTH PACIFIC, GYPSY and SUNDAY IN THE PARK as examples of shows that took new approaches to the material. There were only a few minor edits in GYPSY, otherwise it was exactly the same text that Merman, Lansbury, Daly and Peters played.

With SOUTH PACIFIC some dialogue was slightly altered and one cut song restored, but otherwise it was the same show audiences saw in 1949.

SUNDAY was faithful to the text and score as seen/heard in 1984 but used a radically new design. Still that doesn't change the show...just the dressing.

I wonder if some people think these shows have been reinvented because of years of seeing weak community theatre stagings sometimes altered to fit the whims of the director or performers.

As I said, I agree with many of your criticisms of the production, but for me the show is strong enough to win out. After all ROMEO AND JULIET has been affecting audiences for 400 years now.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 11:57am

I think (though I may be wrong) that Rentboy was referring to changes in the staging and design with regards to Gypsy, South Pacific, and Sunday in the Park. I don't think he meant revisions to the text or score.

[Kalimba]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 3:34pm

ljay, the West Side Story website was just updated and Yanira isn't on there any more.

Dancingthrulife, what are your thoughts on Jennifer Sanchez's performance as Anita?

[ACL2006]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 4:34pm

finally, they've updated their website!! Not if only Hair would do the same.

[dayao]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 7:03pm

"(Has anyone thought of borrowing from the film and allowing Tony and Maria to sing the song to each other? I'm not sure how well it would work but would love to see someone at least try it.)"

This was tried for a brief time in the 1960 revival which I saw featuring the original Tony and Maria, Larry Kert & Carol Lawrence. The ballet began right after the vocal as it normally would. But others who saw this production have said that Robbins and Laurents felt that this rendered the ballet redundant and it was abandoned after a few shows. Robbins was willing to cut the ballet and did so in the film version where "Somewhere" was assigned to Tony and Maria.

I agree that switching "Krupke" and "Cool" creates more much needed tension in the story and is one of the most brilliant revisions in the film version.

For myself, this revival is lacking in practically every way and Matt Cavenaugh pales by comparison to Larry Kert. But who wouldn't? But Josefina Scaglione was wonderful as Maria, the best performance and singing in this production. The Spanish detracted, rather than adding anything to the proceedings, at least for me.

Here is a link to a clip from a 1964 Italian Television show featuring a medley from "West Side Story" with the great soprano Anna Moffo as Maria and some wonderfully energetic dancing (not Robbins' choreography, I think). It has more energy and excitement in 10 minutes than the entire running time of the current revival, in my opinion. Even if you don't agree, it is still enjoyable to see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9I8BYrG0EE&feature=fvw

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 7:18pm

Thanks adamgreer, that's what I meant. I didn't mean we need to make cuts or anything like that, but I just wish someone would come at it from a new angle. I know a lot of people don't like him, but I'd be interested to see what Bilyl T Jones would come up with.

And I know it's based off of Romeo and Juliet, but that doesn't make it good. Romeo and Juliet had better character development and it was a little more romantic given the poetry of the language and whatnot so I think it works. But Laurents doesn't really do much in terms of character development. We don't really care much about these characters because we're not given much upfront. Maybe with better actors and better direction, the script wouldn't come off as weak, but in this production the book scenes were awful.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 7:20pm

Thank you, dayao, for that strange and sometimes wonderful link.

There are bits and pieces of the Robbins choreography thoughout...enough to have made Robbins crazy, I'm sure.

But Lenny must have loved it!

[StageManager2]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 7:47pm

"I would love to see a WSS with entirely new more athletic (less balletic) choreography. I would love to see one on stage with Cool and Officer Krupke reversed. (I just think Cool works better at the later more tension-filled point in the action.) But beyond that I am not sure major changes can be done because of the way the show is constructed."

I also would like to add the replacement of the movie's "America" in place of the original. It's got better lyrics, and I love the inclusion of the boys. FUrthermore, the original "America" is a big put-down to Puerto Rico, whereas the film version is more about the pros and cons of life in the US.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 9:25pm

What does it matter if it's a put down to Puerto Rico? Maybe that's how Anita feels?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 9:28pm

I agree the inclusion of the boys in AMERICA for the movie was a brilliant move.
One of reasons that Laurents has stated for the Spanish was to make the audience relate to Sharks, but having them speak Spanish just makes them more "foreign" to most of the audience.
Showing them playfull and having a good time, dancing, and mocking each other in AMERICA makes them more likable and youthfull.
But I shudder to think what the language translations would do to that song, and who would sing in Spanish and who wouldn't?

[teka21]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 9:49pm

To the OP- qualms are feelings of nervousness, anxiety and perhaps queasiness. Although I have not seen this WWS, and don't intend to until a replacement Tony is cast, it seems to me that what you have are quibbles, not qualms with this revival

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/8/09 at 10:23pm

No, Teka. The Merriam-Webster Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines QUALM as "a sudden attack of illness, faintness, or nausea."

I can't speak for the OP, but I can honestly state that the seeing current revival did not leave me faint, but it absolutely left me feeling ill and wanting to vomit on Arthur Laurents's shoes.

Again, I can't speak for the OP, but my problems with the revival are not quibbles. The are major.

As Noel Coward wrote in Private Lives, "Don't quibble, Sybil."

Updated On: 10/8/09 at 10:23 PM