Act 1 vs. Act 2

[BroadwayRandy0711]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 9:01am

I am not too sure if this topic has been discussed or not. But I was wandering if there has been a particular show that you have seen where Act 1 was brillant but Act 2 was disappointing? Or vice versa, where Act 2 stole the show and after Act 1 you contemplated leaving but decided to stay to see if it got better?

For me IMO that is what happened in a few shows. I am a huge Wicked fan and I do have to say that Act 1 was so strong and Act 2 was a little disappointing for me. Also I felt that way after seeing Candide, Act 1 had all the laughs and just built the story up so high that I felt Act 2 did not really deliver it fully.

What do you all think? What show did that for you?
Updated On: 11/7/05 at 09:01 AM

[Fosse76]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 10:05am

A vast majority of shows, in my opinion, have weak Act 2s. Mainly because this is when the shows start to get serious and the plot unravels and thickes, so the material gets heavier and long-winded. I like Act 2 of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang because that's when Jan Maxwell shines, and she is the ONLY reason to see this show. Of Course, I think Act II of The Woman in White is far superior to the muddied, incoherent Act I.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 10:17am

Several Sondheim shows took a lot of slams from the critics (even the ones who adore him) for their second act shortcomings. Particularly "Pacific Overtures" (original Broadway run), "Sunday in the Park" and "Into the Woods" have been knocked badly for having second acts that fell apart or lost their steam.

[wickedfreak]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 10:21am

For sure not WICKED!!!!!!!!!!!

It is all amazing!!!

And to everyone that said it is not a good score......BLAAAH

and "it's gAlinda with a GA"

[JACXR71]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 10:24am

Best12 - I'll never forget when my high school did Into the Woods. After the show, so many people were saying "I just don't see why it couldn't have ended after the first act. I mean, it was a happy ending!" Apparently they didn't realize that was the point...

[BroadwayRandy0711]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:19pm

I am in the process of watching the DVD of Into The Woods and so far it is awesome.

Besides Chitty, are there any other current Broadway shows that have a weaker second act, or weak first act?
Updated On: 11/7/05 at 02:19 PM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:21pm

ha. I never saw the ITW revival, but my mom saw it, and I remember that her major complaint was that Act I was so happy, and then it got dark and unhappy. She didn't like that. However, this WAS coming from a woman who did not like Les Mis because it wasn't happy enough for her.

See, I like Act I of Chitty better. Just do. It's cuter.

[Color and Light]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:26pm

I think I'm one of the few people who likes the second act of "Sunday in the Park with George" better than the first act, but I definitely understand why Sondheim gets criticism for his 2nd acts.

Perhaps that's why I love Assassins so much, there being no chance for it to lose its steam ...

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:28pm

Personally, I don't know why Sondheim gets bashed for his "Act 2"s.

I think "Sunday in the Park" in particular has a very emotional and dramatic second act. I don't think this show succeeds without it all tying together with the two time periods and views about art and its legacy.

And the whole point of "Into the Woods" is the second act. What happens AFTER "happily ever after." Yes, things grind to a halt, slow down, shift gears, etc., but that's the point. So does LIFE. Too many of our stories end with the guy getting the girl and walking off into the sunset. But that's where their life together begins, in truth. I guess nobody wants to see truth like that on stage? I doubt Sondheim would have wanted to do this project without the Act 2 concept. Act 1 is clever and entertaining by itself, but it's basically a setup for the point of the entire show in Act 2.

[BroadwayRandy0711]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:35pm

I really appreciate Act 2 in Into the Woods. Like you said best12bars, it is refreshing to see what happens after. It is a totally different spin on the concept. I wish that more shows were like that.

[Color and Light]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:36pm

best12bars, I definitely agree with your thoughts on "Into the Woods" - Act One is nice enough, but I don't think the show would connect with the audience nearly as well without the second act, because I believe that's when the characters become the most relatable. The show also loses a whole lot of its meaning if you only look at its first act. I just really think it depends on the company's ability to handle the sharp contrast in Act 2 and not on what Sondheim and Lapine wrote - I've seen really terrible productions where the second act fell flat and left the audience just wishing for it to end. Which is really a shame, because I think it's one of my favorite shows.

Updated On: 11/7/05 at 02:36 PM

[kasim]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:40pm

I dont know if it counts as "Great" to begin with.

But spamalot i thought fell apart in the 2nd act. Each individual scene was funny, but the whole plot was like, huh???

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:56pm

I saw the second act of "Woods" fall flat on its face in the first national tour when it hit L.A. (A terrific cast, by the way, but they had to fight hard to win us back... which didn't happen until the last 20 minutes.)

The problem is that everything does come to a halt when Mrs. Giant comes to town. Characters are standing around drop-jawed wondering what will happen next. As a director & cast, you're fighting this in the plot, since everything clipped along so briskly with plot twists and turns in Act 1. If everything literally comes to a halt on stage, the show will completely lose steam and the audience will quickly lose interest and "zone out." You solve it by working vigorously on the pacing of Act 2. Keep it moving along, despite what the plot and characters are saying. The audience will "get it" but not fall asleep waiting for something interesting or lively to happen. At least it's still moving forward. Otherwise, you might very well have a flounder on your hands. And good luck winning your crowds back.

But keep them interested... and I think the payoff is terrific with this show.

[little_sally]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 2:57pm

I thought the book of The Producers really fell apart during the second act. But then again, I really didn't like that entire show.

[paradox_error]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 3:09pm

"For sure not WICKED!!!!!!!!!!!

It is all amazing!!!

And to everyone that said it is not a good score......BLAAAH

and "it's gAlinda with a GA""

ummm...what?

*scratches head*

[Piazzaslight]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 3:38pm

When i saw Frog and Toad, I thougt the first act was the best ting. But the second act brought that honor for the show WAAAAAYYY DOOOWWWNNN... In short, the second act was boring.

And I thought the first act for WiW was better than the second act.

Updated On: 11/7/05 at 03:38 PM

[Horton]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 3:55pm

I am sober as I write this but when I saw the recent revival of Gypsy I hated the first act, and I mean HATED I could not see anything good, and then the second act was not as bad even perhaps enjoyable, I think it was because I don’t like Bernadette, but that’s really all for me.

-Horton (the elephant)

[Horton]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 3:55pm

I am sober as I write this but when I saw the recent revival of Gypsy I hated the first act, and I mean HATED I could not see anything good, and then the second act was not as bad even perhaps enjoyable, I think it was because I don’t like Bernadette, but that’s really all for me.

-Horton (the elephant)

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 3:59pm

Sober, perhaps, but easy on the "refresh," Horton.

Sam Mendes' "Gypsy" was a different take on it (with Ms. Peters). I wish you'd seen the Tyne Daly production in the '80s, which was a faithful recreation... completely brilliant. Tyne's singing was adequate... but her acting was incredible. Well-deserving of her Tony. I'm guessing that you might have a different view about "Gypsy" had you seen a faithful version of it.

[leap_of_moo]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 4:13pm

In "Wicked" Many of the characters seem to change for no reason (ill justified reasons at best anyway). I've never liked the relationship between Elphaba and Fiyero in it. It just doesn't make any sense. The whole show feels rushed, especially when it comes to Act 2. There are a few funny lines but you can tell that they were trying to tie up the lose ends and finish with a clear finale even if it doesn't make sense.

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 5:02pm

I agree Fosse - Jan Maxwell keeps Chitty flying, and she soars in Act 2 (pitiful, I know.)

I prefer ITW's Act 2 when it rips ("rips") apart the fairy tales we all know and love (or hate).

[jv92]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 6:39pm

Into the Woods has one of the best second acts ever. I think the second act would hold up by itself. Not that that would happen.
The first act of Les Miserables is superior to act 2 in every way, in my opinion.
As for Wicked...
The first act and second are equally good, which doesn't mean they're both perfect. The both have the same ammount of good, posstive things about them and the same ammount of flaws.

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 6:52pm

I thought SWEENEY'S ACT 2 was amazing.

[Nathan_Lane_Rules!]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 6:54pm

In all Arthur Miller show's Act 2 is 10 times be3tter. Usually because it it so powerful and meaningful.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 6:55pm

A prime example of a first act being much stronger than a second (to me) is Les Miz if you ask me.

A prime example of the second act being more dominant is Phantom.

A prime example of both acts being equally well-balanced is Gypsy.