Assassins: My Take

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 6:59am

To be blunt, it wasn't good but it wasn't bad. The set, lighting, acting, and every other technical aspect was great. It was the story that made no sense. I suspended my belief, but still couldn't see how John Hinckley could meet up with Lee Harvey Oswald. Was the carnival setting a symbol of purgatory, even though half of the characters are still alive?

Did anyone ever realize that this show gives a horrifing message?
What would happen if someone sees this show and it inspires them to "follow their dream?" Even suspending my belief couldn't help.

Stand-outs: the whole cast, especially Mario Cantone and Denis O'Hare

I stood at the stage door, got autographs from everyone, then, ran over to the Wicked stage door.

Kristin and Idina signed for everyone but Joel never came out. Oh well, I still got Doogie Howser's (NPH). Updated On: 5/30/04 at 06:59 AM

[NuggetMonkeys]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 9:10am

I disagree. I find the show to be amazing! (By the way, you should suspend your DISbelief) As Sondheim often says, "some people can follow a plot that doesn't exactly make perfect sense, and some people just can't get it." i suppose you are the latter. and his name is Neil Patrick Harris, not Doogie Howser.
-d.b.j-

[BillyLawlor]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 10:16am

I disagree as well. The show is not necessarily sending out this message that you find so horrifying. One of the great things about Assassins is that everyone gets something different from it. I believe the message is "There's two sides to every story". And the lyric "Everybody's Got The Right to the dreams" is sarcastic, and not meant in an inspiring way. I think the mature audience it's recieving will get that.

[secret-soul]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 10:24am

I absolutely loved it and I thought the message was great. It doesn't encourage you to BECOME an assassin, but it encourages you to think about your dreams and realize them, and follow them. But the sarcasm is inherent in the case of the assassins.

[bythesword84]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 10:35am

Wow, I personally adore Assassins (as Im leaving now to go see it for the third time...) but its important to remember that its not trying to be a logical "this happened and then this happened" kind of work. There are some scenes (such as the Leon/Emma encounter) which didn't really happen but which explain so much about the character of the assassins that they are there for that reason, to flesh out the characters that most people just know as "so-and-so killed this president." I don't see the show sending a horrifying message at all. I actually think it really tries hard not to send that kind of message and to instead leave it up to the audience to decide what the message is that he or she wants to get out of it.

I mean when you watch it, here you see these people who actually believed what they were doing was right for some reason or another. No one in the show justifies their actions, they just let you have a peek at a possibility of what might have happened in their heads. To them they weren't insane or wrong, to everyone else they were. It's not saying to go kill people if thats your dream.

[secret-soul]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 10:40am

ex-aaaaaact-ly.

[mallardo]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 10:58am

I didn't find the message horrifying - I thought there was no message at all! There's some tenuous notion running through it that these diverse characters are going for their "shot" at fame and recognition, but is this true? As the show's book makes clear, these folks all have wildly different motives. Some are idealists, one is a revolutionary, several are lunatics and one just wants to impress his favorite movie star. What's the connection? I enjoyed the production, loved the cast - especially Mario Cantone - and liked the score, but I had the feeling I was watching a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing - as someone once said.

[NuggetMonkeys]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 11:11am

Hooray for the score! I love it. I don't understand what people think is missing...
-d.b.j-

[Plum]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 12:17pm

Asking how John Hinckley could meet up with Lee Harvey Oswald is like asking how Bobby could have 3 birthday parties, or how George II could meet Dot. Assassins doesn't have a strictly linear plot- the carnival is a theatrical conceit. The show is about a theme, a concept, and the carnival is just a way of putting it together.

And as others here have pointed out, you may be taking some of the lyrics too literally if you think the show encourages assassinations.

[nystateomind04]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 1:53pm

the characters can meet eachother because that is how sondheim wanted his audience to see them. can you imagine if it had been a bunch of monologues? its the same concept of kushner's "threshhold of revelations", and i think it is brilliant.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 4:49pm

I thought it was a great show, too. I just couldn't see why it was set in a carnival. By the way, is there a difference between the Proprietor and the Baladeer? How does the Baladeer magically transform into Lee Harvey? Was it like that in the original production?

[Jamie Hat]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 6:49pm

Why do people question how two people from different times can meet together onstage in Assassins, and no one questions why all the animals in the Lion King can talk?
The whole show is a concept that really isn't that hard to grasp...

If you listen to the dialog between Booth and Oswald at the end (it's on the first recording too so you can study at home!) so much is explained.

The carnival "under the roller coaster" thing is a metaphor for what is going on "behind the scenes" in America. The "quiet desperation" as Booth says.

The Balladeer "magically" transforms into Oswald by taking off his shirt. It's not that complicated. No, it was not like that in the original, yes it has been done before that way. Yes, there is a lot of sarcasm in this post.

The proprietor in this show has a devil aspect in this show and has a thru line, -- to my knowledge this is the first production to have done that.

And finally Yankee fan, you are not the only one who thinks that the "message" as you say is "horrifing", however, you are in the heavy minority.

The show is only stating common phrases that the US has boasted for hundreds of years. (See: "American Dream" and "Everyone has got the right to be happy"

The show draws few conclutions if you actually analyze the text, and anything that the show has "told" you to do or think is your own personal reaction. And that is good theatre does. But, as you can see, few people tend to agree with your take.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 6:58pm

A bit OT, but what's the deal with the closing date for Assassins these days? Is it still July 4th, or has it gone to October?

[Blonde]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 7:05pm

i hope it goes later because i won't be in the city until august!

[Blonde]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 7:05pm

Updated On: 5/30/04 at 07:05 PM

[NuggetMonkeys]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 7:09pm

i know that Roundabout was trying to sign the cast through October.
-d.b.j-

[bwayaddict]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 8:16pm

I do know that Assassins has been extended through the first part of August and I'm going to buy tickets for the end of July and I was just wondering if anyone had any tips on the best place to sit in the theatre.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 5/30/04 at 8:36pm

the bar rail in the mezzanine (row nn) is great- you can see everything, only for $36

[GreenGirlFlies]

Posted: 5/31/04 at 11:50am

Did anyone else feel Marc Kudish was in another play? Maybe it's because they kind of created this role (or expanded it greatly) from it's original concept, but I just thought he was the one person onstage who was so "musical theater". The other actors seemed to go seemlessly from scene to song, often displaying very impressive acting skills, but Marc was so "theatrical" (not in the best sense of the word). I don't know. There was just something very odd about the different styles of acting going on at Studio 54. And I would have rather had bald head, OR gold tooth, OR tattoos. Did we need all three? We get it!
That said, I thought the show was very inventive and well done. Not my favorite show in the world, but certainly a valid production with some extremely talented people.

[bythesword84]

Posted: 5/31/04 at 2:28pm

Well aside from the Balladeer (which duels as Oswald later so I guess that makes him not count), Kudish's role was the only role which was not a legitimate, real person.

[MusicMan]

Posted: 5/31/04 at 9:42pm

As far as Kudisch is concerned, the role is conceptually a non-starter and completely superfluous since the Balladeer serves as master of ceremonies for most of the evening.
Just one more inanity in a misconceived show with no point and a sub-par score.

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 5/31/04 at 10:12pm

Come on, MusicMan -- the book's much worse than the score.

[LadyDulcinea1]

Posted: 5/31/04 at 10:48pm

I saw Assassins on Saturday and thought it was great. The set and actors were amazing. Yea, the plot depeneded a lot of suspension of disbelief, but I think that added to the show and helped make it more interesting. As for the whole Oswald thing, I personally thought that that particular scene held some importance, mostly b/c when most people are asked to name an assassin they usually think of either Booth or Oswald. I dunno, I really like Sondheim and also tend to like shows and movies that are more representational or unrealistic. That's just my opinion! I think Assassins definetely deserves to win the Tony!

[Jamie Hat]

Posted: 5/31/04 at 11:50pm

Kudisch was a test. His whole role was something that Mantello wanted to try, and they liked it so they kept it.

[bythesword84]

Posted: 6/1/04 at 1:00am

The only thing that I didn't like about the way they changed the Proprietor was that I really didn't see the point to having him sing in Another National Anthem, it was really something that didn't make much difference to me either way but there was no point to it that I could pick up. Otherwise his interpretation of it didn't bother me at all.