Boring Sondheim Shows? — Page 4

Am I the only one (besides Sondheim and Hal Prince) that found the book of Follies (at least the original one from 1971) excellent? People often complain about it, but I think its quite well written.

"He collaborates so well with the book writers, that the shows have a seamlessness that most musicals do not"

I think you're way off base here. I understand what you're saying... but you're really ignoring the facts. The books for Pacific Overtures, Anyone Can Whistle, Bounce, and Company are not even in the same ball park... as far as level of craft goes... compared with the level of craft Sondheim writes at. Aside from that point... you've either never seen a Sondheim show or are just not thinking... because Company, Follies, Pacific Overtures, and Assassins are completely and totally NOT seamless. That's like their thing. They are like revues... where the songs interupt and comment on the book scenes... They all fit together... but I would hardly call it seamless. Because Sondheim is able to create entire scenes with his music... and in some shows integrate it so well into the book I think it's easy to forget how unseamless many of his shows are(on purpose)... which really only goes to show how inferior many of the books are. Sweeney, A Little Night Music, Passion, and Into the Woods... are obviously quite seamless.


kmc

---

I have always loved both the script and score for FOLLIES since I first heard the cast album and read the script when it was first issued in 1972. I liked it so much I went and got the album of COMPANY. Now, my family had all the classic musicals (MUSIC MAN, HELLO DOLLY, CAROUSEL, etc) and I loved those too but COMPANY sounded new and exciting to my 12-year-old ears.

These 2 cast albums plus the double LP set SONDHEIM: A MUSICAL TRIBUTE made me a fan. I eagerly purchased each new cast album as they came out: A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC, PACIFIC OVERTURES and then came SWEENEY TODD in June 1979. For me it was the show that blew everything else out of the water. To me, the apex of modern musical theatre was SWEENEY. It is to the last half of the 20th century what Gershwin's PORGY AND BESS was to the first half.

I have not been disappointed by any of his shows to date. SUNDAY and PASSION were both very moving. INTO THE WOODS, a delight. ASSASSINS, chilling and thought-provoking.

Other shows I enjoy repeatedly listening to are usually those with strong texts: EVITA, CITY OF ANGELS and THE GOODBYE GIRL (both have lyrics by David Zippel), RAGTIME, LES MISERABLES, A CHORUS LINE, CHICAGO and most Kander & Ebb shows.

---

Well, for me, the only Sondheim productions I've seen, were on Broadway, so they may not have been the best productions (I have no point of comparison). I don't recall not being able to understand any of the shows I saw. None of them were very complex to my memory. I just found them dull, and melody-less.

I have not had any problems comprehending any of his shows, but sometimes I believe they suffer from the Big Idea/Problematic Execution Syndrome. For instance, Follies had some very good numbers and performances in it, but I felt the characters were anything but complex - they seemed very basic to me. Bounce had a strong cast, but there was literally no character arc for the leads of such a serious-minded show. They end exactly as they began (they have learned nothing), and they were not especially deep or compelling characters from the start. Assassins sounds really intriguing and avant garde on paper (and had a couple of good numbers and strong performers in the latest revival), but to me it never really evolved at all beyond an audacious concept. I think the nail was hit on the head earlier in the thread when it was theorized that it seems an intellectual concept is the starting/ending point with many of Sondheim's shows, but sometimes they never effectively evolve beyond the concept stage into a free-flowing enjoyable production. It is a bit difficult to become emotionally involved, even for a few hours, with an intellectual concept only.

You know why you're bored? Because, musically, there's no there, there. No melody. Nothing you want to sing. Nothing you want to remember. Nothing you can remember. Just droning, on and on and on.

I don't find that to be true at all. Every time I see one of his musicals, even if the production sucks, I always find myself singing a handful of the melodies.

That's why the public has, virtually, dismissed his shows.

Could you elaborate?

Apparantly, some people in this world are under the impression that theatre's main goal should be to make it's audience think, rather than tell a really good story really well.

The thing everyone seems to be missing is that a really good story will inevitably make a person think and the problem with Sondheim's musicals is that I wouldn't classify many of them as "a really good story".

---

Come on, you've got to be crazy if you think fluff shows like Wicked make you think as much as shows like Sweeney, Assassins, Sunday etc. Ofcourse every show makes you think. But a lot of Sondheim shows ask more from an audience, they ask the audience to actually put the pieces together, opposed to having the whole plot spelled out for you.

And regarding melody. Does a melody make a good musical? no. Just because a score is melodic, does not make it a good score. So quit it with the "oh his shows are so boring because they aren't melodic." Well a melodic show isn't always a great show.

There's no doubt that Sondheim shows appeal more to intellectual theatre goers. And that's not to say that people who don't care for his musicals aren't intellectual. You won't see the pre-teen groupies who love mindless shows with pop scores grouping at a Sondheim show on Broadway, Thank God.

Updated On: 6/23/06 at 11:09 PM

**applauds**

Again, I would like to state that this thread was not created with the intention to bash/slam Sondheim or his shows.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled program . . .

---

again, I would like to state that this thread was not created with the intention to bash/slam Sondheim or his shows.

MmmmHmmmm.

No, I understand what you mean, I do.

But I think some people (not saying you, Spider) are so tired of Sondheim being hailed as the greatest Broadway composer ever, etc etc. That they feel a sort of satisfaction in starting conversations about how he isn't really that great.

ZONE - you might respond greatly to those things in his work, but many others don't. And that doesn't mean it's not there, it just means that it doesn't seem to resonate across as wide a spectrum.

And some seem to think that indicates a demarcation between those who have intellectual capacity and those that don't. I disagree with that sentiment.