Boring Sondheim Shows?- Page 4

[Katecab99]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:12am

Hey - everyone's intitled to an opinion. I'm a full-fledged Sondheim fan (so I suppose that makes me a theatre "snob"?!) but I can understand why people are not as appreciative of his work.

It's been stated before, but I feel like watching his shows forces you to have to listen and really pay attention and engulf yourself in what you're watching. I personally find his work engaging, and I love having to do a little work and really get involved when listening to his work. Many people simply want to be entertained with a jovial story and some songs that they can remember when they leave.

So, if you're a Sondheim fan and find virtually none of his work "boring", that's fabulous and I'm right there with you. If you're not and you can't stomach some of it, I guess that's okay too.
Updated On: 6/23/06 at 10:12 AM

[jv92]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:14am

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.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:32am

I loved FOLLIES. I loved the book, the cast, the music, the lyrics, the whole package. It was one of my favorite evenings in a Broadway theater.

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:36am

"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

[sondwisenheimer]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:47am

Flawed or not, his musicals give an audience member more lasting resonance and meaning to take away than anyone else's.

That being said, I saw the original cast perform "Passion" on Broadway, which I thought was one of the most thrilling, moving, brilliant things I had ever seen.

Last year I saw a regional production of the same show, and found it not only boring, but unintentionally hilarious in many spots. When a work is that layered and complex, direction and acting are really crucial in pulling it off.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 12:31pm

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.

[Danielm]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 3:30pm

Are they boring or do you just not understand them? Or, is it just the production you saw?

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 3:36pm

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.

[raulfan]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 3:38pm

Didn't care too much for Assassins. Love Into the Woods.

[Christoph]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 4:13pm

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.

[AJ1985]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 6:41pm

Sweeney Todd was the first Sondheim I saw on stage, and I loved it.

Last summer I saw Stratfords Into the Woods and was blown away by it.

A few weeks ago a local commuity theatre did Forum and it was fantastic.

3 for 3 is pretty good in my books.

[broadway86]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 6:54pm

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?

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:55pm

There are some pretty good melodies in his shows. Again, I don't understand the whole "it makes you think" argument. Can someone please explain that to me?

[freeadmission]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:04pm

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".

[DG]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:07pm

Free - that sounds suspiciously like 'style over substance' - the theatre gods will smite you.

[ljay889]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:09pm

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

[DG]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:18pm

ljay - I won't dispute that the majority of Sonheim's fans seem to focus more on intellectualism - which only makes sense, as I think he does, as well.

However, the experience of an audience in a theatrical setting rarely has that focus - it usually has to do with emotional impact. The Greeks gave us that, and little has changed since then.

Mr. Sondheim is undoubtedly a genius - I'm just not convinced that his genius translates into cathartic theatrical experiences.

I've always been dubious of creative works that displayed better in a classroom than on the stage. For all the intracacy and depth of his compositions, I've yet to see an audience leave a theatre as elevated by his works as some others. And yes, that includes WICKED.

And if not for the audience in a theatre, then relegate him to the classroom - and let someone who can communicate soulfulness take his briliance and make it real for the rest of us.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:21pm

**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 . . .

[DG]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:27pm

I don't take anything away from him AT ALL - I think he's a genius, as I just stated. But ultimately, we're left with the experience in a theatre - and many of those critics cited earlier have pointed to a 'distance' or 'coldness' in his work, and that has kept many people at arms length from him.

I can't help but think that that's not an accident.

[ljay889]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:27pm

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

MmmmHmmmm.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:30pm

**GASP**

Seriously, it wasn't. As I stated somewhere in this thread, I just wanted to make it known that great composers (Sondheim) sometimes make boring creative choices, not just ALW who everyone and their great grandmother bashes every two seconds on this board. I like Sondheim, so this was by no means a thread to bash him. Just to make a point.

[ljay889]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:33pm

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.

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:34pm

"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"."

Congratulation, you win the "Most Ludicrous Statement of the Day" award. You don't even (in many cases) need the performance to get the story from a sondheim show. Lots of times just listening to one of his recordings tells a good story (Passions and Sweeney for example).


Oh, with sondheim, its not about him being more substance than style, with him you get both, in great number. You get superior songwriting and lyricism and superior story telling, instead of one or the other.

[DG]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:39pm

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.

[ljay889]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:44pm

Yeah, but when you have the average Wicklyn whining "omg thiz iz so borng lik the musiz isnt poppie" about a Sondheim show. You can't exactly assume they have the intellectual capacity of those who really appreciate Sondheim's works.
Updated On: 6/23/06 at 11:44 PM