Broadway Composers Who Get Totally Screwed Over By Audiences- Page 2

[Wild Roses]

Posted: 11/4/06 at 7:34pm

Well, if Sondheim has been screwed over by the tourists, it is partly his own doing. He has fashioned himself as a niche composer and has always gone his own way. (I've read in several places that Oscar Hammerstein II had to convince Sondheim to take part in West Side Story and Gypsy--Sondheim refused initially because he wanted to write both lyrics and music--and Hammerstein had to convice Sondheim if would be worth his while to write only the lyrics considering how prestigious the other people creating the two musicals were.)

I second what ErinDillyfan and jasonf said about blaming the tourist for the failure of an 0-B show. That is ridiculous and insulting to say the least.

As for intellectual musicals getting ignored, frankly, its no different than with the movies either. There are lots of splendid independent directors/writers/producers out there making marvelous films, but only the film geeks are aware of them because for years the moviegoing audience ignores them. Every year it is the same old story too. Popcorn superhero big budget movie takes in the big bucks while thoughtful, intelligent small budget movie goes barely noticed. (More independent films are being recognized these days, but nowhere near as appreciated as they should be by audiences.) So, it makes sense that the same phenomenon would happen on Broadway.

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 11/4/06 at 8:28pm

Maybe when these 'screwed Broadway composers' (Sondheim excepted) learn how to tell worthy stories effectively, write good (not just accessible but actually GOOD) scores, and engage their audience instead of alienating them like rebellious adolescents at every turn, perhaps they will get themselves 'unscrewed.' But I wouldn't count on it. Another turn of the screw, guys! Faster!





Henry James
Washington Square, NYC

[ashley0139]

Posted: 11/4/06 at 9:19pm

Jeanine Tesori (I'm not counting Thoroughly Modern Millie. I had no desire to see that show when it was on Broadway and I have no desire to see it now.)

And, Julian, the other reason I didn't see Thoroughly Modern Millie was because I saw the revival of Into the Woods instead.

Matt, you completely contradicted yourself in those two statements. The first implied that you would not have seen Millie if you HAD had the chance, the second implies that you wanted to see it but saw Into the Woods instead. If you take a position, at least stand by it.

[GClef2]

Posted: 11/4/06 at 9:24pm

what is the livent scandal?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/4/06 at 9:39pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livent

[ashbash1990]

Posted: 11/4/06 at 10:41pm

Wild Roses, I think the fact that sondheim does his own thing is what appeals to his fans, and while some people don't get it, i think he writes musicals in an "art for art's sake" manner, i also think that if sondheim isn't original, who is going to be... there is very little originality being supported right now...

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 2:38am

Isn't Tesori working on the Shrek musical?

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 8:50am

Here's my real position on Thoroughly Modern Millie. I did not want to see Thoroughly Modern Millie when it came out because I wanted to see Into the Woods instead. As the years went by and Millie's run continued, I always thought to myself, "Do I want to see this show eventually?" The answer was no. Quite frankly, this show never appealed to me.

And, yes, Jeanine Tesori is working on the Shrek musical which I would in fact see because I friggin' love that movie.

[Bruce Memblagh!]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 9:01am

That's fine that the show never appealed to you (same here) but with the same token, is it not conceivable that Broadway audiences do not find some of those other composers appealing. For whatever reason ie) having seen poor production elsewhere or just they do not want to see it? You cannot blame the audiences if that is not what they want to see.

And Broadway audiences include those tourists you almost vilified earlier - without whom Broadway would be far less "successful" (however you define that). Thank God Broadway is not the for the exclusivity of New Yorkers. Theatre would be mostly empty and hardly anything would last. Not that things have to last to be appreciated. There is such a thing as a production outstaying its welcome!

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 9:53am

Since I started this thread, I've actually had time to reflect on all of this. I was going to write my college essay about how audiences are extremely closeminded. But my tutor talked to me about it and I thought about it. It's not the audience. It's just that these composers write shows that they consider groundbreaking and innovative. But they're just not entertaining for an audience whose idea of a great night out does not involve watching people get their throats cut. They just don't find these shows appealing. The subject matter might be too unorthodox or the score might have, as they say in Amadeus, too many notes. And the audience has to think more than they're used too because the lyrics are full of hidden meanings or profound philosophies.

Does that sound about right?

[Parsley]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 10:09am

"It's just that these composers write shows that they consider groundbreaking and innovative"

It's a pretentious and presumptious thing for composers to write shows they feel to be groundbreaking and innovative. It is hard to judge a show on those terms, too. More often than not the shows are anything but. Audiences should be given credit not least for giving something a try. Yes it is frustrating when some audiences do not take to a show for whatever reason but once we do not accept their right to have an opinion we might as well not stage anything.

[jasonf]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 10:12am

I disagree with that. Look, audiences aren't going to see the shows by these composers for one simple reason: money. If you're a tourist and you're paying 100 bucks or more a ticket, you're going to go with what's safe - you're going to go with what you KNOW will be a good time. Mamma Mia, Phantom, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, Rent -- these shows have established themselves as names -- people know these shows and know they won't be disappointed. Whether it be by name brand of the show (ie the Disney shows) or by the composer (Mamma Mia, Phantom), or the one-off shows that you still know what you're getting going in (Rent, Wicked) audieneces pretty much know exactly what they're getting with these shows. At 100 dollars a pop, who can blame audiences for not wanting to try the new show by Michael John LaChiusa - someone no one who is not obsessed with theater has any idea who he is?
To that end, Sondheim shows follow a similar pattern -- audiences don't know exactly what they're getting with him before hand, and thus aren't willing to go see the shows in droves. Sad as it is, we theater geeks aren't enough to maintain the run of an "artistic" show, no matter how much we may love it.

Updated On: 11/5/06 at 10:12 AM

[Amneris]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 1:12pm

How about Broadway Composer getting screwed over by Theatrical Politics? I think David Yazbeck got REALLY screwed for "Full Monty" the year "The Producers" came out. Yes, Producers is a good musical but, I personally felt Monty was GENIOUS and had it not been in the running during the same season, it would have taken everything.. everyone just went with the Mel Brooks hype. I also believe Yazbeck was screwed for "DRS"... Spamalot being another case of um total hype because the show really isn't funny without a star. And the music is fair.

[Wild Roses]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 2:08pm

"Wild Roses, I think the fact that sondheim does his own thing is what appeals to his fans, and while some people don't get it, i think he writes musicals in an "art for art's sake" manner, i also think that if sondheim isn't original, who is going to be... there is very little originality being supported right now..."

First of all, learn how to capitalize Sondheim's name and well as some of your "I"s please. (English grammar freak here. At least you spelled the rest of your words properly and know how to use punctutation. It drives me nuts to see the how the English language is slaughtered on this board.)

Secondly, I didn't say that Sondheim going his own way was a bad thing. I just was trying to say that the more innovative composers are going to be left behind (as most innovative people are regardless of what profession they work in) because their ideas are outside of the mainstream. Originality usually appreciated by the mainsteam until it has become mainstream. I do agree with you that there is very little orginality being supported right now. (Although from a feminist and ethnic studies perspective, I believe Broadway still has a ways to go before it can truly consider itself a radical place.)

Besides, Sondheim has repeatedly made it clear that doesn't want to win a popularity contest, that he goes his own way because he prefers being in the niche. (Although considering the guy lived through the Civil Rights, Anti-War, Gay Rights and Women's Movement, one would never know it from listening to his musials which is why I believe he is a liberal and innovative, but still quite traditional in his characterizations of men and women. If he is going to brag about how innovative he is, he should at least stop writing characterizations of men and women like it is still the 1950s/beatnik movement.)

*******************************

"How about Broadway Composer getting screwed over by Theatrical Politics? I think David Yazbeck got REALLY screwed for "Full Monty" the year "The Producers" came out. Yes, Producers is a good musical but, I personally felt Monty was GENIOUS and had it not been in the running during the same season, it would have taken everything.. everyone just went with the Mel Brooks hype. I also believe Yazbeck was screwed for "DRS"... Spamalot being another case of um total hype because the show really isn't funny without a star. And the music is fair."

Its really no different than with what happens with movies or tv award show politics either. There are tons of cases in Oscar and Emmy history where a more deserving movie/series creator, etc, etc, should have won but the voters give it to something else because there wasn't enough momentum for the person who really deserved it. It really is a case of a popularity contest and usually the more deserving person does get screwed over awards time. (The Emmy rules were even altered to give the underdogs a chance...and still the same old, same old, got the nods and wins.)

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 5:44pm

I think David Yazbak

His musicals do not do as well as they should . Many think he is nothing more than a pop composer gone Broadway

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 7:22pm

Yeah, I totally forgot to put David on the list in the first place. His stuff is awesome. I love Dirty Rotten Scoundrels and The Full Monty.

[jv92]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 8:55pm

Yazbek was robbed of a Tony in 2001. 2005 was understandable, since Guettel's score was breathtaking, but even without Guettel as competition, he would have lost. His shows, while successful, have not gotten the critical kudos and finacial success they truly deserve. The man does a helluva lot better than 99.9% than any other composer who writes for Broadway with a pop background. I think his theater music, in fact, is better than his pop stuff.

May I add Jerry Herman. Of course, he's had three big hits (Dolly, Mame and La Cage) but two of his best scores, Mack and Mabel and Dear World, were absolute failures (Thankfully, Mack and Mabel had gained a cult fanbase). He is also best known for writing Hello, Dolly!, which is a very well written musical comedy, but pales in comparision to the emotional roller coaster known as Mame. Mame, while making money, recieiving kudos and becoming popular, was robbed of a Tony Award and is not nearly as well known as Hello, Dolly!

Updated On: 11/5/06 at 08:55 PM

[moulinrougehk]

Posted: 11/5/06 at 9:30pm

Why nobody talks about Jason Robert Brown? He actaully left Broadway for a while with the brilliant Parade and Last Five Years...

[shiksagoddess2]

Posted: 11/6/06 at 2:58pm

moulin, jrb has only had one production actually ON Broadway and that was Parade.

The others (Songs for a New World, L5Y) were both off-Broadway.

So as far as that goes, he's nowhere NEAR as prolific as Sondheim... but he's popular in the same "cultish" sort of way... AND I'M A CULT MEMBER!!!!

[moulinrougehk]

Posted: 11/6/06 at 4:04pm

As far as I know, JRB's score is MUCH MORE complicated than Sondheim, though Sondheim's score is already difficult, and sure I know LFY is off-broadway. I just want to say he actually leave musical theatre for that period, but he's going to have a show soon...

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 11/6/06 at 4:45pm

The popularity of Broadway composers and Broadway shows is no different than what is popular in the entertainment world as a whole. Look at the types of songs that are currently at the top of the popular charts, the movies that are the highest grossing, and the concerts that are the most attended. Broadway is just a microcosm of society as a whole. The masses will always side with what is most entertaining, most accessible, flashiest, and most hyped. A big, special effects laden, pop-influenced show like Phantom of the Opera or Wicked will always trump a intellectual, non-special effects driven, high music show like Piazza or many of the works of Sondheim. The highest grossing films will always be the big summer blockbusters and not the smart, arthouse variety. If quality of musical composition and being intellectually challenged were high on the general public's agenda for entertainment then our symphony orchestras and opera companies wouldn't be suffering through financial woes and on the brink of going under year in and year out -- while Britney Spears and Ludacris are making millions.

[ErinDillyFan]

Posted: 11/6/06 at 4:48pm

You can't blame the audience, they came and paid $$$. He has had two successful shows. Both with national tours. You can argue he was robbed for Tonys, but the audience didn't vote. Personally, I think DRS was robbed, The Producers deserved it.

I suppose with your argument "A Chorus Line" got screwed over by the audiences because they let it close with fewer performances than Cats (eventually had).

[LostLeander]

Posted: 11/6/06 at 8:19pm

As far as I know, JRB's score is MUCH MORE complicated than Sondheim...

Erm, well, first JRB only has three shows, one of which is a song cycle. His shows are complicated, sure, but I'm not sure if they are as masterfully crafted as Sondheim.

He's great though, and I'd like to see more from him.

It's true, LaChiusa might never have a hit, but he's not trying to make a hit, he's trying to write a really good show. His subjects for musicalization are a THOUSAND times more interesting than Wedding Singer or Mamma Mia could hope to be.

He's a brilliant man, who might never has his full due, at least not in the near future.

Yazbeck will be fine. He's a great writer for the theatre, if his songs can become a bit repetitive. And he chooses smart material, while not particularly deep or off beat, that are always well written.

I think Tesori will straddle the line between artsy shows like Caroline and Violet and big musicals like Millie, and Shrek.

Guettel's rich, and takes his sweet time writing things, but I have a feeling that Princes Bride will be even more a breakout hit than Piazza. Great source material, and I have complete faith that he will write a fitting score that integrates the intelligence and very specific humor of the film, while being incredibly inventive.

[RentBoy86]

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

Well for one, I don't trust anyone's opinion on a Broadway/musical theater related issue if they spell the Tonys "The tonies." But anyways....

I don't think audiences rejecting a show has anything to do with the composers. I know plenty of people who aren't theater buffs, but who love WICKED and listen to the CD everyday, but do any of them know who composed it? Nope. They go to what they like. I remember when I was in NYC in March '04, I didn't want to see Wicked because I thought it looked boring, then two years later, I actually heard the score and now I really enjoy it. I just didn't know anything about the show at the time. When I first heard Sunday in the Park With George I didn't really care for it, but after watching the video and listening to the score again, it's now one of my favorite scores.

I wouldn't consider any of those composers to be screwed over. Just because they haven't had a "hit" on Broadway doesn't mean they have accomplished anything. "Bernarda Alba" was a hit off-Broadway. And "Piazza" had a long, healthy run, extending a couple times. I'm not sure how that's considered over-looked?