CARRIE to Hold Developmental Lab, May 25–June 7

[phantom39]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 10:09am

Good to hear this is actually happening this time!

According to an audition notice, the musical revival of CARRIE will hold a development lab at MCC from May 25, 2011 through June 7, 2011. Stafford Arima will direct, Matt Williams will choreograph, and Mary Mitchell-Campell will musical direct.

The lab is being produced by MCC Theater. Carrie features a book by Lawrence D. Cohen, music by Michael Gore, lyrics by Dean Pitchford.

CARRIE had a notoriously short 3 night, 5 performance run on Broadway in 1988. The last reading of this latest resurrection took place on November 20, 2009.

The production is aiming for Off Broadway, produced by MCC and to play the Lucille Lortel Theater. Seller and McCollum are no longer involved with the production which has said to be further revamped, including the removal of the ACT II opener - Out for Blood.

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/CARRIE-to-Hold-Developmental-Lab-May-25June-7-20110422#ixzz1KGFqpFFW

[newintown]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 11:35am

That's nice. There's always something really cute in hearing about people exerting so much quixotic and doomed effort to turn an awful show into a not-awful show. Or maybe this is primarily being done simply to give everyone a (revised) glimpse of the awfulness they missed 23 years ago.

Good luck to them, even though their time might be better spent writing something new, using the lessons the learned (or didn't) from this fiasco.

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 12:00pm

I did see the original and newintown, it's not an awful show. The original staging was a travesty and there were three songs that didn't quite work (Out for Blood, In and the 'Moon' song that I can't remember the full title to at the moment.)

But the story works and there are fantastic songs and music in this thing. Staged properly (think 'The Music Man', not 'Racquetball Court') and with needed song replacements, I feel certain this can be a very good show.

I met with Gore & Pitchford in the 90's about re-staging it, but Pitchford was in NO mood. Gore was a mench, though. Can't wait to see what they've done.

[N2Theater]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 12:01pm

I wonder has there ever been a total bomb musical that came back and was successful? Anyone know?

[phantom39]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 12:08pm

Well, they're not putting much at risk here. Its just getting a tiny off-broadway limited engagement.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 12:13pm

GRAND HOTEL would be the closest example of a 'bomb' that came back a hit. The show began life as AT THE GRAND which closed out of town with Paul Muni in 1958.

Tommy Tune of course made it a Broadway hit some thirty years later, but only after an exhaustive out of town tryout in which he brought on Kopit and Yeston to augment the original Wright/Forrest score and cut most of the original script making it a triumph of staging and concept.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 2:24pm

This is still just another workshop that is "aiming" for an Off-Broadway run. The use of the word "aiming," as opposed to something more concrete like "will be followed by" or even set dates for the potential Off-Broadway run, tells me that there is still no certainty that a full production will follow.

And I'm going to disagree that it was just the staging that was a travesty with the original production. I do have a secret love for the show, but I'm willing to admit that it is deeply flawed and it was a lot more than just three songs that "didn't quite work."

An entirely new writing team might be able to make this story work on stage, but even then I wouldn't hold my breath. As long as they continue to use any piece of the original script and score they will draw the comparisons to the original production and will never be able to pull out from under its shadow.

I also don't see how the Lortel would be a good venue for this show. The stage is fairly small, wing space is very limited, and there is no fly system. The special effects for a show like this need to be very well done or else it just comes across as cheesy camp, and that will be very hard to accomplish on a typical Off-Broadway, non-profit budget and with the audience being so very close to the action.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 2:34pm

I saw the first Broadway preview of the original production and was an early contributor to the discussions that have become the received collective wisdom about the show through the years: "the mother/daughter scenes were great!", "the teen scenes, oy!", "the sets and costumes? dreadful!", "but the mother/daughter scenes were great!", "Debbie Allen, wtf?". "WTF" was originally coined as a result of her work on the show.

The thing is, they mother/daughter scenes were "grea"t in comparison to everything else about the show, not the production, but the show. Compared to something actually good, they weren't so great at all. You have to grade the show on a curve to arrive at the idea that there was anything worth saving. Anything you try to do after that is pure delusion.

No matter what songanddanceman2 tells you.

[newintown]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 2:45pm

You speak truth, Namo - the Margaret/Carrie scenes are only seen as good in comparison to the horrendous dreck surrounding them. The lyrics to "And Eve Was Weak" are just doggerel verse; the sophomoric music to the entire score makes folk songs sound like Schoenberg. As long as the original writers are on this project, it will never be more than "Solid Gold" in the theatre. They just don't have the talent or skill to make such a tricky proposition work.
Updated On: 4/22/11 at 02:45 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 2:59pm

And it takes a very specific persona and skills set to give Margaret White the it factor, they could possibly only be found in one actress.

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:05pm

Well, I guess we're going to find out if it can work or not.

Picture this:

The song Carrie (for those familiar with it). Carrie wanders home to her spooky but American victorian home. She's taking clothes off of the line and putting them in a laundry basket. As she starts to fantasize about what it would be like to be asked to the prom, clothes in the basket animate into her prom date and she has a dance with them.

That's the Carrie that people wanted to see. And I'd pay to see it. I imagine others would too.

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:09pm

Oh, and -- one of my big regrets at not being allowed to revive the show in the 90's was not being able to use the ad that I pitched them:

CARRIE WHITE BURNS IN HELL
Nightly. At The Las Palmas Theatre.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:09pm

THAT'S the Carrie that people wanted to see?

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:10pm

Yes, Namo. It was.

[newintown]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:13pm

Clearly not enough people wanted to see it...

[phantom39]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:14pm

People want to see the campy Carrie, from 1988. Not a reworked version that will probably never be good. Flying mirrors and disco balls.

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:16pm

Newintown, the show as presented originally could not have been saved without a complete overhaul, and that couldn't happen for a few reasons including some politics regarding the RSC and the director Terry Hands.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:18pm

So just taking the staging from "I'm Not Alone" and using it earlier in the show during the title song was all it would have taken to fix the show?

One of the numerous problems with the original production was that there was no natural progression of Carrie's discovery of her powers, and no explanation of just what her powers were (telekineses is never once mentioned anywhere in the show, leaving people unfamiliar with either the book or the movie scratching their heads). Her using her power, which is largely fueled by her inner struggles, stress, and lack of any true positive emotional outlet to create a cheap, second-rate, black light magic show just showed how little understanding of the source material there really was.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:27pm

Which people are the people who wanted to see Idiot's description? I didn't overhear anybody saying that's what they were hoping to see when I saw the show.

[phantom39]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:29pm

That's true for the original 88 production. They tried to present a serious musical, which obviously didn't work. Since then, however, it became a cult musical and has a big following in the theater community. I doubt people really want to see a "good" production of Carrie. They just want to relive the campy production everyone wishes they had caught in the 80s. People's expectations from this material are now very different from what they were back then.

Updated On: 4/22/11 at 03:29 PM

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:33pm

Ultimately, though, there is not a large enough audience who want to see campy productions of supposedly serious material. If there were then Dance of the Vampires would still be running. You may find enough people on these boards to fill a Broadway theatre for a couple of weeks to see a revival of Carrie, but the average ticket-buying tourist crowd that actually keeps Broadway running is just as likely to avoid it a second time around as they were the first time.

[phantom39]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:34pm

Well, that's probably part of the reason they're trying it out in a tiny off-broadway house first.

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:34pm

Well, Namo, when a person buys a ticket to see a musical of an iconic story about a telekinetic, tortured teenager, what do you think they're paying to see?

The presale on this show was quite respectable, but cancellations after the reviews came out ended the run. If you're going to give us CARRIE, we want theatrical magic tricks and a bloodbath at the end. I don't think I'm going out on a limb there.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 3:47pm

You seem very specific in your idea of what it was people wanted to see, but then got more general when I asked you to explain. Your specific description of laundry and dreaming of the prom was what you said was what people wanted to see.

I'll tell you what it was like before the first preview in NYC. There were posters with that most incredible original Carrie artwork EVERYWHERE you looked in Times Square with the tagline "There's never been a musical like her." We were visiting NYC that week and when we saw the poster for the first time we sort of chuckled because the idea seemed so preposterous. As our visit went on, we happened to go by the theater as the giant disco ball was being loaded in. We had been bombared with that poster for days. Suddenly, we were sorry that we were leaving town the day before the first performance.

There was something about seeing a physical piece of the set being loaded in that got our curiosity up. I remember saying, "Maybe they're actually going to make something out of it." We extended our visit and bought tickets, full price!! 10th row center!

I had never read the King novella and thought the movie was a cheaply made piece of exploitation cinema with a couple of good scares, which just happened to luck out because Vinny Barbarino had become HUGE between the making of the movie and its release. So I didn't go to it with cherished memories of any beloved source material. I just wanted to see what they would make out of it. Would there be a good shock jump out of the seat moment? How would they render something that mostly made audiences laugh in the movie theater, realistically?

As luck would have it, they didn't. And what started out as most of us saying, "It really wasn't ALL bad" has over the years morphed into "There were parts that were excellent and all they have to do is CHANGE EVERYTHING so it will be a good show!"

I think producers swayed by this would be investing in Fool's Gold.

[tourboi]

Posted: 4/22/11 at 4:20pm

Going to disagree that "In" doesn't work. "In" lays the foundation that (and it's very true) in the high school world, fitting in is the key to survival. That's one of the foundations of the show. She's a misfit.

Agree that people won't want to see a campy take on a serious story.

The writers dont' want a campy production.. .that's why they've turned people down for years. They were waiting for someone like Stafford who's going to take it seriously.

Yes, most of those teen songs from the original were VERY campy. But they (except In and a revised Do Me A Favor) are gone. "A Night We'll Never Forget" is a much stronger opening for act two than "Out for Blood." And without the squeeling pigs. Big plus.

I, for one, like most of the re-writes. Though I DO wish they'd go back to Heaven and Heaven Octet in the prom.