CHICAGO - Staging? — Page 2

I wouldn't mind seeing a new production of Chicago that is more fully staged with sets and costumes and most importantly, Bob Fosse's actual choreography done by dancers who can do it justice. The choreography in the style of Fosse by Ann Reinking is clever as is the entire production, but I do think it needs a face lift. I will say that what impressed with about Chicago when I saw it was that it showed me what can be done with such minimal staging. It makes every little move more important and Reinking's reworking of Fosse's choreography with the cleaner positions stick out. I also think the clean costumes give the show a look that allowed it to last as long as it did. They are more distinctive than the original production's costumes which I felt were pretty hideous though I'm sure designed with a real purpose. I think the film's costumes were inspired by both in that they wanted it to be period but they also wanted it to look aesthetically pleasing so they went with the revival's aesthetic moreso than the original production, and I don't blame them.

ETA:

Here's video footage of the original 1975 production to give you more perspective on what it looked like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjMMbm6pGXM

It must have been during out-of-town tryouts because this one has "Loopin' the Loop" as opposed to "Hot Honey Rag". Also, it has the idea of Chita playing drums and Gwen playing the sax that entertained Kander, Ebb. and Fosse so much but went over with the audience like a lead balloon.

Updated On: 7/9/18 at 03:31 PM

The original was much grimmer and more menacing, for sure. The staging of Razzle Dazzle is a great example, which starts at 4:45 in the video linked above. Compare it to the revival version - the original has a deathly, eerie, and thoroughly unpleasant vibe while the revival version is like a giant wink. It's cute, but the original wanted you to feel a little sick (see also the Manson Trio from Pippin).

So what made it so lavish? It looks fairly simple. Like his Dreamgirls staging, which again, I never understood why it was so lauded. I think we can do better - at least re: Dreamgirls.

Touche. I takeback my gay card.

Gwen and Chita - the real deal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w5tRzTrqrA&frags=pl%2Cwn

RippedMan said: "So what made it so lavish? It looks fairly simple. Like his Dreamgirls staging, which again, I never understood why it was so lauded. I think we can do better - at least re: Dreamgirls."

It's one of those things that you need to see live and in person I bet as I'm sure whatever still photos you find or grainy videos that exist from the 1970s and 1980s fail to capture the full effect of the set and staging. Fosse's Chicago set probably complimented his direction and choreography perfectly. Michael Bennett's staging for Dreamgirls was all about having the scenes and everything move with movie-like speed and flow. All reports said how incredibly impressive the staging was. I didn't understand why the costumes looked so frumpy for it until I saw clips of other productions trying to recreate the Bennett staging and I got it. The costumes were layered so the costume changes happened right then and there as the scenes quickly changed from one thing to the next. The first thing the set has to do is serve the direction and flow of the musical. If it's just a spectacle that's static (like Wicked), then it's just there not serving anything really other than to be a distracting huge set. I think it helped that both Fosse and Bennett were dancer/choreographer/directors, so they always thought about how the show flowed and moved and how the performers moved in it, even the non-dancers and the non-dancing scenes.

Updated On: 7/10/18 at 12:52 AM