"Company" without Bennett- Page 2

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 10/16/06 at 10:10pm

I don't know how Bennett would feel(RIP) about his work not being integral to the show.

But this isn't the ACL revival that's a carbon-copy of the original. It's an entirely different, re-imagined production. Even if Tick Tock were in the show, it wouldn't be Michael Bennett's work, it would Wayne Cilento's or Jerry Mitchell's or whoevers. Don't make out the statement to be a slight on the memory of Michael Bennett just to gain sympathy for your argument and make Emcee look like a heartless ogre.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 10/16/06 at 10:12pm

The dance to tick-tock is supposed to express the difference between having sex and making love.

The scene between Bobby and April, with or without Tick Tock, no matter which way you slice it, is just sex. He's not in love with her. He may think he's in love with her, or want to be in love with her, but it's just sex. I can see expressing the difference in dealing with what's not present in their time together, but I saw no element of love between those two.

Am I not a heartless ogre?

Updated On: 10/16/06 at 10:12 PM

[PARISinNYC]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 12:49am

Such a shame. "Tick Tock" happens to be one of my favorite numbers in the whole show. It's the song that everyone expects to get cut.

[FoscasBohemianDream]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 12:57am

Michael Bennett on "Tick Tock" as quoted by Donna McKechnie in Time Steps: "I have an idea for this number. You know when you're in bed with someone, and you're making love but you're not really into it. You hear the clock ticking and you're more aware of that sound than you are of the person you're with. So you really feel alone."
This does not sound like an irrelevant number to me, just like every number in Company, it provides a different perspective on relationships, sex, what it means to have some "company," loneliness versus being alone, etc. I should mention that "Tick Tock" was almost cut at the same time Prince considered cutting "Another Hundred People." Can anyone imagine Company without "Another Hundred People"?
I am not trying to be obtuse-minded, I will enjoy this revival as a completely new Company (I do have some issues with the lack of dancing during "You Could Drive a Person Crazy" which was a number specifically written as a takeoff on the Andrews Sisters), but I just needed to say that "Tick Tock" is hardly irrelevant or just a "ohh, they're having sex, cool" number. There is plenty of subtext to this number. If Doyle could not find a way to bring out the subtext of the number in his production, I'm glad he didn't try to pull it off in an awkward way, but I think the number in a way does affect the understanding of the themes behind Company.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 12:57am

I still just can't get over Roxy's idiotic opinions on this revival. I can't even say anything about it, it's so annoying.

[Plum]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:07am

It might be right to cut "Tick-Tock" for this particular revival, but dance shouldn't be overlooked as a part of the show in general. Out of Bobby's three girlfriends, one gets a song, one gets a monologue, and one gets...a dance number. There's balance there; all the parts of musical theater together. I love Company, but it is not the kind of show that performs itself. Cut things, have the wrong Bobby, screw anything up and it won't quite work. I'm hoping the staging concept here will be strong enough to overcome all that.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:55am

Foscas, thank you for that quotation! it really gives more insight into the show.

Plum, I agree that dance was a very important part at least for the original production. Again, every production can't be dubbed awful without it, and I understand the cutting down of the dancing in the revival, but it's still interesting to consider its importance in the original.

Here's another Bennett quote referring to the specific choreography of Side By Side by side: "I remember when Steve first played me 'Side by Side by Side," and I told him that it was a good start but I had an idea for something which utilized the partners...I told him to give me something that I could do in many different styles and that I could do over and over and over so that it becomes grating...I'm not saying that these married couples aren't sincere about caring for Bobby in the show, but you need more than friendships or it becomes the old song and dance routine."

I also recently read a whole schpeel about how any of the songs that feature dance, or old school, vaudeville type aspects of them are purposely used to distance from the period of the piece and social aspects of the characters. Sondheim and Bennett theatricalized and satirized the fun-loving attitude these people find it necessary to assume.

Again, not at all saying this needs to be in the revival as I agree it wouldn't fit this production, and I know the revival will bring other visual themes, but I'm just kind of enjoying this discussion about the original production on its own.

[Ciaron McCarthy]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 11:40am

But this isn't the ACL revival that's a carbon-copy of the original. It's an entirely different, re-imagined production. Even if Tick Tock were in the show, it wouldn't be Michael Bennett's work, it would Wayne Cilento's or Jerry Mitchell's or whoevers. Don't make out the statement to be a slight on the memory of Michael Bennett just to gain sympathy for your argument and make Emcee look like a heartless ogre.

Take it easy. I'm sure that Emcee can handle herself. I also don't think you have any idea what I was talking about regarding Michael Bennett. You cannot discount what Michael gave to the original production of "Company". He is a BIG reason for why people loved it so much. I also don't think it is unfair to ask how people who love the original will feel about the new revival without Bennett. As far as not being able to see Bennetts original choreography and another choreographer having to step in? You might want to run over and check out "A Chorus Line'.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 11:54am

As far as not being able to see Bennetts original choreography and another choreographer having to step in? You might want to run over and check out "A Chorus Line'.

I think that was referring to the fact that it's quite rare to have a Chorus Line-like revival that's a complete recreation of the original production without new choreography, sets or costumes. Even if there were dancing, it wouldn't necessarily be Bennett's.

[Ciaron McCarthy]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 12:16pm

I think that was referring to the fact that it's quite rare to have a Chorus Line-like revival that's a complete recreation of the original production without new choreography, sets or costumes.

Yeah but this is Chorus Lines first broadway revival. I for one think "A Chorus Line" goes from a masterpiece to a pretty good musical without Bennetts work.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 12:22pm

I don't get the obsession with the comparison between ACL and Company, other than that Bennett worked on both shows. Of course dance is a big part of ACL; it's a show about dancers! And if dance is such a big deal, then obviously it's not as good of a show without the Bennett choreography. But... I just don't see the big deal about a production of Company sans vast amounts of dance. ACL thrives on great choreography. Company can thrive without it in the right context. I can't compare because I haven't seen any incarnation of the original, but I can tell you it works in this context. Like I said before, you have to sort of let go of preconceptions and contextualize this production as what it is -- something new, first revival, second, or sixteenth.

The thing about ACL is that this revival is pretty much a carbon copy of the original; the Company revival isn't. The focal points change and it becomes vastly different from previous productions, and is in some ways quite a bit less "theatrical." I don't get why that's so hard to understand, because it's pretty basic, yes, even without discrediting Bennett's contributions to the original. That was the original, this is the reinvented revival. Skepticism is warranted to a point, but... see it and decide what you think. Don't worry so much; you'll like it better if you can put your reservations to the side. If you sit there the entire time going "oh, Bennett did this, Bennett did that, I NEED A TAP DANCE!!!" then no, you aren't going to like it. And I want people to like it. :)

Updated On: 10/17/06 at 12:22 PM

[Ciaron McCarthy]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 12:34pm

HAHA I know I am going to LOVE Doyle's. I just asked if the non dancing destroys the show at all. My question has been answered. Thanks Emcee.

I look forward to discussing this after I have seen it.

[FoscasBohemianDream]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:15pm

Also, from what I have read/heard about the revival, it is a complete re-invention in terms of staging/sets/time setting. Sometimes revivals re-staged by less-than-stellar choreographers or directors that still resemble the original work (the Sweet Charity revival immediately comes to mind) can't leave the shadow of the original production. Doyle's staging in a way recognizes the brilliance of the original Company and so decides to take his concept in a completely different way instead of giving us a watered-down version of the original concept.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:17pm

Exactly, Fosca.

[Ciaron McCarthy]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:24pm

Hey I am all for change. I didn't love the orchestrations in Doyles Sweeney cause I like that score "big". I think it could work really well with a show like "Company" though.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:41pm

"I still don't understand why people are insisting that Tick Tock has such an enormous impact on the show that it should never be cut."

When Tick Tock is cut, it throws off the balance of the show. The three girlfriends flesh out their characters in three different ways: one sings "Another Hundred People", one has the "Butterfly" monologue, and one dances Tick Tock. Without the dance, the third girlfriend has no reason to be in the show.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:44pm

I think that was referring to the fact that it's quite rare to have a Chorus Line-like revival that's a complete recreation of the original production without new choreography, sets or costumes.

That's exactly what I meant. If Tick Tock was in a subsequent production of Company, they didn't use the same choreography that Michael Bennett did in the original. Unlike ACL, Company is not just attempting to recreate the original production, identical choreography, orchestrations, costumes and all. If Tick Tock were in the production, most likely they wouldn't be using Michael Bennett's original choreography, so it's not about HIM, it's about the exist of a dance number.

And I'm more than aware of the fact that Emcee can handle herself, but the "RIP" after claiming she was "brave" for daring offend Michael Bennett's contributions was complete overkill.


You cannot discount what Michael gave to the original production of "Company". He is a BIG reason for why people loved it so much.

I'm not saying that he wasn't an amazing choreographer, but there was nowhere NEAR enough dancing in Company to support this claim. I've never once seen Company singled out as being best-known for its choreography.

[Ciaron McCarthy]

Posted: 10/17/06 at 1:49pm

I'm not saying that he wasn't an amazing choreographer, but there was nowhere NEAR enough dancing in Company to support this claim. I've never once seen Company singled out as being best-known for its choreography.?

Did you see the OBC of "Company"? Donna McKechnie is awesome in that number. It also closes the three solo's for "Robbies girls".
I know a lot of people who LOVED the choreography. Especially with Bobbies dance during "Side By Side". It just takes one step to move someone. It also got him a Tony nomination.

[lula2]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 4:46pm

Does anyone else here have any insight as to a more in depth narritive behind tick-tock besides just the love vs meaning nothing statement?

[sicetergo]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 5:27pm

"The three girlfriends flesh out their characters in three different ways: one sings "Another Hundred People", one has the "Butterfly" monologue, and one dances Tick Tock. Without the dance, the third girlfriend has no reason to be in the show. "

Now Kathy has the extended park scene which is incredibly touching, which has more resonance and certainly fleshes out the relationships between Robert and the girlfriends.

[Cape Twirl of Doom]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 6:07pm

I've seen two productions of 'Company,' (Seattle & the new Broadway version) neither of which have the Tick Tock number. I know it takes place during the sex scene but can someone explain how it is actually staged, since I've never seen it?

[keen on kean]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 8:08pm

I recently read McKechnie's autobiography, and I think her relationship with Bennett might have had some impact on the addtition of "tick Tock." But I didn't see the original, didn't (obviously) miss it in the revival, and don't think it was the actor/musician approach that made "Tick Tock" irrelevant - the addition of a dance number would shift the focus too far from Bobby - and this production *SPOILER* seems to be so much in his mind that it doesn't make much sense to have a "number" at thjat point in his thoughts.