DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS -- What drives the show?- Page 2

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 5/20/05 at 2:24pm

I agree with everyone that said first and foremost it is the performances. While I do like Broadway comedies, I tend to see dramas more than once much more often than comedies b/c the comedy loses something when you're expecting it. Yet I've seen DRS 3 times and loved it each time. Should be interesting to see how it plays out with a different cast...

The comedy is somewhat universal, it's diverse. There's typical gross-out comedy(Ruprecht), physical pain comedy(Ruffhausen mit Shiffhausen), lots of tongue-in-cheek comedy(Love is your legs), twists that become funny, and of course for us Broadway reference comedies(mention of act 2, missing scenes, quoting My Fair Lady, etc.) Most people can at least appreciate some of the comedy, making the show's flaws not so obvious.

I think the direction as well plays a major part as the score does lose something on CD, though I still immensely enjoy it. It's directed to excel most of the comedy, and I agree that the score is appropriate for the silliness of the show.

Certainly I think the best musical of the new season, hoping for a tony!

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 5/20/05 at 2:30pm

I think that the heart of the show, and the complexity of the show are that they are entirely under the table, subtext and what the characters don't say are very important. It certainly does not want to take itself too seriously and goes about in what seems to be an easy surface pace, but much of the humor is not so over the top as it seems. There are many aspects of the characterizations that you can miss on first examination. Its deception is not intentional deception, but rather deception based on the appearance of complete simplicity.

[Plum]

Posted: 5/20/05 at 2:40pm

I disagree- I don't think there was much to DRS that couldn't be spotted the first (or, at the most, second) time out. It did what it did quite well, but there's never more than 2 or 3 layers to things and there aren't a lot of tiny details to be spotted, either (like the posters in Bialystock and Bloom's office).

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 5/20/05 at 2:52pm

Maybe I just read extra things into it, the details I'm thinking of are very subtle and have to do with the characters and the way they deliver lines more than anything else. I'm not claiming the show is Sondheim or even close, but it has an extra something.

[Plum]

Posted: 5/20/05 at 4:28pm

Pfft. I wasn't looking for depth- Dirty Rotten Scoundrels is traditional musical comedy, plain and simple. But still...the whole time I felt like the show was good but not quite great- an almost-Producers.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 5/20/05 at 10:54pm

Extremely interesting comments....But what kept you engaged--plot, score, performances, scenic elements?

[feinstein9]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 1:00am

the plot isn't what kept me intersted... actually the plot was only "eh". the score didn't keep me *that* interested, the scenery was interesting to me. that held my attention. i think my favourite parts were the choreography and mr. butz. that's what kept me, personally, interested in the show. the score/plot was really a bit mediocore in my opinion, but i think it's one of those things that's like "we've been working and reworking this, so, our judgement of quality is now impared." i'm not saying they *did* work and rework it, but it came across that way. kinda messy. to answer your question, jose, it was the performances and dancin' that kept me into it, as well as some numbers like "ruprecht" "great big stuff" and "oklahoma?"

[Plum]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 2:31am

Actually, "Oklahoma?" struck me as one of those numbers that could have been hysterically funny but wasn't. I'm sticking with my answer of "the cast," with the score coming in a very respectable second.

[feinstein9]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 3:40am

i think in that number i wanted to laugh but i was in too much shock- how could they pen texas so well while talking about oklahoma? while listening the song on the recording, something norbert came into my head- "it's tragic but it's trrrruue"
but yeah i think 99% of the board probably thinks it was cast-driven, and that includes moi. question is, who on earth is going to replace them?

[One Song Glory]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 7:21am

The hilarity in the music, cast, and story is what drives me to the show.

[FranklinShepard-Inc.]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 8:35am

Feinstein9, I have the distinct feeling that the one joke you placed in about Yazbek has not been noticed except for me I saw it in his biography on the drs site as well! Thanx for bringing it up again...

[MusicalDirector109]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 10:01am

I also got the seven reference!! I think Mr. Butz and Mr. Lithgow drive the show. They both give incredible performances. The score is good, but not as good as TFM. However, I don't think its fair to compare them. The score for DRS is just plain fun and suits characters that don't care too much for each other. The songs are completely character driven. As stated before, there is more emotion in TFM because there are wonderful relationships in the story.

[mint0621]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 10:55am

what seven reference? care to elaborate?

I think it's Butz and Jbara who drive the show. Jbara is a bit overlooked; but I think his suave dancing and humor is brilliant and serves the show very well. Butz steals the show. Nuff said.

It also doesn't hurt that the conductor Fred Lassen is also very cute as well, esp. from the lottery seats. =)

[FranklinShepard-Inc.]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 11:52am

It's in his bio on the drs site. It says Yazbek is seven, must be a typo, but a good one

[JbaraFan1]

Posted: 5/21/05 at 3:19pm

I thought the 7 was deliberate, a way of jokingly saying that Yazbek is a kid at heart. But I could be wrong.

As for what I think drives the show, I'm not good at analyzing this sort of thing. Speaking for myself, it was Greg Jbara that put me in my seat on opening night. My husband and I wouldn't have been there if it weren't for him (literally). But, although Greg was THE reason we were there, we also thoroughly enjoyed the show itself in general. There isn't a performance or number that I didn't like, though I have my favorites of course. For me, Greg (who I found amazing in his role) aside, it was a combination of performances, songs, sets, that held my interest and "drove" the show for me. My attention apan tends to drift after a while usually (whatever I'm doing!) ... but at DRS, I think something that helps is that there is always movement on stage. Whether it's actors moving, dancing, or the sets moving on the turntable stage, things are always in motion.

Will it be as good a show with a different cast? I honestly don't know. I know that for me, it's hard to imagine other actors in those roles, and for me the experience could never be the same ... but I wouldn't say it can't be done and be done effectively.

Not sure this really answers the question, but there ya go. :)