Doyle's MERRILY. — Page 3

I think one review said the theme for the Watermill production was the tape recorder. Judging by the photos for this one, it seems to be an archives office. Or maybe moving boxes.

Maybe the different shades of blue to be representative of the blue skies that were ahead when they were young. Notice how Frank's clothes are the darkest shade of blue, Charlie and Mary still have the light shade, just not as up front, so maybe that means they still are trying to remain true to themselves. Also, Mary's dress is sort of a muddied blue, maybe saying her blue skies have been muddied because of Frank's neglect and her own alcoholism?

However it is, I imagined Frank (old) walking in from a door offstage to his "archives" office. He carries a bottle in his hand an spies one of the boxes. He throws the lid off and takes out some papers and a tape recorder. We hear the opening bars of "Good Thing Going" playing on the tape recorder. He stops it. He puts down the bottle and throws the papers on the floor. He presses the forward button on the tape recorder. Up to this point, a spotlight has been following him. He searches for the light switch. When he finds it, the figures of the cast are revealed. The recorder stops. The music for the first "Merrily" starts. When it transitions into "That Frank", the cast pulls props for the party out of one of the boxes. I figured that by the end, there's only one box containing the binoculars and anything else in the last scene. The box is taken away by Frank who runs off, young and ready to take on the world.

TL;DR: Thoughts on Doyle's Merrily just from looking at photos and imaginary production.

Also, this is a smaller and shorter Merrily than those familiar with the show are accustomed. Several chunks of dialogue and entire characters have been excised (as compared to the licensed script), the songs have no musical buttons (and thus no applause from the audience until the very end), and the show comes in at an intermission-less one hour and forty-five minutes. Worst of all for fans of the musical, the glorious overture (probably the last great one heard on Broadway) is entirely absent. The director's concept of the show being told to Frank Jr. (Ben Diskant), presumably as a cautionary tale, is interesting, but one not fully developed or focused.
http://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/cincy/cincy246.html

Yikes. Doyle also took an axe to Sweeney's book. MERRILY without that glorious Overture is kind of tragic.

The sensuality of Johanna in Sweeney, with Anthony and Johanna caressing and holding their cellos between their legs, whilst playing to each other, was one of the sexiest things I've seen.

This makes me want to puke. Not just puke, but projectile vomit onto and into their cellos.

This gimmick is infuriating. This is not art. This sheds no light on the works themselves. And this is no longer creative, if it ever even was.

This is nothing more than a contemporary version of "The Emperor Has No Clothes."

And it makes me want to puke.

---

According to ATC, they cut the roles of Beth's Dad (is her mom still in it?) and the Newscaster. If that means the interviewer from Franklin Shepherd Inc, how the hell does that scene/song work now?

Apparently Sondheim saw it, and it made him cry.....

http://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat/d.php?id=2052914

Updated On: 3/11/12 at 12:17 AM

Can someone please try to explain exactly what insight, how did the instruments played by actors bring this insight about, how did it enrich the storytelling? How did it integrate the various components into a cohesive whole, that's if it does at all. I honestly have never read a single peep from anyone who claims some insight is gained in his productions. Everyone says they're ingenious but fail to support that claim with examples. Not like I'm demanding it either and know too well how it's like being busy, but when all I read are people saying "it was beautifulll" "INGENIOUS!" "INSIGHTFUL like never before," and leave it at that and many others do the same, it's enough to drive a person crazzzzy. :P

---

...vomiting into Lauren Molina's cello would really be a bummer for her.

Are tubas easier to clean?

---

Updated On: 3/11/12 at 10:11 AM

I love the cast. I would really like to Daniel Jenkins interpretation of Charlie. He has to be better than Lin-Manuel Miranda, who was woefully miscast. It needs a good singing voice and strong acting abilities, both of which Mr Miranda does not have.

'This makes me want to puke. Not just puke, but projectile vomit onto and into their cellos'

Ah, Socractic discourse, I have missed it and when your balls drop or you're less twattish - which ever's first - I'd be delighted to read your latest sophomoric ramblings.

Wait, so now Merrily is staged as a cautionary tale for Frank Jr? "Here son, why not watch us enact for you a tale about what an asshole your father ended up being to everyone who loved him! Enjoy!" Depressing.

"Wait, so now Merrily is staged as a cautionary tale for Frank Jr?"

Hmmmm... putting a child who barely figures in the script into the centre of the plot... sounds reminiscent of the Regent's Park production of Into The Woods.

"Is it any less depressing than, "Look at what these idealistic and talented young people became: alcoholic one-hit-wonders, sellout philanderers, and crazy people"?"

That's not depressing. That's life.

I doubt this sways many of your case-closed conclusions on Doyle, but in this new Playbill interview about 'Merrily' he yet again address the 'gimmick' claim:

"I often read, 'Oh, John Doyle, he's the person who does shows with actor-musicians.' The reality is that I've done 20 of them out of a career of 250 shows, but it's better to be known for something than nothing at all, I suppose. ... I only really try to do it if there's a real point and there's something to say.'


Playbill interview

For me, twenty too many. The only actor/musician shows I've seen that worked were Radio Gals and Cowgirls, for very obvious reasons. And I'm told Once works, as well.