Emcee's THE DROWSY CHAPERONE Review

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:57am

The whole world has jumped on the "My __ Review" thread bandwagon, and I know you all hate them, etc. But I make people put up with this -- and hope they enjoy it -- because this is (hopefully) practice for me. And I'm not just going to write for practice and shove it in a drawer, because the feedback you guys can give me is invaluable.

That said, I haven't posted a review on here in ages (with the exception of when I saw Doyle's production of Company) for a lot of reasons that it would be unnecessary to go into. I may be a little rusty.

Onto the important stuff....

Before being separated by a 6-hour drive between our respective colleges, my best friend and I used to have a strange pastime. My parents have a surround-sound system at home, in one of the larger rooms in the house -- and the one with the highest ceilings -- so you can imagine what that's like. We'd either wait until it was night, or we'd close the shades and turn off all the lights, after putting a cast recording that had meaning to us, or that we had particular love for, into the CD player and finagling the sound settings a little bit. We'd sit there together, in pitch dark, for hours on end, being completely captured by the music -- in the dark, with no "real life" visuals, and with sound that glorious, it was almost as though we were there.

The Drowsy Chaperone opens with The Man in the Chair speaking, he and the audience sitting in pitch dark. He talks about what he likes and dislikes about the theatre: for example, he hates when actors break the fourth wall, as he does himself break the fourth wall for his audience. He misses the days of Gershwin, which have been replaced by the days of Elton John. His opening ode to both the positive and the negative of musical theatre begins what is in concept a love letter to the musical comedy -- while also a loving joke at its expense.

The lights come up, and The Man in the Chair shows the audience his records. He decides to play one of his favorites, the original cast recording from the 1928 musical, "The Drowsy Chaperone." He explains, as he puts it on, that when he does this, it transports him, and makes him feel like he's seeing it (this is what reminded me of the little anecdote with which I opened this review). It helps him when he's feeling blue -- such is the power of the beloved musical; of any beloved musical. With this, Drowsy is not merely the pyramid "show within a show within a show" that it is; it's something that people who love the theatre will tap right into. That said, it's not necessarily something that the average tourist will love, I think, because it seems that to really "get" what's so lovely about Drowsy, you have to understand what this man feels for this show. You have to have experienced that, in at least some capacity -- feeling transported and comforted by a recording; having favorite, tiny little moments that bring joy, loving an imperfect show, even if you know it's imperfect, or loving a show you've never seen. I've certainly experienced those things. I've been that guy. This is a show for people who adore musical theatre.

The show's concept, and *what* it is is better than the way it's actually carried out. It's very fun, though utterly ridiculous. It's light and fluffy in all senses of the terms -- a love letter, yes, but also very sugar-coated. The laughs come, one after the other; the book is hugely clever, and the visual gags are plentiful. At the end, The Man in the Chair explains that it's not a perfect show, but that he loves it anyway; it's entertaining, and that's why he loves it. However, because of this, and because one of the themes is loving an imperfect show, well, you have to watch an intentionally imperfect show. Sometimes that succeeeds with absolutely flying colors -- many scenes are incredibly funny, because it's a hyper-aware, self-aware representation of some of the worst, awesomely bad, funny as all hell theatrical blunders we've all ever seen. But then other times, scenes are dreadful and boring.

Bob Martin wrote his material, so it's rather ironic that the material itself is better than his delivery of it. The lines never stop being funny, but his delivery and tone do; he seems to be using a characterized vocal inflection -- funny at first, but it gets old. The jokes are spot-on, hysterical, well-timed comedy. It's a wonderful book. The music is... there. It's not bad, there's nothing wrong with it, per se, but it's not great, either. There's nothing really new or exciting about any of it. It's cliché to say that music isn't memorable, but with a couple of exceptions (mostly lyrical), Drowsy's score is nothing special. The same goes for the technical aspects, as well, costume design being better than the rest.

The acting, too, is fine. Everybody is good, able, and turns a commendable performance, but nothing is really astounding or mind blowing -- perhaps the nature of the material, as while sweet, it is silly and giddy. Again, what the show is, especially in terms of its fun-poking aspect, often gets in the way of how pleasurable some of the performances are to watch; for example, Danny Burstein, as Adolfo, has the unenviable task of playing a scenery-chewing actor. He portrays a performance that The Man in the Chair classifies as being one that nobody could get away with today; it's funny, but dangerously teeters on the edge of being annoying. The Man in the Chair's explications of and comments on this actor's performances -- offensive racial stereotypes -- are often funnier than watching the performance itself.

Sutton Foster doesn't shine as much here as she did as Millie, which is a little bit disappointing, but she's still more than excellent; I've always thought that while a true triple threat, in that she is *truly* good at all three, I don't feel she excels in one facet of her triple-threatdom more than another. Her performance in Drowsy isn't incredibly layered, but she's supposed to be playing a character who is, as classified by The Man in the Chair, two-dimensional -- as is everyone else. She does, though, continue to clinch her status as a fantastic comedic actress.

As I said somewhere above, in the end, The Man in the Chair gets very emotional, saying he knows the show isn't great, but that he loves it nonetheless. Aside from the fact that the people who are Drowsy's target audience can sympathize with that, it also embodies the show itself. It's imperfect; almost every show is. But it's enjoyable. It takes you away, into this silly, happy, flightly world of musical comedy. Imperfections included and often forgiven, Drowsy is extremely entertaining -- a bit meta-theatrical and self-promoting in that aspect, but most importantly, a good night of fun, and a solid escape from reality. I don't agree with the assessments out there that it's totally original and mind-blowing, but people who love musical theatre will heavily identify with it, and I think that's its strongest attribute.

Updated On: 5/12/06 at 12:57 AM

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:11am

Very nice review Em. :) I especially liked the story at the beginning. I must try that sometime!

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:13am

heh, just make sure nobody's home to walk in on you. My brother came downstairs sometimes, and found us sprawled out on the floor, in the dark. He was very confused, and slightly disturbed.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:14am

Especially if it was CABARET, right Em?


And, I agree totally with your review, though I'm not as forgiving as you are - particularly with Burstein and the score.

Well written!

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:17am

Cabaret was one of THE most perfect examples, yes. We did that a lot, since so much of the show was about the concept of transport. It also caused my brother to bolt in the other direction.

I'm such a loser.

Updated On: 5/12/06 at 01:17 AM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:29am

Were you with us when we went to see 42nd STREET for Dyan's 16th Birthday? In the limo on the ride home, doing just that to INTO THE WOODS? I know Jess was there, but I can't recall if you were...

What an appropriate and relevant question, and how necessary it is that this be asked and answered on a public message board...

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:33am

Great review as always Em. I have missed reading yours.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:34am

HAHA. I'll IM you and we can continue this. :)

[timote316]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:44am

Great review, as always!

[beacon1]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 8:03am

Superb writing, Emcee! (From a fellow writer.) You are becoming quite a wordsmith. :o)

And, this further clinches that I'll be seeing this production on my next trip to NYC!

[Princeton78]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 10:42am

Lovely review and I agree with 99.9% of it. About 10 minutes into it, I thought "The average tourist isn't going to get this." I thought Danny Burstein and Sutton Foster were quite good, and I notice you left Beth Leavel out of your review. Did you feel that her performance was overrated like I did?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 10:46am

I didn't really go in with any expectations regarding her, actually. I had read little about the details of the show; I didn't really even know what it was about, but simply that people had been saying it was superbly original, etc. So, since I don't really know what other people were saying about her, I can't really call her "overrated," but I thought she was good. Good, but not anything to rave about.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 10:57am

See, I found Beth Leavel’s performance to be the highlight of the show (well, second to those hysterical Bob Martin explanations). She was doing a GREAT send-up of the qualities we’ve all come to know and loathe/admire in the great stars of yesteryear while being massively entertaining in doing so.
Also, I’ll be the first to trot out the “Sutton Foster is our finest NEW musical theatre actress” (because I love her in unexplainable ways), but I felt she was somewhat lacking in this number. And, as all of you who have said the build-up to Leavel’s performance was a letdown for you, Sutton’s build-up was a letdown for me, especially in “Showoff,” which left me surprisingly bored about halfway through it.
Also, I’m with the reviewer who said, “where’s our doe-eyed ingénue?” That’s who Sutton should have been playing but she was really just giving us an earlier version of Beth Leavel’s character.

Em, well-written as always. I think you’re on your way.

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 11:51am

Thanks for an excellent review, emcee!

Funny about Sutton. She left me cold in MILLIE. I found her too pushing, charmless and strident. Yet in DROWSY, I found her totally beguiling, charming as a pixie and, most importantly, hysterically FUNNY. She seemed more relaxed in not having to carry the show on her slender shoulders the way she did in MILLIE, and perfectly underplayed her comedy in her "Show-Off" number, being deadly serious in her facial expressions while her actions belied her words. After that, she seemed underused, and nothing she was given afterwards hit the heights of "Show Off". But she had the grace (or misfortune) to subsequently share a big scene with Leavel who - quite intentionally - wiped her off the stage.

Updated On: 5/12/06 at 11:51 AM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:07pm

It's not Sutton who's pushed off by Leavel, though; it's the actress playing Janet pushed off by the actress playing the Chaperone.

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:08pm

Sorry...that's what I meant!

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:11pm

That's a perfect example of what I meant about the material having a huge influence on how the performances are rated, I think.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:13pm

Ya know...I've taken a number of shots as Ms. Foster on here...totally unfairly. For a while, I couldn't divorce my utter dislike for the show MILLI from the actress given charge to bring it to life. Could I have handled it any better? Nope. Would I have worked as hard to deliver. Yeah...probably.

After a while, I realized that she has some serious talent that she will be able to let shine when she's given something of some quality to do.

With Master's seal of approval, I'm gonna pick up a ticket!

[uncageg]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:25pm

Emcee, listening to music in total darkness is one of my favorite things to do. But I usually light a small candle so I can see where the wine bottle and glass are on the table!

[Hanna from Hamburg]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:26pm

em -- GREAT review. I have to disagree with your assessment of Sutton, though. I do agree she's a triple threat, but I REALLY feel she excels vocally first, acting second and then dancing. I would classify her as a STRONG singer who acts and dances quite well. The big thing that impressed me is that she was able to make everything she did seem effortless. In addition, the level of confidence that she exudes just blew me away . . . moreso in Drowsy than in Millie. I'm a huge fan of hers, but it was very clear to me in seeing her performance in Drowsy that she can score without having to do the "hard sell" like she did in Millie. I think it's something that just comes with having Mille and Little Women under her belt, but it also could have to do with the directing. I think Ben Brantley mentioned in his review that she amazingly pulled it in quite a bit from her normal style, ESPECIALLY in "Showoff" where she could have gone WAY overboard. Now, that being said, I don't think this is a year for Sutton to be nominated for a Tony. She might get it because of the Millie/Women factor, but the Lead/Featured categories are too packed with strong performances and I don't think the role is strong enough for her to even get nominated, much less win.

Updated On: 5/12/06 at 12:26 PM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:38pm

Don't get my wrong, I like Sutton A LOT. And yes, she does definitely score in terms of being subtle without being dull, and while still being really funny.

[algy]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 12:58pm

Great Review Emcee. I really hope this gets some sort of run in the West End - from everything that I've read I'd be really interested to see it. Theres going to be a cast recording right?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/12/06 at 1:54pm

Thanks! And yes.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 5/13/06 at 2:50am

How do you think it fit the theater? There was a thread a while back about how they were going to switch theaters. Do you think it got swallowed up? Or does it fit?

[BroadwayChica]

Posted: 5/13/06 at 7:40am

Fantastic review, em. You beautifully worded many of my own thoughts about this show.

"Danny Burstein, as Adolfo, has the unenviable task of playing a scenery-chewing actor. He portrays a performance that The Man in the Chair classifies as being one that nobody could get away with today; it's funny, but dangerously teeters on the edge of being annoying. The Man in the Chair's explications of and comments on this actor's performances -- offensive racial stereotypes -- are often funnier than watching the performance itself."

I have to say, reading this made me feel incredibly... validated. When I saw "Drowsy Chaperone", I was really taken aback by Danny Burnstein's character, and his delivery. It really, really, REALLY bothered me. I feared that being Latina hindered my ability to objectively critique this performance. Try as I might to be open minded, it still bothers me when I see flagrantly racist portrayals of Hispanic people. When Man in Chair commented that it's a character no one could get away with today, I found myself thinking "It's true. You CAN'T. And perhaps shouldn't." What bothered me most wasn't Burnstein's portayal itself (the material necessitates an over the top performance), but the audience response to the character. I saw the show with a few friends, two of which are, like myself, Puerto Rican. Beside me was a middle aged white man. Obviously a tourist. Whenever Burnstein took the stage, said man laughed. A lot. And a little *too* loudly. It bothered me. Was he laughing at the winkiness of the character, or just the character itself? Where is the line between laughing at the comment being made on racism, or just...laughing at a racist character? I wondered how many people in that audience would laugh just as hard at this character, were he being played earnestly, without that ironic layer of "this is wrong. But that's why it's funny"

I felt like Man in Chair's (very funny) interjections were there to remind people "this IS racist", and I feared that many of them (mostly the tourists, of which there were plenty that night) would have completely missed that. Maybe I'm being cynical. But would The Drowsy Chaperone had gotten away with a very obviously racist portrayal of a black man? No. People would have been very offended by that. And yet, they have no qualms about laughing at the stereotypical Latin lover, which is just as offensive.

And please don't tell me to "lighten up". I know it's just a show. But I'm entitled to voice my frustrations, which, I believe are very validated in this case.

On a less downer note, I also used to play records of old musicals as a child, and imagined myself being transported to those worlds. So, as a musical theater geek, I couldn't help fallin in love with this very imperfect show.