Flying Over Sunset - Previews Thread — Page 19

My family saw a matinee "Flying Over Sunset" last Friday, 11/26, and greatly enjoyed it. The reviews here are all over the place but there are common themes to most of them. "Flying Over Sunset" has some incredibly beautiful scenes, both musically and visually, that you don't often see on Broadway. The scene in the ocean is incredible to watch -- especially from the Loge are -- and the "Flying Over Sunset" song is very beautiful and touching. The lighting and staging is also incredible to view and four days later, I want to go back and see those visuals again.

However, as the negative reviews point out, there is very little plot and no dramatic tension. And it does feel long in the second act.

This is a thoughtful production that is reflective. The acting is excellent. However, it isn't for everyone.

Auggie27 said: " I appreciate how constructive some of the posts here are, noting places where this show needs clarity, pruning, or simply to be re-thought."

My family liked the show and talked about how it could be made better. But it all depends on what the director/writer wants to do. Maybe he doesn't want dramatic tension or a plot?

But here are some thoughts:

1. The play is focused on the individual experience of taking LSD. But what about the larger social and cultural issues? One could have a sideplot that interweaves that issue with the current play. Clare Boothe Luce was an ambassador and a conservative. Clearly, there are possibilities here that could be explored that would give some greater tension or purpose to the play. For example, why aren't more people doing LSD in today's world? Could the play suggest some reasons? That would add depth to the current tripping presentations.

2. Create a 3rd act that brings these characters back together again in the future, say a year later. Let us see how the LSD trips have or haven't affected them or their lives. Create some reasons in the plot for why this would be important for the audience to care about.

What musical in the past 50 years has had a third act?

I saw the show on the 12th and again on the 26th. Both times the house was 75 to 80per cent full. I was blown away by the piece both times. The first time my date was a bit restless in Act 2 (as was I because I relinquished the aisle seat and my legs were cramped). But when I walked out and saw it was 11:00 I was shocked. The show did not drag for me. I was hugely entertained. The music, the sets, the acting, the lighting, the orchestra: ten, ten, tens across the board.

I figured they’d want to cut something from Act 2. But what? My first thought was lose the penis song. My friend thought they could cut Huxley Knows. But considering that both those songs were written a few years ago, and are so topical now, it would be hard to cut either one. The penis song made me think of Jeff Bezos and Huxley Knows brought to mind the disparagement of science debated during the pandemic. That retrograde topicality is prescient and delicious (to me).

Unfortunately, they cut the Act 2 reprise of the theme song by the time a saw it again. Too bad, because that song is haunting and memorable. Both times I cried into my mask when the astonishing Carmen Cusak performed that number. A truly stunning song and performance. Both my dates and I walked out humming that tune and it is still going through my head.

Anyhow, by the 26th, they had shaved off about 10 minutes from the total running time. I saw Mrs. Doubtfire on Saturday and that show was only about five minutes shorter than the later Sunset preview. Somebody earlier in this thread said Sunset is not for everybody. The Doubfire audience is not the Sunset audience and never the twain shall meet.

As to plot, yes, it’s got a loose one. But I was entertained nonetheless. Assassins doesn’t have a plot, and I liked that too. I’m not a stickler for plot as long as I’m entertained.

As to the LSD trips: I’ve had extensive experience with hallucinogens over many years. The depictions of their experiences weren’t like my experiences. But my experiences were in a different era and solely recreational versus the therapeutic experiences depicted in this show. I will say, however, the way the trips were represented with lighting and sets was evocative and gave me a little flashback deja vu. Another fascinating irony of this subject matter is that hallucinogens are coming into more general therapeutic use these days in the psychiatric profession. So this drug has come compete circle over the last 70 years. Maybe that’s why the dancers are tapping in circles.

I’m seeing it again on Saturday (TDF).

pmondrian said: "A Director said:
1. The authors of this musical are no doubt aware of the larger social and cultural issues, but did not choose to include them in their show.

2. Sounds like you prefer shows to be tied up neat and tidy at the end.

A few responses:

1. Yes, it's the director's choice. But if the musical is a flop, they might want to rethink their choice.

2. Not at all. I liked the musical a lot and may go again. But it appears that it's going to be a complete flop. I'd rather see it be a success, and one that will be performed again. Again, if the director doesn't care whether he has a success or not, then he can disregard all such suggestions.


I suppose that depends on what you mean by a complete flop. A commercial failure is not necessarily an artistic failure. Take Sweeney Todd, for example. It didn't run for very long, but in hindsight it is revered. I think that artistically the show is a gem. It may or may not make money. Only time will tell how it is viewed through the lens of posterity.

You did not just compare this to Sweeney Todd…….

Sutton Ross said: "God how I despise Sweeney Todd. I cannot wait to see this show, an original show based on nothing in this climate is brave AF."

These are literally my thoughts every time I read someone's thoughts/review in this thread. Especially one that seems to attempt a different level of gravitas in its material than a pop/rock-infused musical; original or otherwise. Looking forward to reading more from everyone seeing the show over the next few weeks.

jacobsnchz14 said: These are literally my thoughts every time I read someone's thoughts/review in this thread. Especially one that seems to attempt a different level of gravitas in its material than a pop/rock-infused musical; original or otherwise."

To each their own, and if people enjoy this piece, great, may it have a long and happy run. But there's a recurring theme in this thread that implies that there is something brave/laudatory about this production BY VIRTUE of the fact that it has no plot.



Meaning, sure, you can say "i think it does have a plot/story" or you can argue "it has no plot or storyline, but thats OK because XYZ" but this notion that there is something inherently valuable or brave in this production is hard to stomach. The LDS trips aren't over the top avant garde moments, the messages and revelations the characters have are completely cliche and straight out of a million shows we've seen before. Yes some may enjoy watching this and some may forgive/relish the lack of any storyline to move things along, but there is no message/point/thesis here, nothing new or extraordinary, that could merit words like "bravery" or even "original."

jacobsnchz14 said: "but to see a musical hit the following points alone make it an intriguing thing I wish I could see: an original musical on a Broadway scale with no tryout, post-pandemic, that attempts to tell an intriguing story of human condition that is not a jukebox musical or based on some previous IP or movie. This isn't about the awards, but sounds enough of a valiant effort to laud over after having a Tony Award ceremony where the three contenders were jukebox musicals and based on discographies/films."

I completely missed that you were lauding "original" meaning "not based on a movie or strung together to match a famous musician's catalogue"- i agree with you that we need more original stories. I bought a ticket in March 2020 and again now for this very reason. There's a ballsiness to it, i hear your point. I was just sorely disappointed, and think that this show does a DISSERVICE to what you're describing: it makes the argument FOR jukebox musicals and old film musicalizations because it strongly suggests that the collective We has run out of original storytelling ideas.

I agree, posting this the day before I see the show. Being built from the ground up intrigues me, but isn't preferable creative DNA; we'd be ignoring defining works of the musical theater to pretend adaptations have lesser origin stories, artistically speaking. The only distinction I make, and others may disagree: we've been hit with a string of musicals from fairly recent contemporary box office successes -- Groundhog Day, Tootsie, Mean Girls, Pretty in Pink, Doubtfire, The Bodyguard, Urban Cowboy Pretty Woman -- which are a subcategory of adaptation insofar as the titles themselves are virtual brands. They resonate with consumers as known commodities. Arguably not so true of Tales of the South Pacific, Green Grow the Lilacs, or They Knew What They Wanted.

This should be called "Style over Substance." Beautiful production. Pointless evening. What is the choreography all about? What was all that clip clopping? Time? Seriously? Heart rate? Please tell me.

Also, why did Sondheim pass on writing this show? Perhaps because Lapine had not found anything really unique to say or anything about the characters that was particularly musical. The score they ended up with was hummable, but completely disposable. Nothing interesting going on here. I believe the phrase is sturm und drang...signifying nothing?

One has to wonder what the production would have been like if it had had out of town tryouts and further workshopping. I also wonder if a lighter approach with more humor would have garnered a more satisfying result.


The great thing about Lincoln Center is that they can afford to mount original works given it is a not for profit theatre.

The show was workshopped multiple times, two major ones, once with Ebersole and once with the late Marin Mazie. It's been around since at least 2015. I believe the NY Times piece said it had at least 7 readings. Whatever the perceived flaws, the development process was not sidestepped; Lapine, Korie, Kitt are about as A-list as musical theater gets, all of whom work hard at craft issues. One can imagine many wise allies giving feedback. Scanning the score and song list, it doesn't strike me as having a great deal of music. (Does it feel that way in performance?) That's a curiosity in light of the length.

I'm going to the matinee today and look forward to joining the discussion.