Guys and Dolls - interpretations

[AngusN]

Posted: 8/13/09 at 1:37pm

I'm currently doing some research into the musical, prior to directing it later in the year. It seems that most of the productions I've read about or seen are all very similar in style. Is it a show that you can be innovative with? What are your ideas on the show?
Furthermore, have seen anything in a production of Guys and Dolls that you thought was innovative?

[Love the Tussin]

Posted: 8/13/09 at 9:03pm

The recent revival supposedly tried to make the show "grittier" and set during the Great Depression. I have to say that I didn't really take note until I heard about said intent afterward, other than recalling a lyric in "Take Back Your Mink" was changed ("back in late twenty-eight I recall"). I enjoyed the revival, but I think they could have taken it a bit further. Despite some viewing Guys and Dolls as the quintessential 50s musical, I think it's an interesting idea.

[D2]

Posted: 8/13/09 at 10:29pm

Just trust the material. It doesn't need the gloss of "interpretation."

[TimesSquareRegular]

Posted: 8/13/09 at 10:41pm

I'm not so sure that G&D is a show that has much room for much innovation if you want to be faithful to the source material, Damon Runyon.

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 8/13/09 at 11:10pm

The revival was set in the 1930s because that is when the Runyon stories were written and took place in. Since the original production was written/performed/set in the 1950s that's when most productions are set. I was in a production set in the 30s and I believe that can work VERY well (despite the recent revival's missteps).

[AngusN]

Posted: 8/14/09 at 7:42am

"Just trust the material. It doesn't need the gloss of "interpretation.""
I totally agree. I'm just curious about other people's ideas and viewings. It's just nice to hear what opinions other people have about the show.
I feel that eah time I've seen the show, it's always just been the same as the time before, with a few better/worse performances. I'm thinking it's probably best to approach the characters in a innovative way, rather than the whole style/conception of the show. Adelaide for one; I'm sick of seeing her as this one-dimensional character, who is only defined by the wretched cold/cough. I want to see more of the woman that is desperate to build a nest, a home, a family. I also like the idea of Sarah and Sky being younger than Adelaide and Natahan; bringing a nice juxtaposition to the couples' experiences of love.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 8/14/09 at 3:51pm

Having read the stories and many of the commentaries of the creators the main thing I see is that it is a world unto itself.
The gangsters ( never forget that IS what they are!) are colourful characters who can not understand why the police seem set on preventing their "business" ventures from succeeding. There is a peculiar naive quality that has to come across for the audience to like these characters. Get too "real" and the show loses its charm.
Enhancing the Adelaide character is not impossible. Just don't lose the sweetness and vunerability that is the core of Adelaide.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 8/14/09 at 3:54pm

It's as simplistic as musicals come...not really much to interpret.

[AngusN]

Posted: 8/16/09 at 4:25pm

"It's as simplistic as musicals come...not really much to interpret."
I disagree. I know the storyline is quite simple and straighforward, but the characters can be interpreted in a wide variety of ways. As a starting point you need to think back to the original material and consider how much influence the Runyon characters have on your chosen style. How far do you stretch to portray these characters in a realistic manner?
I think the shows great strength is the potential the material allows.

[A Director]

Posted: 8/16/09 at 5:45pm

It's as simplistic as musicals come...not really much to interpret.

I also disagree. The first thing to do in directing Guys and Dolls is to trust the material. The book is one of the best ever written for a musical. The score is one of the best ever written for a musical.

If you make the show too realistic or gritty, it won't work. The creators called it A Musical Fable.

If you think the show is simplistic, the production will fail. On the surface, Guys and Dolls might look simplistic, but underneath is it made of steel.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 8/16/09 at 8:02pm

They are not GANGSTERS, they are GAMBLERS. There's a big difference.

This is pretty close to a perfect musical, how the revival screwed it up is beyond me! Trust the material, but push your actors to still give real performances.

I have always found the tough job is making Sarah interesting.

[allofmylife]

Posted: 8/17/09 at 4:42am

1) these guys are just gamblers. It is made clear in the show that Big Julie is a gangster. Big difference.

2) The show is not simplistic, actually, it is very complex. It's just that the show was written by absolute geniuses who made it SEEM simplistic, but every creative decision they made - every single one - was spot-on perfect. They made it look effortless, but G&D was the culmination of decades non-stop work for these guys. They didn't have just one or two shows under their belts. Frank Loesser had been writing music since 1936 and had had hits like "I Hear Music" and "Two Sleepy People" as well as the hymn of every GI Joe, "Praise the Lord and Pass The Ammunition." Abe Burrows created Duffy's Tavern in 1941, so he had spent a decade writing about these very types of gamblers and low-lifes; Jo Swerling wrote his first musical for Broadway in 1927 and was a Hollywood screenwriter from 1930 on. He'll be forever known for his work on "It's a Wonderful Life."

George S. Kaufman was the god - with Mr. Abbott - of Broadway by 1950, having written and directed everything save for his own reviews and traffic on Broadway and 42nd Street. Guys and Dolls was his 68th show and he did all this while stilling finding time to fit in - or should I say into - Mary Astor, with whom, it was revealed at her divorce trial he had a very long affair. Sections of her purloined diary were read in court and they sounded like something right out of Guys and Dolls.

Updated On: 8/17/09 at 04:42 AM

[allofmylife]

Posted: 8/17/09 at 4:48am

Updated On: 8/17/09 at 04:48 AM

[AngusN]

Posted: 8/17/09 at 4:28pm

Thanks for your information allofmylife. it comes in really handy.

As for dramamama, I agree that Sarah is a problem. What fascinates me about her, after directing mY Fair Lady several years ago, is the progressive change in character. How she gradually lets down her guad and allows her emotions to rule her head, instead of vice versa. It is the journey of self-discovery that I will be working on.

[allofmylife]

Posted: 8/17/09 at 9:21pm

Replace the music with menace and the dice with guns and you have "Witness," one of the greatest movies ever written. A good story is a good story, no matter the time or setting.

[A Director]

Posted: 8/17/09 at 11:33pm

Allofmylife - You are probably old enough to have read Mary Astor's diary when it was first published in the newspapers. Her affair with George S. Kaufman was long over by the time he began work on Guys and Dolls.

[allofmylife]

Posted: 8/18/09 at 4:54am

Oh absolutely. I just love mentioning the fact that this guy was nailing Mary Astor for a decade and nobody seemed to notice. And BTW, I am not THAT old.

Updated On: 8/18/09 at 04:54 AM

[sabrelady]

Posted: 8/18/09 at 10:49am

"not gangsters"
from Broadway Stories: "Sense of Humour"-
"Well, a few days later I see by the papers where a couple of Harlem guys Joe the Joker is mobbed up with are found done up in sacks over in Brooklyn, very dead indeed, and the coppers say it is because they are trying to move in on certain business enertprises that belong to nobody but Frankie Ferocious."
Remember the little comedy piece in the last production @ the
mechanics shop (played for "laughs") of somebody going into a car trunk?
They are gangsters ( excepting Sky & Nathan) we just don't see them @ their "other" neferious activities just trying to gamble.

[allofmylife]

Posted: 8/19/09 at 3:34am

I seem to remember reading Theater Magazine of the late 1940s in the library where they were described as low-lifes and colorful denizens of Times Square. I think the musical softened the edges. Only Big Jule brought a heater.

Update: Music Theater International says they are all gamblers, save for "the gun-toting gangster from Detroit, Big Jule."

Updated On: 8/19/09 at 03:34 AM

[Love the Tussin]

Posted: 8/19/09 at 3:50am

I always just assumed they were a mix of gangsters and harmless and lovably clueless gamblers (Nicely Nicely, Nathan, etc.).

Updated On: 8/19/09 at 03:50 AM

[AngusN]

Posted: 8/19/09 at 11:03am

I'm not going to limit myself either way. I think having a mix of hardened criminals and high-flying gamblers, brings a bit of variety to the men's chorus and gives us something to explore in rehearsals.
What do people think about having Sky and Sarah younger (25-30) than Nathan and Adelaide (30-40)?

[Love the Tussin]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 6:15am

I like the idea of having a mix of ensemble members. That's probably the most believable too, right? Some actual criminals and then a bunch of guys who like to pretend they are.

I'm no director, but I love the idea of a younger Sky and Sarah. It's more believable to think Sarah could experience such a drastic, um, "thawing out" of sorts at age 30 than 45.

[philcrosby]

Posted: 8/20/09 at 10:24am

I think you have to trust the material. It is indeed just about perfectly constructed.

Despite the stylized dialogue, remember these are real people working out romantic issues ... that is the heart of the conflict and the play. Where it is set adds the color, the humor and interest.

I saw a local production that added the character of Damon Runyon to the piece as a "frame" .. an unneccesary, disruptive bit of business that yanked people out the world of the play on a regular basis.

No gimmicks please. Just "play the play, I pray you."

[bwayguy22089]

Posted: 9/3/09 at 5:01pm

I have to say that Kate Jennings Grant took the role of Sarah and made her a real person, with real emotions. I actually cared about her... a lot. More than any other character. I thought she did a wonderful job. Best part of the most recent revival.