High Fidelity in Chicago (My Review)

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 10:43am

I posted this on the Chicago board, but it deserves a space here as well. Congrats to the cast an crew of High Fidelity for creating such an utterly delightful show.

***MINOR SPOILERS***

Ok, I have to say, after my last few years of experiencing Chicago theatre, I went in highly skeptical, but I was very pleasantly surprised. This show is so much FUN! The intimate atmosphere, small stage and use of actor/musicians all worked in harmony with the script and score to create a charming voyeuristic view into a brief chapter in Rob's love life. There's not much to the story (there never really was to begin with) which is why this little show should never have been thrown upon a big stage. Even the big screen could not translate the first-person narrative addressed directly to the audience while keeping them at arm's length, which only comes off as smug and self-indulgent. By compressing everything to such a small scale and putting the audience into the lap of the cast, we feel as if we're genuinely welcomed into Rob's world (and Rob's mind) and we get a sharper, more focused understanding of his emotions and thought process. Having the cast double as band members in the record shop reinforces the importance of music in the lives of these characters in a way that doesn't feel as cutesy-quirky as before. While there are some lighting and sound glitches that need to be worked out, the cast really dives into the show with total commitment and delivers a production that has so much heart, it's practically impossible not to fall in love with it. The cast is wonderful. While they are not all perfect singers, it actually works because we know from the beginning we're dealing with very imperfect characters. The acting, singing and staging are all very balanced and the director has played to everyone's strengths and weaknesses. And Michael Mahler as Dick practically steals the show.

My only criticisms are more technical than anything else. It's sort of sad that it has to share the banquet hall with Tony and Tina's Wedding as I wish the set decoration could be a bit more detailed and filled out. It doesn't need to be excessive, but it needs a bit more professional polish to help mask the awkwardness of some of the surroundings. I know it's a huge challenge to create something that has to be so temporary, but it looks unfinished. The costumes are fine with the exception of Liz's penultimate costume. That crazy Jersey bridesmaid black skirt HAS TO GO and throwing an ill-fitted jacket over it only makes it absurdly distracting. I'm sorry if someone really believes it's pretty, but it looks like it was yanked out of the Tony and Tina's costume shop at the last minute. And the sound levels still need adjusting as we had some trouble hearing Laura at times. But these are quibbles as none of them truly interfered with our enjoyment of the show. We had a great time and it was clear the audience really enjoyed it. I hope this show takes off running. I just wish it could find a more permanent home somewhere in the theatre district such as the Loop Theatre. It deserves a long healthy run. I highly recommend it and I'll probably go see it again myself. I'd like to see it later in the run when it has had more time to settle.

Oh yeah, and as a musical, it works. We actually did leave the theatre humming the tunes.

Updated On: 8/28/09 at 10:43 AM

[AlgonquinProd2]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 12:01pm

Well, a couple of things here. I've never been to Chicago, but I have to say that they seem to be fanatical about their theater, most finding it superior to (or at least equal) to New York theater. The 'highly skeptical' phrase alone would probably be enough to send them through the roof. I'd be curious as to how they received your post on the Chicago Board.

That aside, I was one of the few who enjoyed "High Fidelity" here in the Big Apple. It wasn't great, but the score was catchy, the actors were terrific and the set was impressive. Will Chase was perfect for the part. It was worth seeing for the staging of "Conflict Revolution" alone. "Ready to Settle" is a personal favorite and a great ironic example of coffee house songs. Is "High Fidelity" a great show? By no means. But I'm not surprised it's doing well outside of the media maelstrom which is New York. It's fun!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 1:30pm

I've never been to Chicago, but I have to say that they seem to be fanatical about their theater, most finding it superior to (or at least equal) to New York theater.

Having moved to Chicago in 2001, I have a slightly more objective view of Chicago theatre. There is quite an abundance of theatre in Chicago, but I have felt that due to the fact that the city is so supportive of its theatre, standards have been lowered quite a bit since the city is so heavily saturated with literally hundreds of nomadic amateur production companies and comedy troupes. Mediocre and even embarrassingly poor productions are often celebrated and award-laden while inflated egos and arrogant attitudes run rampant, which is why I have avoided even auditioning for anything for years. My friends and parents are even shaking their heads and walking out of show after show during intermission from productions padding their bios with every "Jeff Award/Citation/Recommendation" they can list over their collected lifetimes charging upwards of $65/ticket for something that would be considered bad community theatre (but with a cast of EQUITY actors, as if that somehow means anything).

Do I feel this way about all of Chicago theatre? Of course not. I've seen some absolutely brilliant productions, but they are few and far between and I can rarely rely upon reviews as they are often as wildly inconsistent as the theatre companies themselves. For example, my parents and I bought season tickets (five shows) for a well-established professional theatre company based on our very positive enthusiastic response to their first show of the season. We hated the second show both in its concept and execution, walk out of the third and fourth show during intermission, and couldn't even generate enough enthusiasm to even attend the fifth at all.

The best local Chicago productions I've seen this past season have been Caroline or Change (Court Theatre), The Seafarer (Steppenwolf), Rock and Roll (Goodman) and now, High Fidelity.
I only wish I could have seen Ruined and Twelfth Night. I may try and catch Arabian Nights this weekend.

Updated On: 8/28/09 at 01:30 PM

[jansal]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 4:14pm

I just watched a few preview clips on the website and it looks embarassingly bad. More like a high school production than anything else.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 4:33pm

Well, good thing for me it wasn't embarrassingly bad or like a high school production. Now, Bye Bye Birdie and Curtains this summer, on the other hand... And I'd happily see High Fidelity every night for two months than see Poseidon! The Upside-Down Musical once again.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 6:26pm

Critic seemed to really enjoy the lyrics/music from this show, but I have to say, I've had a hard time getting into it. It's def. not as tuneful as Kitt's "Next to Normal," but it has its moments. I'd love to see a production of it. It def. didn't belong in the Imperial.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 6:46pm

I grew out of this show.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 7:01pm

How'd I know you'd have some snide remark for me? You have a picture of Spring Awakening. You have no room to talk about taste.

[jansal]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 7:10pm

RentBoy, I don't think his comment was directed at you...no need to stoop down to attacking people's tastes!

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 7:15pm

Nope, it was directed at me. He's referring to something I posted in the Birdie thread, and he has some weird fascination with me. I think its because I won't put out.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 8/28/09 at 9:09pm

Some thoughts regarding Chicago theatre:

I have lived and worked here as an actor for the past four years after growing up in New York going to Broadway shows. True, there are a lot of amateur (or amateurish) theatre companies in Chicago that call themselves "professional" when they are barely so if at all. In my opinion, if a theatre company is not paying its actors and staff (and by "paying" I mean at least stipend of a few hundred dollars, if not a weekly salary), it is not a professional company. However, that doesn't mean that low-paying or non-paying non-Equuity theatres can't produce high quality work (I have seen some Broadway-caliber performances from actors I know were getting paid little or nothing for their work). And of course, not all high-paying Equity theatres are always good.

But there is a huge spectrum of quality that runs under the self-proclaimed banner of "professional" in Chicago theatre. But couldn't one say the same for theatre everywhere--even Broadway? In any case though, just like in most things, in Chicago theatre you do get what you pay for. There are constantly exceptions to that rule, but if you are looking for a play to see, just know that if you are paying $15 or $20 to see something at a non-Equity storefront theater, odds are you are going to see something akin to a college production or even community theatre. However, some of those low-budget storefront productions may be some of the best theatrical experiences of your life. Theatre-going is always a gamble, but no more so in Chicago than in any other city.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 12:47pm

In any case though, just like in most things, in Chicago theatre you do get what you pay for.

See, that is where I disagree. I think I get what I pay for maybe 40% of the time. And that is including half-price tickets at Hottix or Gold Star Events.

Theatre-going is always a gamble, but no more so in Chicago than in any other city.

For me, it's been more a a gamble here than anywhere else I've seen theatre, mostly because the critics and awards congratulate so much mediocrity. While in other cities, I could look to certain publications as a guide to point me in the right direction, there is nothing on which I can rely in Chicago. I'll never forget the painful production of 110 in the Shade we walked out on for which the review said the "upcoming" Broadway revival with Audra McDonald could not possibly be better. And all those awards for Parade. Mostly great singing, but that was it, really.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:18pm

MisterMatt, you really are an anti-snob snob.

[kasim]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:20pm

FWIW is this the same high fidelity that was on broadway for like 2 weeks?

And ironically i went to go see at full price.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 1:24pm

I saw the Broadway production. It was a perfectly fine diversion. I'm not sure "this little show should never have been thrown upon a big stage," because it sure didn't look as if it had been thrown there. The set itself was an engineering marvel. From reading MisterMatt's review, THAT sounds like it was thrown there. I mean, THAT OUTFIT!

[tourboi]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 2:05pm

It's the same show (with some minor changes from the writers) that played Broadway. And that's whole "thrown up there" argument about Broadway isn't really right. It's more a thought that the show works better in a smaller, more intimate production (which, I happen to think it does). And the (full) house last night seemed to agree in spades.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 6:25pm

tourboi - Thanks, that is exactly what I meant. Once again, I guess I'm just not articulating myself as well as I could. I didn't say the Broadway production was "thrown together", but I see how it can be misinterpreted. I'm glad to hear last night went well. I recommended High Fidelity to a couple of friends who went to the show Friday night and I'm curious to hear their thoughts tomorrow at work.

I'm not sure I'm an anti-snob snob, but I'm definitely curious to know how it was determined. I consider myself more of an anti-snob supporter or even an anti-snob enthusiast.

[jessica0414]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 9:34pm

I went last night and really enjoyed myself! I'd only ever listened to the first two songs on the OBCR, so seeing this after having seen Next to Normal was interesting. You can hear the Tom Kitt in the score (which okay, duh, I know how that sounds lol I know he wrote both). What I mean is that there are little...bits of flair or musical flourishes or whatever you want to call them in both shows that are similar.

I don't have my program and can't find the info on the website but Michael Mahler as Dick and the person who played Barry were hilarious. The girl who played Liz was also hilarious, I realized that I saw her in the House's production of "Rose and the Rime" which was great. See another post for that, I'm pretty much obsessed with anything the House does now lol anyway. Tangent. The girl who played the lesbian girlfriend (Sarah Kendrew?) has a FIERCE high belt, reminded me of the person who has the high belt in Hair (again, sorry, I have no names due to no programs/Playbills handy). Overall I really enjoyed myself, if I had the money and still lived in the city I'd likely make a return trip :)

[lakezurich]

Posted: 8/30/09 at 10:00pm

I also went last night and had a great time. Mike Mahler definitely steals the show in this production. The actors who play Barry and Liz are brilliant as well. Oh, and I agree that the lady who plays the lesbian girlfriend has one fierce singing voice. But, there were a few things I did not care for though. Like the over-use of those strobes (during one song I had to close my eyes), and Stef Tovar (who plays Rob) just looks a touch too old for the part. Other than those two things I really didn't have any other major problems with the show. I LOVED it and may make a return appearence.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/31/09 at 10:04am

At the beginning, I thought Stef Tovar looked a little too old for the part, but then the score includes lyrics about Rob being "too old" a couple of times, though I'm not sure how old the character is supposed to be. Both Rob and Laura appeared comparable in age, so early into the first act, it was no longer an issue for me. There was a record store very similar to the one in the show around the corner from my first apartment in Chicago that was owned by a die-hard Grateful Dead fan in his 40s and it got me thinking; a mid-30s small business owner obsessed with nostalgia might be a bit more believable than one ten years younger. I think I'll check out the staff at Reckless Records in the Loop just as a reference. Anyone been to Rock Records lately?