How was Tale Today? — Page 5

lenasview,

Do you realize that your posting is a pyramid scheme and a chain letter, both of which are illegal, besides being totally annoying. Is it possible that you were the person whistling from the mezzanine?!

Yankee,

In this context, I made no mention of Riedel (although, from rumblings, he doesnt like Barbour)

I was referring to:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09172008/news/regionalnews/its_beast_in_show_129477.htm

<< As I wrote earlier, I believe he is an extraordinary talent and it would be a great loss to all to not allow him the opportunity to move on with his life. I don't know the details of his "indiscretion" but I believe if he's paid for his crime, then we should cautiously forgive. (As I don't know the details, I'm not one to judge him to begin with.)
>>

Totally agree. He seems like a very nice guy, from the few times that we were able to speak with him. I believe he has a
2-3 month old baby girl, and he has moved on (or tried to)

Wish everyone else could do the same.

I'm heading out for the evening. Nice debating with you all. Any other questions - feel free to private message me.

I think yelling "bravo" after every number would grow old very fast, too. Whistling was particularly annoying because it seems so out of place in a Broadway theater. And, maybe even more out of place during a production such as A Tale of Two Cities.

I do want to make it clear that I appreciate enthusiastic audiences. I loved that the theater went berserk at the opening title image (sans whistler). All of that energy seemed foolish after a while when it was clear it wasn't grounded in a profound moment of theater, but some audience member's agenda. Come on, as much as I loved James Barbour's performance I don't think whistling to one of his farts appropriate!

Updated On: 11/16/08 at 10:24 PM

"(Please remember that I've heard your score only once and will be far more able to comment after repeat listening."

Yankeefan...finally you have admitted what I feel has been one of the "unjust" and "harsh" ways the music from this show has been judged...after only ONE listening, and perhaps not even in the show context. How can you really judge from one go? Read on...

"Also remember, that most audience members will make their initial impressions based on only one listening.)"

But, then, most audiences just go to be entertained, and, like Jill stated, they will not remember the music, unless it is a "catchy" repeated tune. Has anyone here ever taken "music appreciation" in school? As I remember, one reason to take this class is to LEARN to discern the different aspects of music, including things like instrument recognition, etc...If you ever take one of these classes, you will sit there "listening" to different types of music pieces, over and over again. Why? Because it is unreasonable to believe that, from one listening, you can "grasp" all the piece has to offer, and "appreciate" it. Perhaps we can all put this to practice when we judge a score, as well...IMO, it is absolutely irrational and absurd to think Broadway musicals scores should be judged any different.
I have appreciated Jill's music from listening intently to the lyrics, as well as the way they interact with the music (and, of course, this, from reapeated listenings). But I must also say that I still thought it was very "likable" from the first time I heard it. To me, Jill's music is at times haunting, at times touching, and definitely well written and memorable. Just LISTEN to it more than once, and you will "appreciate" all its aspects.
PS...really hoping (and patientely waiting) for that Broadway cast CD!
And, thanks Jill, for making yourself accessible to us on this board...it really makes for a more rounded, interesting and educated discussion of your work
BTW...for all it is worth, I also believe there were "agendas" out there by some posters regarding Tale...I'd leave it up to your imaginations from all that has been discussed, and maybe some "hidden" misdirected feelings towards this wonderfuly artistic piece of theater (or I should say, its enablers).

I buy a cast recording for two reasons:
1. I am totally enthralled by the production or
2. A few days later, I cannot get the music out of my head.


Are you really insinutating that I need to purchase the cd for every single show so that I can LEARN to appreciate it? A musical..which includes the score...is a live experience and needs to be taken in WHOLE. MOST audience members WILL only see a show once. If it does not resonate with me, why would I continue to put time and effort into it?

Should I really invest in a show that initially didn't work for me just to see if it grows on me? Do I need to view again movies I dislike too? It is the JOB of the production to grab me and make me invested in it...not the other way around.

Often, when I take my CHILDREN to see a work that is "above" Disney level, I will indeed purchase the music for them so that they have a framework to build upon when they see the show. I am an adult with extensive knowledge of music and theater...I don't rely on primers but on the visiral (sp?) impact the show produces.

---

bwaybabe2,

You are quoting me, Scott, and not Yankeefan. And, although I agree with what has been said about repeat listening and music appreciation, I still believe a Broadway composition should resonate with the listener on some level after the initial listening, most often in the theater.

As for the agenda... I really would like that elaborated on. I find it very hard to believe that Les Miserable fans would feel so threatened that they would trash A Tale of Two Cities just because it exists. And, I truly hope that the show didn't fail because of Jame Barbour (who I believe was brilliant in the role).

Therefore, why did A Tale of Two Cities arrive in New York with such a predetermined mindset to dislike it?

DramaMama - no, if you didn't like the show in the theater you shouldn't buy or listen to the recording to give it a "second chance". If you did like the show in the theater but don't think it's in any way, shape or form due to the score - because you don't find it memorable enough - then you probably should give it a second chance.

You read me like a book

And, you are absolutely right regarding the comparison: Oliver is a much better comparison than Les Miserable.

***

I find it curious that I too assumed Les Miserable until I actually experienced A Tale of Two Cities and immediately saw the structural differences. I didn't think Oliver until your post, but you are absolutely accurate in that assessment. This brings me to question my own preconceived notion of A Tale of Two Cities and / or prejudice. My first remembrance of thinking Les Miserable was when I first heard about A Tale of Two Cities and I think that was from a direct mail piece I received - internal marketing materials. It featured a beautiful and exciting image of the Tony Walton stage and David Zinn costumes - first impression, very Les Miserable.

I think the look and feel of A Tale of Two Cities spot on, so please understand I am not implying anything negative about the design(s), just that they share "historical European fiction" "abstract set design" "period costumes". Tony Walton's sets were wonderful and I believe far more dynamic than Les Miserables except for the one "magic" Les Miz moment when the barricade forms itself. (Did budget restrict automating the scaffolding - a la Broadway's Chess - or was it an artistic choice to have the cast move them?)

Having typed this, I do want to add that the similarities between A Tale of Two Cities and Les Miserable at that first impression were positive. I was looking forward to another Les Miserable. I knew the book, and so an opera - pop or classical - would be fun and potentially good. Within moment of being in the theater I knew this wasn't another Les Miserable. It was structured far more traditional Broadway musical and I thought to myself: "interesting", "cool", "let's see what they do with this".

***

So, we were all stuck on Les Miserable when we should have thought Oliver. Now that I think about it, Tony Walton's sets are actually more Oliver than Les Miserable, anyway. Hmmm. Is it that Les Miserable has had such a powerful effect on our culture?

I think your concerns regarding the opening sequence are on target. A Tale of Two Cities loses an important opportunity to set us all straight right at the beginning: "This is not Les Miserable!" To steal again from our beloved Sondheim, I remember a story he tells regarding getting the opening of, A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum, right. It wasn't until the opening worked that the show worked. The audience needed to know what they were about to see. In what context should they view the following? For A Tale of Two Cities: traditional Broadway musical, complex classic score, episodic in structure, but not Les Miserable!

Lots to think about...

---

Updated On: 4/3/10 at 02:19 PM

Son...,

I think there is a lot to what you wrote, and it seems to shine more insight than just "Les Miserable" and "James Barbour". Your comment about the pool of new producers strikes a chord in me. I believe that Broadway producers live among their own code and culture, and I wonder if this new breed paid attendance to the ruling class.

One immediately thinks, Disney. Perhaps Disney is just so powerful that they didn't have to pay their dues. Or perhaps they knew how to oil the squeaky gears and were accepted into the fold. A production like, A Tale of Two Cities, arrives with a whole different set of baggage. I wonder how welcoming the "producer's club" was as well as how humble the new kid was upon arrival?

Ah, the politics of Broadway...

Updated On: 11/17/08 at 02:30 PM