If you could Supervise a Revisal...- Page 3

[mjohnson2]

Posted: 9/3/14 at 10:39am

GavestonPS, because I like you as a poster and have no wish to get in a fight, I will just end this whole thing by saying that ANYONE CAN WHISTLE is more musically complex without question, but I don't think complex and sophisticated always come together. I mean, just take a look at the scores of ANNA KARENINA or WOMEN ON THE VERGE OF A NERVOUS BREAKDOWN if you refuse to look at Sondheim.

[JRybka]

Posted: 9/3/14 at 11:54am

On the topic of "Tanz" and "Jekyll" -- both shows done as gothic style non camp would be amazing. I get there needs to be some humor but I think Jekyll worked best when it was done during the first tour -- it was more almost erotic and sensual. TANZ just needs to be a big ass bold and very dark show (like the original which i have now see three times)
One other show that was part of the whole "mega musical" (and like one of the previous posters I am also a fan of them) -- would be Metropolis. Some of the music is STUNNING and it is a vocal powerhouse for a female lead. I really wish someone would take a hard look at it and revise it.

[darquegk]

Posted: 9/3/14 at 12:20pm

"I am songs" and "I want songs" are pretty self-explanatory. The others are terminology that aren't universally accepted, but that I pieced together from my dissertation- all of them come from one of the major works on musical composition and dramaturgy, but no one put them together.

In an "I will song," a character makes a choice, but not a specific, plot-moving action. It marks a turning point. "Being Alive" WOULD be an I will song (and one could argue that it is), but we see no sign of Bobby following up on the song's intention. His only action after the song ends is to break up with his circle of friends and wish himself a happy birthday, alone- possibly a healthy move, but a bit at odds with the sentiment of the last song.

An "I do" song is a song in which a character makes an action, moving their plot or the plot of the whole piece forward.

An "and then" song is one which, without focusing on a single character's dramatic arc, moves the plot forward. It is a song that is inherently more plot-based than character-based.

It's not a perfect science, but it's something I've had to think about as a writer before- does my show contain at least one of each kind? Does it need more? Less? Is there a category I don't need?

For reference, let's look at Sweeney Todd for an easy example of each.

"I Am" song: "The Worst Pies in London." Mrs. Lovett shows us who she is and how she thinks.
"I want" song: "By the Sea." We get a look into Mrs. Lovett's goals, and at the same time, her skewed priorities and morality.
"I will: song: "Johanna." Anthony decides that someday he will rescue Johanna, but it won't be now. His character arc changes in that moment.
"I do" song: "Pirelli's Miracle Elixir/The Contest." Sweeney and Mrs. Lovett challenge Pirelli and Toby, setting into motion the road to murder.
"And then" song: "God, That's Good." Multiple plots move forward: Mrs. Lovett's business is booming, the Beggar Woman is snooping about, and Sweeney officially begins his career as mechanized serial killer.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 9/3/14 at 10:25pm

GavestonPS, because I like you as a poster and have no wish to get in a fight, I will just end this whole thing...

Fair enough, mjohnson2. We'll agree to disagree. I promise you there are no hard feelings on my part and I look forward to disagreeing with you (and sometime agreeing, too) in the future.

(I just have to add this because it occurred to me: try tapping your foot to DOLLY! and WHISTLE. The near impossibility of doing so to most of the latter is a testament to its complexity and, in my view, sophistication. The shifting rhythms are just one reason WHISTLE requires a sophisticated ear or a learning process. But, hey, there's nothing wrong with a good toe-tapping Broadway number!)

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 9/3/14 at 10:36pm

darquegk, that response is so generous, I am embarrassed to ask additional questions:

Your "And then" reminds me of what Lehman Engel (or his workshop) calls a "musical scene". (I'm not accusing you of being derivative, just wondering if I am on the right track.)

Isn't "Not Getting Married Today" an "I do (not)" song, by your definition?

Do you use a specific term for "comment songs", such as those that dominate COMPANY?

Thanks for sharing your terminology. Even without seeing all of it, it already seems more helpful than terms like "charm song".

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 9/3/14 at 11:06pm

Regarding Anyone Can Whistle, I think that the David Ives-edited book used for the Encores production works quite well. I also think the currently licensed version of Merrily We Roll Along is wonderful. Road Show and Follies, as well. If there's a Sondheim show that needs book work, it's probably Do I Hear a Waltz, but I'm not sure how much it'd be worth to take another look at it.

A couple years ago, I would've said Candide is a show that has never quite worked, but I adored Mary Zimmerman's production. However, like all of her work, I'm wary of the idea of her writing being performed with someone else's staging in future productions.

All in all, I don't think all that many musicals need revisions. I've seen great directors and ensembles make mediocre books look extraordinary. I've also seen well-intentioned but misguided directors and ensembles make good writing look dreadful. While definitely the center of importance, there are so many other factors that go into the experience. That said, I wouldn't say no to a more pc Annie Get Your Gun.

[mjohnson2]

Posted: 9/4/14 at 12:56am

I agree about MERRILY WE ROLL ALONG. I think that right now in its current stage it is an extremely compelling story with the story being told in reverse helps the show not be so cynical and ends up almost hopeful. I do think that a small problem with the book now is that the dialogue isn't so great, which is weird because most Sondheim shows have excellent dialogue but lack the emotional backing. I do think that it could be tightened up to become one of the best books written for the theatre perhaps ever.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 9/4/14 at 7:26am

A couple years ago, I would've said Candide is a show that has never quite worked, but I adored Mary Zimmerman's production. However, like all of her work, I'm wary of the idea of her writing being performed with someone else's staging in future productions.

It's funny you say that because, with minor exceptions, she does not seem aware (by all accounts) that John Caird already did her rewrite of Candide in 1999 at the RNT with some success. Having recently done an in depth reading, I can tell you that Caird's version comes as close to the best of all possible versions as any version of Candide ever will, in my estimation.

Updated On: 9/4/14 at 07:26 AM

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 9/4/14 at 7:48am

^ Which reminds me...

Broadway premiere of Caird's 1999 version of Candide, in a production utilizing the environmental approach of the '74 Hal Prince production and the orchestrations of the '56 Broadway production. That's one revisal I'd get behind any day.

Updated On: 9/4/14 at 07:48 AM

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 9/4/14 at 7:52am

And last but not least, because I prefer my posts to be separate thoughts and not one long boring entry on meandering topics:

On the topic of "Tanz" [...] show [..] done as gothic style non camp would be amazing. [...] TANZ just needs to be a big ass bold and very dark show (like the original which i have now see three times)

The original production is wonderful, especially compared to what they did to it on Broadway, but a lean, mean, stripped-down Tanz is easier to tour, and is the polar opposite of what audiences would expect based on the flop NY production -- an attempt at flashiness that ends in tacky disaster. We step back from the mega-musical cauldron a bit, and tour it in a tight, "cheap as chips" version at appropriate venues and build a reputation and cult audience for it, and it should go over well enough to maybe one day attempt a major theatrical market in an English-speaking country again.

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 9/4/14 at 9:52pm

I can hear the groans now, but I'd haul back out ON A CLEAR DAY YOU CAN SEE FOREVER. It's one of my all-time favorite scores, and I do think it has a lot of potential that neither of the Broadway productions nor the film took full grasp of. So I'd mix the best parts of all three.

I would definitely keep the '40s Melinda and the songs from Royal Wedding, because I've always thought that the 1700s parts were stupid (though there were some good songs). Just have those scenes written a little better than they originally were.

I'd also go back to a female Daisy - making the story more complicated was certainly not the way to fix it.

The ending from the film would work best (though I'd put the title song's first appearance back in act one), but I don't think I would use the other numbers from the film (except maybe the jazzed up second half of "What Did I Have That I Don't Have").

The rest of the show would be close to the original script, which I've never thought was that bad, the main problem being the regression setting (which incidentally both revisions have tried to fix).

I had also though once of resetting it to Seattle and having an ultra-cheesey motif where for the whole show it's cloudy and rainy and then at the end (the film's ending) she comes out and it's sunny and clear. I don't know if that would be too over the top though, and how it would be shown on stage.

[Elfuhbuh]

Posted: 9/5/14 at 10:35am

"On the topic of 'Tanz' and 'Jekyll' -- both shows done as gothic style non camp would be amazing. I get there needs to be some humor but I think Jekyll worked best when it was done during the first tour -- it was more almost erotic and sensual. TANZ just needs to be a big ass bold and very dark show (like the original which i have now see three times)"


Yes, exactly. The US really just doesn't have enough of these kinds of shows at the moment.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 9/5/14 at 11:38am

^ And there's a reason, namely that they are commercial death. You have to adjust a show to fit the market in which it will succeed. DOTV was a failed attempt at doing so. Doing Tanz in the way I suggest gives it a fighting chance of growing into something bigger over time.

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 9/5/14 at 11:46am

I would love a re-boot of TOMMY.

Every time I hear it, I'm struck by how relevant it still is-- bigotry and ignorance in organized religions, generational gaps, absurdity of celebrity. I would love to see the show set during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the orchestrations revamped (no synths!), and a large emphasis on the modern day celebrity culture.

[darquegk]

Posted: 9/5/14 at 1:33pm

I've pitched a production set in the then-failing steeltown of Pittsburgh, PA, set beginning in the Vietnam era. The story's arc has no actual British content or language, and moving it forward 50 years and across the pond would highlight a number of themes that DO show up in the story: the frustrated working class of the '70s economic downturn, the rise of punk, arcade gaming and daytime talk TV personalities in the 70's and 80's.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 9/5/14 at 9:29pm

Let us clarify that Tommy in both instances refers to the version with a Des McAnuff book? Because pretty much any other version seems to me to be mostly devoid of time-specific anything, except for the song "'21" (or "'51" in the film).