JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR LA JOLLA- Page 2

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:21am

"JCS is a joint protagonist structure. I'm not kidding with the Wicked reference. And this is as silly as debating If that show is Glinda's story or Elphabas-- the answer is they are one and the same and neither's journey could exist without the actions of the other."

Since you added that, I will agree, although I don't think the debate is "silly." Show curtains are silly. My original point was to say they are equal, or at least to argue that Judas alone is not the protagonist of JCS.

And it is possible to have two protagonists. A Mozart-Salieri comparison in Amadeus would also be valid.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:23am

Best12- one gentle reminder- judas doesn't really die- he continues his perspective and his 11 o clock number is performed after he is on a spiritual plane-- a brilliant touch for a show in which resurrection is expected ( and isn't shown) for Jesus' character.
Updated On: 11/25/11 at 07:23 AM

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:26am

No gentle reminder (or condescension) needed, MB. At that point, Judas is the leader of the Greek chorus, knocking it out of the park. But his participation in the plot or story ends when he dies.

Updated On: 11/25/11 at 07:26 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:33am

His active participation yet, but obviously the ramifications of events that Judas has created continues to play out for Jesus, which is what makes this a joint protagonist story!

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:36am

HAMLET, MACBETH, EDWARD II, RICHARD II, DEATH OF A SALESMAN.

Just a short list of tragedies that have a scene and at least one major plot step initiated by the protagonist but occurring AFTER his death.

***

But the time you got to Amadeus/Salieri, I began to think "dual protagonist structure" was just another term for protagonist/antagonist. Judas/Jesus might be described as the latter, even Elphaba/Glenda. There's no rule that says the protagonist and antagonist can't have moments of collaboration.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:39am

I will agree! Go back to my original post in this thread to see that was my point all along. They should be equal in the show. It's definitely not the Judas Show alone!

But since Judas's entire involvement in the story and this show is singing about and interacting with Jesus, I do tend to think the show is more about Jesus than Judas. But it is a joint-protagonist situation, yes.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:40am

I agree Gaveston but I think at least in the situation of AMADEUS and JCS (and WICKED) the debate of which character actually is antagonist/protagonist (in classic) terms is unsolvable because I think in each of these cases, the answer is, that the author is saying both characters are. Each is the protagonist/antagonist for each other's journey.

And I agree Best12, It might just be a situation in which the actor playing Judas is more charismatic than the actor playing Jesus. For my money the challenge in any of these joint protagonist stories is that you have to have two charismatic leads on equal footing.




Updated On: 11/25/11 at 07:40 AM

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 7:43am

^ A good point, MB, which is why I prefer the joint-protagonist description rather than protagonist-antagonist.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 8:00am

"And I agree Best12, It might just be a situation in which the actor playing Judas is more charismatic than the actor playing Jesus. For my money the challenge in any of these joint protagonist stories is that you have to have two charismatic leads on equal footing."


That was the reason for my first post in this thread, MB ... because the original post here says that in the new La Jolla production, they suddenly realized it was "Judas's Show." Apparently, an understudy went on as Jesus, which hopefully had something to do with that reaction. For me, if you see a production of JCS and you think it's Judas's show, you didn't see a strong actor/singer playing Jesus.

I also think a lot of people have trouble relating to Jesus and his inner turmoil, but they can relate to the inner turmoil of Judas much easier. That may have something to do with certain people gravitating toward Judas and seeing it as "his show." I have trouble with that because his entire existence in JCS is to sing about and discuss Jesus. He tells us nothing about himself, except his conflicted opinion of Jesus. That basically IS his whole character.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 2:50pm

I agree and would go so far as to say that Judas represents the 'us' of the audience who all in some way shape or form are on an eternal quest/conflict for spiritual clarity.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 4:06pm

best12bars, I DISAGREE COMPLETELY.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 8:47pm

With so many clear parallels to our modern world, it's easy to see why many directors set the show in the present. Not only does it retain its power and its point, it helps make the story accessible to a contemporary audience in a way that the more minimalist, event-driven style of the Bible cannot.

To me, setting the show completely in the present is more of a lazy copout that fails to analyze the structure of the show as written. Setting the show in the present renders the title song practically irrelevant. That one number, where Judas returns in present day to comment on Jesus and the events thus far, is the only moment in the show that occurs outside the framework of the story. It's the only moment that really SHOULD occur in a modern setting. And it's the number that conceptually links the score to the book and solidifies the the two.

Judas is not a protagonist at all. He's referred to historically as the ultimate traitor, so he was brilliantly used as narrator providing the "devil's advocate" and contemporary voice of reason to the actions as they occur. The plot and narrative do not revolve around Judas. He only comments on them. His suicide is a result of his own realization that Jesus was, in fact, the protagonist of the story. Otherwise, he would have had no compassion for Jesus or remorse for his own actions. Valjean was not a double-protagonist of Les Miserables. He was central to the plot and turned out not to be as bad as he (or we) assumed. But that doesn't make him a protagonist, nor does it make Les Miserables his story. It just makes him (and the story) more interesting and dynamic.

And no, Judas was not an antagonist. Jesus makes that clear when he predicts the actions of Judas and then goes on to accept his fate in Gethsemane.

Updated On: 11/25/11 at 08:47 PM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/25/11 at 9:20pm

I love JCS, and enjoyed the London revival when I saw it (though I had major issues)--which I've heard was oddly and randomly changed for the worse when it was filmed, toured in the UK and brought to Broadway. But I really do believe it's a show that is near impossible to make really work on the stage--and I know that's not an opinion others share. That's one reason that the film works really well for me.

It was written as a record album/concert, and wile it's a very theatrical score for a record, I don't think it easily translates to theatre visuals (probably one reason that ever since the original Broadway production people tend to want to dress it up as much as possible--although I know the much longer running London production of the 70s, which I've never even found photos of, was also much more simply staged). For whatever reason, that can translate easier to a movie shot in an almost pre music videos style.

I also really feel one reason Evita did work so well on the stage is because Hal Prince insisted on going through the whole score and changing it up, making it more theatrical. While I'm mixed on Parker's film, in some ways it goes back to Evita's concept album, and that may work again because much of it is basically a long music video.

As for what era JCS should be set in, I do think the movie got it right (though I'm not necesarily down with the Godsepll-ish "actors putting on a show" concept). It shouldn't be full out present, and that does ruin the coup de theatre that the title song can be, but it really doesn't work for me when set in a firm and "accurate" (at least pseudo accurate) era.

[dented146]

Posted: 11/26/11 at 3:20am

I saw the original London production which took place on stage made up of glass columns which would rise from the floor in different colors to create objects on the set. I was so mesmerized by the columns that I barely took note of the story.

I will have the good fortune to see this production tonight and I sincerely appreciated the previous debate as it will open my eyes and give me much more to consider.

I'm sure that others in our small group will want to read these comments and judge for themselves.
Updated On: 11/26/11 at 03:20 AM

[East Village]

Posted: 11/26/11 at 11:49am

There was a certain shock value in the original concept recording that was also present in the original NY and London productions -- and to some extent, the movie. All created this effect by mixing modern and surrealist concepts into the story which mass audiences hadn't really seen before. Subsequent productions never really seemed to captured this edginess or cultural relevance with ease.

Remember JCS appeared in the Vietnam Era when Catholics were painting over their churches white, getting rid of latin masses and attempting to address contemporary issues in their liturgy. This really shocked a lot of people. By the 80s the church had already begun being sidelined out of mainstream culture by fundamentalists and the political right -- and ultimately buried by the pedophilia scandals. A lot of subsequent productions, including the 2000 revival, would attempt to bring contemporary elements into the show with black leather angels and S&M roman soldiers. This never really worked . It just appeared forced & strained -- or plain laughable.

I've heard in this new production, McAnuff discovers an emotional subtext in the story and stages the production as an emotional menage a trois between Jesus, Mary & Judas. All the scenes between Mary and Jesus have Judas on stage eavesdropping. And the scenes between Judas and Jesus have Mary watching from the sides. -- both Mary and Judas constantly suspicious, jealous, and watchful of each others relationship with Jesus. A friend had seen it in Stratford and said the effect is absolutely unnerving.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/26/11 at 2:14pm

^I don't like the word "discovered." I think that subtext was always there. I wouldn't give McAnuff that credit. The last revival even touched on it with that long lip lock between Judas and Jesus. The only difference here is that McAnuff seems to have made that subtext the focal point of his staging.

[gvendo2005]

Posted: 11/27/11 at 9:08am

How I see it:

2000 REVIVAL -- Subtextually speaking, Jesus and Judas are coming out of a relationship, Judas is insanely jealous of Mary for coming between them. Tony Vincent didn't play this as much live, but as CATSNYrevival points out, it's patently obvious in the video, down to Jesus picking up Judas in an alleyway during "Heaven on Their Minds" and rebuffing his advances during the song, and the long lip lock in the garden that YouTube punters have dubbed "Brokeback Gethsemane."

LA JOLLA -- Have not seen it myself, but from what I observe from clips and press notices, it seems to be more even-handed, playing up Jesus and Mary, with Judas' love as unrequited. Anyone who's seen it, here or in Stratford, I would appreciate any input.

[canmark]

Posted: 11/27/11 at 9:54am

I saw JCS in Stratford and the relationship is not presented as a blatant love triangle, per se. But I think Judas thinks of himself and Jesus as BFFs ('I've been your right-hand man all along,' he sings), and then along comes this woman who doesn't seem to do much other than massage his feet and hair--yet he (Jesus) seems quite devoted to her. Judas is frustrated because Mary seems to be taking Jesus away from his work. Both Judas and Mary may be vying for Jesus' attention and eavesdropping on each other somewhat jealously--and at the same time may be afraid that that their own actions might 'bring him down' (as Mary sings). From Jesus' perspective, he has a personal relationship with Mary and a business (and friendship) relationship with Judas. He may or may not be aware of the conflict between them, like the man who has a longtime best buddy and a new girlfriend.

[VernonGersch]

Posted: 11/28/11 at 12:16am

some real debtaing going on over here...haven't seen this much back and forth since Wimbledon Men's Semi-Finals (and I mean that in a really good way)

i'd agree that it's a dual protagnaist show - just never even considered it given title and what little i knew of the show.

[dented146]

Posted: 11/28/11 at 1:40am

canmarks description is fairly accurate. Saw this last night. I thought the subtext of the physical attraction between JC and Judas was reasonably subtle.

It may be that there are two protagonists but Josh Young so steals the show as Judas that it might as well be one. Young dominates and drives the story.

This is an extremely complex production in terms of style, energy and movement. It's a very physical production and flows quite well. Melissa O'Neal was filling in for Chilina Kennedy as Mary Magdalene. I wasn't impressed with her role but I haven't seen Kennedy.

I can see why critics might enjoy and appreciate this production from both an artistic and creative viewpoint. It's very impressive and the ending is sensational. But I'm not so sure the average patron will be as thrilled.

[BroadwayNorth2]

Posted: 12/1/11 at 3:43pm

Stratford's Broadway-Bound JCS receives a rave in San Diego:

http://local.sandiego.com/arts/jesus-christ-superstar-at-the-la-jolla-playhouse