Jagged Little Pill preview thread — Page 5

Markecib said: "It’s currently 1:45 and they still haven’t opened the house. Wonder what issues they’re having or if they were making a change and it took longer."

I'm assuming the show went on. Any word on the delay?

ACL2006 said: "Markecib said: "It’s currently 1:45 and they still haven’t opened the house. Wonder what issues they’re having or if they were making a change and it took longer."

I'm assuming the show went on. Any word on the delay?"

The went on. I talked to a few of the staff they said they were working thru a technical issue with the speakers.

Updated On: 11/9/19 at 07:05 PM

A FEW SPOILERS

It's become a difficult piece to discuss, craft-wise, because any naysaying inspires a lesson or two in coolness from the cognoscenti. Apparently, we "just don't get it." I was told elsewhere that "life is messy," and so the show captures the essence of that existential chaos, stacking societal ills upon one another to illuminate the inherent messiness of living. I "get" that as the goal, and rebel against the sledgehammer execution. What is intended to be an assemblage of sociopolitical puzzle pieces to me feels like utmost contrivance. One family must bear a catalog of trauma, or bear witness to it over a few days or weeks. Once these crises pile up, the show cannot decide how to resolve them, or where we should look for catharsis and resolution. And so we get shorthanded turns, and hoary cliches. If you run away looking for your identity, you go to the East Village, because they's where Self Discovery awaits, per "Rent." if you're a kid of color with no racial awareness, plenty of other spots would offer quicker access; but, of course she's a poet, and poets blossom in the Village. When you are a straight white workaholic father who doesn't have time for family, you take up the guitar when your wife is in rehab, and presto, you have Your Priorities Straight. And the biggest catharsis, in the ostensible protagonist (though she is abandoned as such, once the story needs her as an antagonistic scold and thus more obstacle than antihero) happens off-stage, during a 90-day rehab. (News flash: Oxycodin addiction takes 90 days to detox; you then move on to secondary treatment.) The primary color depiction of issues themselves would never be acceptable in movie-of-the-week but we're expected to buy every slapped on happy-enough ending. The bookwriting has flashes of genuine wit, but feels cobbled together in a pressing need to find song cues for stand-alone ruminations on "messiness' that have more potency untethered to cliches about suburban malaise.

Trust us, those who shame our dismay over the contrived storytelling: we're cool enough to "get" this material. To "get" the maddening contradictions in a post-millennial culture indifferent to the sources of human suffering. Some of us feel manipulated in all of the wrong ways. Morissette's work is iconoclastic and deserves better. And I write that as a major fan of Cody and Paulus.

Updated On: 11/10/19 at 09:00 AM

The same thing happened on Wednesday. Two people stood in the mezz, and the cast waited. You could feel the sense of expectation, to rouse the house to its feet. It took way too long to feel spontaneous, and only about 35-40% stood, slowly. I take nothing away from the stellar performance, but pushing this O in the middle of the second act defines the problems with the show. It's like "The Miller's Son" or "Doatsy Mae" stopping their shows. The character is important but subsidiary. Giving Jo the best known number was a risk, and though it serves the great performer, it doesn't serve the shape of the storytelling.

Saw the matinee today and while I do recognize the attempt to make the story tighter compared to the ART tryouts, it still felt quite lacking to me. I echo a lot of what Auggie27 has posted above. Cutting a few of those plot points would have probably helped in reaching a better resolution for the book. For what it's worth, today's matinee audience seemed to loved the whole thing and the standing O after " You Oughta Know" did not feel as forced as some are referring(Personally, I preferred her performance of this song in the ART tbh). My least favorite thing about this show is the new choreography. Aside from a number or two, there was too much movement when I felt like there didn't need to be and it took away from the experience.

Overall, the show is still a good time. As someone who grew up listening to this album and Alanis, I quite enjoyed myself and I thought the performances of Stanley and Gooding were quite spectacular. I wish the show had focused on them more.

Weren't the majority of the ART reviews raves? If there haven't been many, if any, changes then why would it be any different?

Is it flawed? Sure. All shows are flawed in one way or another, and it's funny to see people bat an eye at some shows and then go head first at criticizing others. It's great for what it is. They do an amazing job at intertwining Alanis' song's and for most audience members of that show... That's all they care about.

YvanEhtNioj said: "Weren't the majority of the ART reviews raves? If there haven't been many, if any, changes then why would it be any different?

"

There are so many variables that can sway the perceived response of the show (eg who went Boston vs NYC) that you can’t necessarily asume the same response once it came to NY from the out-of-town tryout.

FWIW, I did make the trip to Boston last summer and I echo a lot of opinions here.... it’s a great Alanis concert, but the book needed a lot of work. I’ll eventually see it here, but I’m in no hurry and will probably wait for the tourist rush to pass.

Well I found this show to be absolutely awful.

It starts out okay, I suppose, but very quickly devolves into an absolute mess of a multitude of conflicting plotlines and issues. There is so much going on, and so many important issues weaved into the fabric of this show that none of them are handled with the nuance or depth they deserve. While it's admirable to see a new musical want to deal with subjects such as rape or drug abuse or racial issues, it becomes insulting to see how thinly and simply those subjects are ultimately dealt with. It feels like every 2 minutes we're off to another character and their problems, and thus everything because awash in a sea of archetypes and cliches and buzz words with no meaning or impact or genuine feeling. By act 2 I found myself cringing and rolling my eyes. It's embarrassing.

The cast is not untalented. There are some good vocals, and to the point that the material allows them to find anything meaningful or interesting to do, Elizabeth Stanley and Lauren Patten stand out. Talented folks like Derek Klena are positively wasted. The choreography is interesting and unlike what we typically see, but the juxtaposition between it and the songs and tone doesn't work. The set is deathly cheap, and Diane Paulus's direction is turgid and bland. I have no idea why she re-used her bit from Waitress with the band rolling on and off the stage throughout the show.

As I left I heard many people praising the show. I have a feeling it will be a hit with general audiences as they think they are seeing important theater. But for me it was a thinly constructed and borderline offensive mess with nothing interesting to say. Trying to turn pre-existing songs into a cohesive narrative rarely works. This is proof of that right here.

From what i've heard from friends, coworkers, etc..the average theater patrons are loving it. A lot of my friends have actually raved about it, but still pointed out the flaws.

I work across the street from the show and sometimes go watch the crowds leave the afternoon performance, and all I hear are positives thoughts for the most part.