Jerome Robbins' original choreography and how much can be changed or not

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 3:50pm

EricMontreal22 brought up an interesting question on a different thread as to which revival of musicals which involve either Jerome Robbins' original choreography or in the case of FIDDLER direction could be changed and what stays.

 

In my frank two cents, I think as long as Robbins' original concept and intention is hugely respected in a revival that wants to do something a bit different with the choreography then it's fine. That's why Christopher Gattelli was nominated last year for his work on Bartlett Sher's revival of THE KING AND I because Jerome's work and spirit is there but due to how big the Vivian Beaumont stage is, Gattelli was allowed to do different ideas to make the entire stage used to perfect use. If the ideas and intentions are not respected and a revival changes for the sake of change, then it ends up like the boring and bland 2009 revival of WEST SIDE STORY.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 4:06pm

Thanks for creating this thread!  I am never sure what the deal is with Robbins' shows, but I THINK any major production of at least his three where the choreography has been preserved (WSS, Gypsy and Fiddler,) have to use his choreography, but maybe they can make a special request.  I don't believe this is true of King and I, but could be wrong, but the only thing really saved (and the only big dance piece) is Uncle Tom, and anyone would be foolishly not to use his choreography at least for the basis of it, as you said.

(Not sure if there are any other choreographers who have this requirement.  A Chorus Line does I believe although I have heard of professional "re-imagined" productions that don't use the Bennett, but not sure if that was legal or not.  Certainly Fosse--who wasn't even very keen on his stage works being preserved on video--doesn't fall into that category though, as seen in  the last Sweet Charity revival, that's kinda too bad :P )

Arthur Laurents was sneaky/terrible with that WSS revival--he somehow managed to allow them to cut back the Somewhere ballet, by chopping off the "Nightmare" finale which, really, is the *point* of it.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 4:22pm

I, but could be wrong, but the only thing really saved (and the only big dance piece) is Uncle Tom

 

The build and sweet and eroticism of "Shall We Dance" is also Robbins's conception on pretty much his execution.

 

If you think about it, there's really no way it could be improved upon.

 

 

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 4:31pm

Absolutely, though I am sure many companies would borrow that and just not give him credit (or even think to.)

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 4:33pm

I agree, there is no way that anyone can do anything to improve upon those two moments in the revival of THE KING AND I where Robbin's concept and execution still get gasps from people, even me. But that's one of the reasons why I love what Bartlett Sher and Christopher Gattelli did, they respect and kept the ideas that Robbins had done and staged them in ways that it still feels fresh and new after all these years.

 

I swear when Ken Watanabe put his arm around Kelli O'Hara's waist and pulled her in before they did the great polka in "Shall We Dance", a pin dropped. 

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 4:49pm

Watch that same moment with Yul Brynner and Patricia Morrison in the original staging, then Brynner and Deborah Kerr in the movie staging and Ken Watanabe and Kelli O'Hara in Christopher Gattelli's Lincoln Center restaging:

 

 

"Shall We Dance" starts at 2:15 mark:

 

 

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 4:58pm

That moment in the Christopher Gattelli restaging at 3:44 still gets me everytime. I mean...WOW. I have complete faith that Sher's upcoming FIDDLER ON THE ROOF revival which begins previews in six days, will have moments like that.

Updated On: 11/14/15 at 04:58 PM

[Tom5]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 5:18pm

Choreography notation can be copyrighted and if Mr. Robbin's original choreography was used I imagine royalties must be paid. But how a court could determine if it was - would the trial judge and later the appeal judges - have to attend a performance? - is beyond me.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 5:24pm

I don't think things like this have ever involved the court   I should be careful with my terms.  But when the property is licensed for a major production that is one of the requirements (with these few shows, anyway.)

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 5:38pm

Speaking of Jerome Robbins, I just wonder what would've happened if Arthur Laurents didn't barge in, ruin the revival of WEST SIDE STORY and just let more talented people than he is run it. If the musical gets revived again, I hope it's done better.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 5:48pm

I saw it on tour, where I think much of the Spanish had been cut back, so can't speak for Broadway but my main issue was none of the changes were improvements to me.  It didn't feel more "real" or whatever he claimed it would be, or didn't offer me any new revelations into the musical.  I admit, often I can fall into the trap of a traditionalist--if I had a billion dollars I would fund as close as a recreation as possible of the original Follies production, for example, so take this with a grain of salt, but when I was 18 (so... around 1999?) I saw the London revival of WSS that used the original production designs and staging recreated by one of the original dancers, which was purposefully cast with a bunch of young unknowns.  I found it *thrilling* and a far better experience.

[Mike Costa]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:01pm

Eric is correct.  The licensing agreement for Class  A  productions of these shows requires the use of Mr. Robbins' choreography.  Ditto A Chorus Line and Michael Bennett.  Also, revival  productions of Hal Prince shows must be first offered to him to direct if he is interested.  Remember, he was a producer first so he knows how to write a good contract.

 

As for the revival of West Side Story, Arthur Laurents was making so many changes that he always wanted back when Mr. Robbins was alive (and not allowing them) that Sondheim famously threw up his hands and walked out of rehearsal one day never to return.  

[Jonwo]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:03pm

I think reviving a production and just keeping everything the same does mean the production might be seen as a museum piece which theatre should never be. Sometimes having a new creative team can breath new life into a show, the 1998 revival of Cabaret or the 1994 production of Carousel for example. 

 

 

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:14pm

Jonwo said: "I think reviving a production and just keeping everything the same does mean the production might be seen as a museum piece which theatre should never be. Sometimes having a new creative team can breath new life into a show, the 1998 revival of Cabaret or the 1994 production of Carousel for example. 

 

That is a good point until you see footage the 2001 revival of Follies (to me which was awful), the 2002 revival of Flower Drum Song (which in my top 3 of worst musical revivals ever), the 2003 revival of Nine (which I found to be pretty boring except for the moments that did shine), and the bleak 2004 revival of Fiddler On The Roof (which I thought was a miscast and misdirected mess); which makes the statement not entirely true.

 

If one changes way too much it becomes less innovation and more infuriating, frustrating and rather un-memorable evening at the theater. But I agree about the revivals of Carousel and Cabaret where the changes that were made helped the pieces to be striking and memorable which is what I wished that the other revivals I mentioned had.

Updated On: 11/14/15 at 06:14 PM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:17pm

Absolutely agreed--and I saw the Carousel on tour as a teen which blew me away.  I liked Cabaret a lot too, although over time my appreciation for it has slightly dimmed.

That said, there are examples where going back to the original (as much as possible and hopefully re-examining WHY things were done a certain way,) can bring about new insights that had been forgotten over the years.  While not remotely based on the original Show Boat, Prince (and a couple of 80s productions) went back to the original scripts and restored a lot of elements that had been over the years white washed away over the years.  A better example I can think of is in the ballet world where the Mariinsky 10-15 years back, and just last year Ratmansky at ATB went back over the original notations for Sleeping Beauty (and, in the case of Petersburg, the designs as well,) and much was revealed that over the years had been forgotten or had been wrongfully assumed to be too old fashioned--both were massive artistic successes.  Part of that is because Tchaikovsky composed a lot of the music to choreographer Petipa's instructions--so there's a disconnect when the choreography is changed (which isn't to say wonderful new choreography is impossible.)

Which brings me back to choreographers and Broadway.  I think it could be argued that with many of these musicals we're talking about (especially with FOsse, Bennett, Robbins, etc) the choreography was as much a part of the text as the libretto and music--in some cases it even came first.  While again I think there's also as much room for new interpretation, that does give a good argument to the fact that returning to the original choreography can be a valuable thing--and I'm sure some choreographers are annoyed that their work isn't treated the same way (though of course there are reasons for this--dance notation is much harder to do right than words or sheet music, etc, etc)  EVen though it was a university production, the recent televised recreation of the original Oklahoma! production--or as closely done as possible--at UNC was wonderful to watch.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:19pm

My point being sometimes what people think are the traditional stagings of these shows have been so diluted over the years of countless restagings, tours, etc, that it's worthwhile to truly try to return--with an artistic eye--to the original, even if you don't try to recreate it but as a basis for your new production.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:26pm

EricMontreal22 said: "My point being sometimes what people think are the traditional stagings of these shows have been so diluted over the years of countless restagings, tours, etc, that it's worthwhile to truly try to return--with an artistic eye--to the original, even if you don't try to recreate it but as a basis for your new production.

 

Exactly Eric. I agree 100% with that, which is why Bartlett Sher is great for what he does and should keep doing for these revivals.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:35pm

Yes, I agree completely with you about Sher

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/14/15 at 6:43pm

It seems that every musical revival that Bartlett Sher and his crew touches it turns into not only memorable, but striking and beautiful productions which I think both South Pacific and The King and I are proof of it. Now if things go well during previews, he might as well add Fiddler on the Roof to that list.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/15/15 at 12:42am

 

I have a feeling this Fiddler will be epic.

 

[ljay889]

Posted: 11/15/15 at 1:18am

Doesn't London's Gypsy revival have new choreography? 

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/15/15 at 11:41am

PalJoey said:  

I have a feeling this Fiddler will be epic.

 

With a talented cast and crew behind it, I think so too. Plus it can make one forget that the Broadway Theater is a slightly cavernous place.

Updated On: 11/15/15 at 11:41 AM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/15/15 at 1:01pm

ljay889 said: "Doesn't London's Gypsy revival have new choreography? 

 

"

On the webpage for the show only Stephen Mear is listed so you are right, though Robbins gets his standard Original Production Directed and Choreographed by. It will be interesting to see how it differs

[Smaxie]

Posted: 11/15/15 at 1:21pm

The choreography in the London Gypsy is new, though similar in concept to the Robbins originals.  The strobe light Baby June transition is also used.  It's certainly hard to top it.

In addition to Small House and Shall We Dance, the other Robbins pieces in King and I are March of the Siamese Children and Getting To Know You.  I don't think any of it was set by Gattelli.  I think it was set by Associate Choreographer Greg Zane.