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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.)

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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

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