Jersey Boys...why best musical?- Page 2

[bostonbroadwayfan]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 6:56pm

I hate to repeat myself but who cares where the music came from?

Someone still had to coreograph and produce it for the stage. Get over it.

[new_philosophy_girl]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:23pm

Damn straight bbfan!!

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:28pm

I've never been more sure of a musical that deserved to win Best Musical.

JERSEY BOYS won because it was the superior show with a superior cast and one hell of a story.

I could not be happier right now.

[jasonf]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:29pm

I still want to know what music from Hairspray or Ragtime wasn't written for those shows!

[kidmanboy]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:31pm

I don't care whether the music was written for the piece or not. BOOK All Shook Up) I fail to see the great book All Shook Up) I fail to see the great book in Jersey Boys that everyone else seems to see. I found it pedestrian at best. All of the humor was TERRIBLY forced, and there wasn't any dramatic tension at all. I didn't care what happened. A character got divorced? I didn't even know they were married to begin with. And the songs are mostly presented in concert form and therefore have no dramatic action to them and I found myself growing bored during many of them (I've heard four seasons music before...I don't need to pay 110 dollars to listen to a cover band.)

[BroadwayChica]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:33pm

I didn't think Jersey Boys deserved to win Best Musical (I'ma Drowsy Chaperone fan), but not because it lacks an original score. The fact is, as many people have posted here, this is a very well thought out, acted and directed show. There's a story being told, and the music serves that purpose, quite skillfully, I might add.

Jersey Boys proves that you CAN use existing music, and still create a unique, effective piece of musical theater.

Now, having said that, I still would've rather seen "Drowsy Chaperone" win.

[XOsweet_dancerOX]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:36pm

i think it was a good choice for best musical but simply more of a suprise. Especially after seeing who won as best actress in a musical.

[sanda]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:39pm

I am not talking the situation of ITW and POTO which both have origianl scores. I am talking about a jukebox musical and an original-score based musical.

of course it matters about where music comes from. Score is one of the most important part of musical. It is called MUSICAL, for God's sake. How can you say it is the same with one writing the music from scratch and another just borrowing ?

Jersey won the best musical this year. That is OK. I have no problem with it. A jukebox musical can be better than many original but mediocre musicals. God knows I love some jukebox musicals, like Mama Mia!.

But you cannot ignore the importance of the composer. I ask my question again. If you are the voter for a jukebox musical and another original musical and you love both equally, which one will you give the award?





Updated On: 6/12/06 at 07:39 PM

[new_philosophy_girl]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:46pm

I agree completely with you about the importance of the composer, and that is what the Best Original Score Tony honors. Best Musical involves the whole creative and production process, not just the music.

[sanda]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:53pm

of course. but when other equals, (production,etc), I do believe whether the music is original counts.

Jersey won because it's better in other stuff than other original-score based musicals this year . Also because the original scores are not strong either. Not because music is not an important aspect in the decision of best musical award.

[bostonbroadwayfan]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 7:59pm

I disagree on the importance of the composer or pop music.
It's what the final product is all about.
I wasn't a huge Frankie Valli fan before this but I loved what they did with his music.

[kaboodles041]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 8:01pm

"Jersey Boys...Why Best Musical?"

Because it won. Case closed. The Tonys are over. If you didn't like it...tough.

[sanda]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 8:05pm

>>I disagree on the importance of the composer or pop music.
It's what the final product is all about.
I wasn't a huge Frankie Valli fan before this but I loved what they did with his music.

That's called hard work vs easy work. To admit the difference is called fair.

[Hawker]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 9:56pm

"Jersey Boys" won becuase Marshall Brickman pulled off a minor miracle. He wrote dialogue that could have been written by David Mamet or Arthur Miller. THIS is why the show became a blockbuster--not because of the music.

Twwo examples: The scene when Frankie tells the mob boss that the group will pay off Tommy's debts (Mamet) and Frankie's brief monologue after hearing of his daughter's suicide (Miller).

Brickman's craftmanship was so elegant and exquisite you couldn't even see "the spring within the spring" that made the show work.

I can't really distinguish an excellent opera aria by a tenor or soprano form a time-capsule one.

I imagine it's the same thing with dramaturgy. Some people can't see distinguish the good from the extrordinary.

[billygoatgirl300]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 10:21pm

"Jersey Boys...Why Best Musical?"

Because it won. Case closed. The Tonys are over. If you didn't like it...tough.

Thank you for saying that. I swear the people who are upset about Jersey Boys winning are just as bad as the teenyboppers who were ranting about Wicked not winning in 2004.

[me3]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 10:34pm

COOL someone agreed with me YAY

[JustChillin8908]

Posted: 6/12/06 at 10:38pm

"I still want to know what music from Hairspray or Ragtime wasn't written for those shows!"

Seriously, if you're gonna make a statement like that then you better have some proof to back it up!

[mediakilled]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 12:38am

This is where there is misrepresentation.

As I stated in my post (if you read it the first time around)

I'm not knocking Jersey Boys..it's a great show!

But how does a knock off of vh1's's 'Behind the Music' with a catalog of old songs manage to win over shows that had material created for the stage like Drowsy? or even Wedding SInger (minus the 2 songs from the movie)...

I just don't get the rules and regulations.

LIKE I SAID...I'm happy Jersey Boys won...it's a nice surprise.....
but it's just so bizarre that people who spend alot of time and effort to write a great book,score and all that mumbo jumbo....get trumped by a show that was easy to just interweave text inbetween very well known catalogue music.

It reminded me of the year Contact won....it just seems no effort or thought is put into those kinds of shows as much as original pieces.

If that's the case,...I'll just take Spice Girls songs and weave them together in my new show 'Spice'...and then write some catchy lines and narration and hope for my Tony win for best musical of the year.

I don't know...it just seems like an easy way out.

I guess it doesn;t bother me as much as contact did. That was 2 hours of canned music with no singers and no dialogue...just a dance concert. now THAT was heinous.

hey,..it's just an opinion. don't kill the original post...but i'm sure there's people out there who agree with me.

I'm just a fan of people who put original work out there.

(But I did enjoy Jersey Boys...don't get all 'up in my grill'..and defensive..it is just a thought..) chillax and take a pill..

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 8:36am

Most people agree that Contact was not a "musical" because there was no live music or singing. But that has nothing to do with a "jukebox musical" (which Jersey Boys is not) winning Best Musical, or even worse, creating a separate category. A musical that does not have an original score is still a musical. And if you think writing an original story around preexisting songs is easier, then by all means, try it. Jersey Boys is slightly different from s jukebox musical because of how the songs are used. Nonetheless, it is still very difficult. Try writing your Spice Girls musical and see how easy it is.

[sanda]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 8:52am

Jersey Boys is not a jukebox musical. Then what it is? Ok, let's call it "non-original score based musical(NOSBM)". will that make u feel better?

[bostonbroadwayfan]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:36am

>That's called hard work vs easy work. To admit the difference is called fair.<

In this case it's sour grapes. You cant seem to get passed the pop music factor.
Try telling the folks who put together JB that it was easy.
So how do you feel when a play is produced from a book? The script is already there is that Original? It's all about what comes out of it.

[sanda]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 9:47am

you misunderstood me. I said, I have no problem for Jersey's winning at all. Is that sour grape?

I am not saying putting a musical together easy. I am saying borrowing the music instead of composing by yourself is easy. Understand the difference?

and if we don't need to consider the factor of original score vs jukebox music (sorry, non-original score based), why divide theater award into play and musical? Let "History boys" and "Jersey Boys" compete together! Hell, History boys featured music of Rogers as well. "it weaved the music and dialoge seemlessly."

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 10:59am

The term "jukebox musical" was coined after the success of Mamma Mia. It refers to a show with an original story created around a catalogue of songs in which the lyrics are incorporated into the plot. The songs of Mamma Mia actually contribute to the story. Jersey Boys is a bioghraphical catalogue musical like its predecessors, Elvis! and Buddy. The book is a biography of the artist(s) whose music is performed in the style of the original artist and few, if any, songs actually tell the story or comment on the action through the lyrics. They are simply performance numbers. And then there's the musical revue, which is a bookless musical in which the songs share a common theme, usually the composer/lyricist, or in the case of Jerome Robbins Broadway and Fosse, the choreographer. Both the catalogue and jukebox musicals are wildly popular in the West End. Buddy ran for over ten years and the first successful jukebox musical I can think of, Return to the Forbidden Planet, beat out Miss Saigon for the Olivier Award for Best Musical (and in my opinion, rightly so, the show is freakin' brilliant).

These various styles of musical theatre all existed prior to Mamma Mia and this has been explained numerous times on this message board, and in reviews and articles. People just enjoy misusing the term "jukebox musical" because it is catchy and they believe it indicates something which is inferior.

"I am not saying putting a musical together easy. I am saying borrowing the music instead of composing by yourself is easy. Understand the difference?"

I understand what you are trying to say, but its really not a fair comparison. Most often, the composer is not writing the book, so it is neither easier nor more difficult if he is not involved. Either you hire a composer or you don't. It is actually easier to have songs written for a specific plot and be able to make changes when necessary than to write a plot around songs (especially when limited to the catalogue of one artist) which may not allow you to change lyrics, tone, or certain arrangements due to copyright. With original music, you may change whatever is necessary to fit your book and vice-versa. It is far more versatile, creatively.

"why divide theater award into play and musical?"

Because they are two entirely different genres. Everything from direction to costuming to performance is handled entirely differently. The same cannot be said of the difference between a musical with an original score and a musical with preexisting songs.

Updated On: 6/13/06 at 10:59 AM

[bostonbroadwayfan]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 11:38am

>>I am not saying putting a musical together easy. I am saying borrowing the music instead of composing by yourself is easy. Understand the difference?<<

Of course it's easier if you have something there to work with but you make it sound like they just slapped it together.

[sanda]

Posted: 6/13/06 at 12:20pm

the missusing of "jukebox musical"? Maybe, but I do believe the reason that people apply this term to Jersey is to emphasize the "non-original score" part,not the whole musical catelog theory you talked about.

Here is my point: this discussion is not about the clarification of Jersey's "jukebox musical or bioghraphical catalogue musical ". That is not the point. Is Jersey a musical featuring non-original score? Yes, it is. Can a jukebox musical (sorry again, non-original based score) be good and enjoyable and win the best award? Sure. Is the question people raising about its non-original-thus-controversal winning valid? Absolutely. Jersey maybe good. But can a musical featuring a non-original-based score be called great like other good musical based on original score? I don't think so.

Jersey won because other new shows are not good enough. A jukebox ( Damn, it is so easy to use this than NOSBM. So f*** u, I will stick with it. ) musical can be good. An orginal score based musical can suck. But I don't believe a jukebox musical can be said as good as an original score good musical, no matter how good it is. It is simply not fair.

>>"why divide theater award into play and musical?"

>>Because they are two entirely different genres. Everything from direction to costuming to performance is handled entirely differently. The same cannot be said of the difference between a musical with an original score and a musical with preexisting songs.

You are right. Unfortunately, there are some people who do not realize it here.